whereabouts.34 Determining the final whereabouts of the disappeared person is fundamental to easing the anguish and suffering of family members caused by the uncertainty as to the fate of their disappeared relative.35 A violation is ongoing as long as the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared is not determined.36 13. The right to know the truth37 extends to society as a whole, given the public interest in the prevention of, and accountability for, international law violations.38 Family members and society as a whole both have a right to information held in a state’s records that pertains to serious violations, even if those records are held by security agencies or military or police units.39 14. In armed conflict, all parties must take all feasible measures to account for persons reported missing as a result of the conflict, and to provide family members with any information they have on the fate of their relatives.40 In the event of death, all parties must use all means at their disposal to identify the dead, including by recording all available information prior to the disposal of the body and by marking the location of graves; and in a situation of international armed conflict they must at least endeavour to facilitate the return of the remains of the deceased at the request of, inter alia, the next of kin.41 Moreover, each Party to an international armed conflict has to establish an information bureau to forward any information regarding, among other things, the death of protected persons in its hands to the power to which these persons belong.42 C. The Triggering and Scope of the Duty to Investigate 15. A State’s duty to investigate is triggered where it knows or should have known of any potentially unlawful death, including where reasonable allegations of a potentially unlawful death are made.43 The duty to investigate does not apply only where the State is in receipt of a formal complaint.44 16. The duty to investigate any potentially unlawful death includes all cases where the State has caused a death or where it is alleged or suspected that the State caused a death (for example, where law enforcement officers used force that may have contributed to the death). This duty, which applies to all peacetime situations and to all cases during an armed conflict outside the conduct of hostilities, exists regardless of whether it is suspected or alleged that the death was unlawful. The duty to investigate potentially unlawful death caused during the conduct of hostilities is specifically addressed in Paragraph 21. 17. Where a State agent has caused the death of a detainee, or where a person has died in custody, this must be reported, without delay, to a judicial or other competent authority that is independent of the detaining authority and mandated to conduct prompt, impartial and effective investigations into the circumstances and causes of such a death.45 This responsibility extends to persons detained in prisons, in other places of detention (official or otherwise) and to persons in other facilities where the State exercises heightened control over their life. Owing to the control exercised by the State over those it holds in custody, there is a 34 Under the ICPED, a victim is not only the person who is subjected to enforced disappearance but “any individual who has suffered harm as the direct result” of the crime (ICPED, Art. 24). As a consequence, the family and the community to which the disappeared person belonged can all be regarded as victims under the Convention. See also ICPED, Art. 12. 35 35. IACHR, Report on the Right to Truth in the Americas, August 2014; see also WGEID, General Comment on the right to the truth in relation to enforced disappearance, para. 4. 36 ICPED, Arts. 18 and 24(6); and General Comment on enforced disappearance as a continuous crime, General Comment No. 9, in Report of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, UN doc. A/HRC/16/48, 26 January 2011, para. 39. Under Art. 24(1), for the purposes of the ICPED, “‘victim’ means the disappeared person and any individual who has suffered harm as the direct result of an enforced disappearance. 37 See, e.g., Art. 2, ICCPR and Art. 24, ICPED. See also Principles 2–5, Updated Set of principles for the protection and promotion of human rights through action to combat impunity, UN doc. E/CN.4/2005/102/Add.1; and see also UN docs. E/CN.4/2004/88 and E/CN.4/2006/91. 38 See, e.g., IACtHR, Slaughter of the Rochela v. Colombia, Judgment, 11 May 2007, para. 195; IACtHR, Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala, Judgment, 25 November 2000, para. 197. 39 Tshwane Principles on National Security and the Right to Information, 2013, Principle 10. 40 1977 Additional Protocol to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (1977 Additional Protocol I), Arts. 32, 33; International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Customary IHL Study, Rule 117. 41 ICRC, Customary IHL Study, Rules 116 and 114; 1949 Geneva Convention I, Arts. 16, 17; 1949 Geneva Convention II, Arts. 19, 20; 1949 Geneva Convention III, Art. 120; 1949 Geneva Convention IV, Arts. 129, 130; and 1977 Additional Protocol I, Art. 34. 42 1949 Geneva Convention I, Art. 16; 1949 Geneva Convention II, Art. 19; 1949 Geneva Convention III, Arts. 120, 122; 1949 Geneva Convention IV, Art. 136. Where relevant, this duty applies, mutatis mutandis, to enforced disappearance. 43 ECtHR, Ergi v. Turkey, Judgment, 28 July 1998, para. 82; Isayeva, Yusopva and Bazayeva v. Russia, Judgment, 24 February 2005, paras. 208–09; IACtHR, Montero-Aranguren and others v. Venezuela, Judgment, 5 July 2006, para. 79. 44 See the Nelson Mandela Rules, Rule 71(1). 45 Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, UN doc. A/61/311, 5 September, 2006, paras. 49–54. 5