■■ Are the procedures appropriate given literacy levels, cultural traditions and accessibility (for example, by permitting a complainant to appose a fingerprint instead of signing a document whose contents are read aloud)? ■■ Do the procedures impose unnecessary inconvenience on victims, for example, requiring that allegations are proved by affidavit at the outset, or that the complainant should attend in person to file a complaint when this requires travelling a long distance? ■■ Are there measures—translators, sign-language interpreters or other forms of assistance—for persons with disabilities, speakers of minority languages or other groups? ■■ Would electronic filing or faxing of complaints expedite the process? In most institutions, complaints are usually submitted in writing, although they should be able to accept oral complaints, too. Lodging a complaint should be free of charge. Complainants should not be required to incur direct or indirect costs. There are, however, some human rights laws that permit the respondent to seek costs if a complaint is found to be malicious or filed in bad faith. This is a high bar, however, and should be used only in clear cases after the investigation demonstrates that this is the case. Care should also be taken to ensure that cost provisions, if they exist, do not become a form of retaliation. Official complaint forms are typically used to gather and consolidate information about the allegation. The complaint form should elicit all the information that is required to make an initial decision on the receivability of the complaint and, if the complaint is accepted, to start the investigation. This would usually include: ■■ The name and contact details of the complainant and victim, if different; ■■ The name and contact details of the alleged perpetrator, if known; ■■ A summary of the allegation or situation, including what happened, when, to whom, by whom, how and in what circumstances; and ■■ Whether the matter is before, or has been adjudicated by, any other authority or under examination by another competent body. A complaint might be filed in person or by telephone, in which case an officer will often assist in the completion of the complaint form, or by post or electronically. It may be useful to establish contact points throughout the country, particularly in remote areas, to accept and assist in the preparation of complaints. Where possible, it is preferable for a complaint to be lodged directly with the institution. Using intermediaries, such as government bodies or Members of Parliament, will invariably delay and complicate the process. It will also give the impression that the institution is not independent and the complainant’s privacy might be compromised. 2. Determining whether to accept a complaint for investigation Many statutes contain specific rules about whether the NHRI may handle a particular kind of complaint. While individual laws vary, the typical grounds for exclusion include time limitations, bad-faith complaints, complaints against parliament or the courts and complaints that have already been resolved or settled. There are typically several considerations involved in making this determination, such as: ■■ Does the institution have jurisdiction over the matter? 83