credible. It may also be important to ensure that the alleged victims have an opportunity to present their views to the inquiry, including a statement on the harm they have suffered. Presentations to inquiries may be verbal or in writing. It is not always necessary for individuals to appear in person. Involving the media Public inquires should promote public debate and examine important issues, effectively shedding light on hidden or poorly understood issues. The process should therefore encourage and facilitate media involvement. Media strategies should be carefully laid out before the hearing, and all appropriate support, including media backgrounders, should be provided to media representatives as warranted. Publicizing the inquiry will also ensure that individuals with important information to share can do so. Effective reporting The main “product” of a public inquiry is a comprehensive report on the issue, including recommendations for action. A report can influence decision-making and public opinion only if it is credible. The panel and others involved in the inquiry must therefore fully grasp the issues at play, and carefully and judiciously review and analyse all the evidence before coming to any finding. This implies that time should be set aside before, during and after the public inquiry to review and consider the evidence thoroughly. Without compromising the integrity of the process, the recommendations should be carefully crafted so that they are acceptable, both to the general population and to the Government, and will be implemented. They should also take into account the country’s tradition, culture and fiscal realities. Following up Some institutions have the authority to seek redress before the courts or specialized tribunals following an inquiry. Most, however, are limited to transmitting recommendations, based on their findings, to the relevant government department or agency. Regardless of its specific powers to follow up, an NHRI should make every effort to ensure that the results of its inquiries are made public and disseminated as widely as possible. It should carefully monitor the measures taken with respect to its recommendations and report publicly on the action by government agencies or the legislature in response to its recommendations, perhaps through its annual report. After an appropriate interval, an institution may even schedule public follow-up meetings to ask officials directly what action they have taken. An institution’s efforts should focus on achieving positive change, and wide publicity and active follow-up help promote this. Conclusion Investigation is an important function for all NHRIs. It is important in its own right: it is through investigation that an institution is often most able to directly protect against human rights violations. Moreover, the existence of an effective and independent mechanism to deal with such violations is a strong deterrent against abuse. Investigation is also important because it is a highly visible activity, and one on which an institution’s independence, effectiveness and credibility are likely to be judged. For all these reasons, an institution must fully understand its role in investigation. This chapter attempts to assist in this, but cannot replace the more substantive training and instruction that will be required to ensure that those involved in the process can function professionally. It is important to reiterate that the success of an institution in fulfilling its obligations with regard to investigation also depends directly on its being given the necessary powers and resources to carry out the function effectively and efficiently. And that is an obligation of the State. 99