E/CN.4/1998/38 page 13 54. “The Special Rapporteurs call on the Government to fulfil its obligation under international law to conduct exhaustive and impartial investigations into all allegations of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and torture, to identify, prosecute and punish those responsible, grant adequate compensation to the victims or their families and take all appropriate measures to prevent the recurrence of such acts.” 55. The Government indicated with regard to the obligation to compensate victims that Act No. 288 of 1996 established methods for compensating victims of violations by virtue of the provisions adopted by certain international bodies, specifically the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Human Rights Committee. The Act established an obligational content specifically for the Government. 56. Non-governmental sources pointed out that, although Act No. 288 of 1996 marked a step forward in making domestic arrangements consistent with international instruments for the protection of human rights, it did not encompass the broader view of reparation for violations of human rights developed by international doctrine and case law and was confined solely to financial compensation, without any mechanisms which, for example, envisaged social redress, clearing of the names of the victims and fulfilment of the State's obligation to guarantee the rights to truth and justice. Similarly, Act No. 288 of 1996 limited the State's commitment to fulfilling only the Recommendations on Compensation made by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and by the United Nations Human Rights Committee and excluded any equally binding recommendations from other intergovernmental bodies for the protection of human rights, such as the International Labour Organization or the Committee against Torture. 57. As regards the civil justice system the Rapporteurs recommended, inter alia, the following: “As long as the Regional Justice System exists, the crimes falling under this jurisdiction should be clearly defined ... defendants before regional courts must enjoy full respect for their right to a fair trial. The severe restrictions currently in place, including those affecting the right to habeas corpus, ... should be eliminated.” 58. With reference to the Regional Justice System the Government said that the Administration of Justice Act specifically mentions the period of operation of the Act, which should cease to apply no later than 30 June 1999. This Act originally contained provisions to limit the anonymity of witnesses and of the public prosecutor. Now the Constitutional Court had declared that it was impossible to eliminate these provisions on procedural grounds. Nevertheless, from all the criticisms, recommendations and suggestions made, it can be inferred that the tendency is to reduce the scope of the Regional Justice System, the principal factors for applying it being the danger posed by the accused and the seriousness of the offence. More and more restrictions have been placed on the anonymity of judges and witnesses. 59. Non-governmental sources indicated that, further to the decision by the Constitutional Court, the previous rules were still in force. This continued to make it easy for members of the police force to act as secret witnesses and accuse, in court, those whom they considered their enemies, who were usually nothing more than social activists.