Proposing solutions to underlying problems. National human rights institutions should promote acceptable solutions to the underlying issues. This requires, first, that they should develop a thorough understanding of those issues from the perspective of both sides. The institution should be seen to appreciate the points of view involved, since failure to do so will mean that one side or another will not feel that its concerns are being heard. It also means that the institution must develop recommendations that not only respond to the concerns of both sides but that are practical. If possible, attempts can be made to get agreement before moving on to more difficult issues. As with other efforts to promote peace, proposals that find favour with moderates within the combatant communities have the best chance of success. Training, education and public awareness: an institution operating in a situation of conflict will wish to ensure that the State organs involved understand both the human rights and the humanitarian norms that apply, as well as the potential consequences of breaching them. This will be especially relevant for vulnerable groups such as internally displaced persons. The institution may also wish to redouble its efforts in community-based human rights training, especially with regard to the need for respecting the rights of people who may not share the same political view or belong to the same cultural, ethnic or language group as the majority. If the root of the conflict lies in a real situation of inequality, the institution must make every effort to ensure that the majority population understands the nature of legitimate grievances, as well as the need to address them. If large numbers of persons are displaced by the conflict, training may be required to ensure that the population in areas to which persons are displaced are sensitive to their situation, as well as their rights. Similarly, institutions in neighbouring countries may have to ensure public education on the rights of refugees, where this is an issue. Monitoring human rights: the general discussion on monitoring set out in chapter VII applies here, but certain issues take on special importance. The absolute obligation on human rights workers to “do no harm” must be respected, especially as regards individuals who may be endangered because they are on one side or another in the conflict. Safety considerations are paramount, both with regard to the public generally and the staff member; rules about confidentiality and the protection of witness/victim identity apply. National human rights institutions will likely be restricted to incident-based monitoring since full-scale investigation may be neither desirable nor possible. This will require the monitors to fully understand the human rights and humanitarian laws that apply. Institutions operating in situations of conflict will also likely have to monitor the situation of internally displaced persons to ensure that their needs are being adequately attended to and that, if they are from a minority population, their rights are not being ignored. Similarly, institutions operating in neighbouring countries may also have to be vigilant in monitoring the rights of refugees who arrive there. Investigation: as with the discussion on monitoring above, the general principles that apply to human rights investigations set out in chapter V also apply to investigations in conflict. Again, as with monitoring, the obligation to “do no harm”, safety and the protection of identity are particularly important to investigations conducted in situations of conflict. An investigation into an insurgent action may not necessarily involve non-State actors, who have different legal responsibilities than States. Moreover, in many countries, NHRIs may not have jurisdiction over non-State actors. Nonetheless, the NHRI should be able 141