CCPR/C/126/D/2560/2015 obtain the release of his son Amrit Kandel from illegal detention. On 13 July 2005, the Supreme Court suspended the case stating that the lawyer of the petitioner had missed the hearing scheduled for 26 May 2005 and that, since the lawyer did not request an extension or for the hearing to be held on an alternate date, nothing else was further required in regard to the case. On 13 February 2006, a separate writ of habeas corpus was filed with the Supreme Court on behalf of 34 disappeared persons, including Amrit Kandel. On 1 June 2007, the Supreme Court ordered the Government to form a high-level investigative commission on enforced disappearance to establish and make public the status of those disappeared; to criminalize enforced disappearance; to initiate legal actions against perpetrators; and to provide relief and reparation to the relatives of the victims. The State party has admitted that the fate and whereabouts of Amrit Kandel remain unknown. 4.3 The State party submits that the authors must exhaust domestic remedies before submitting a written communication to the Committee for consideration. It argues that the authors should have invoked domestic legislation in order to seek a remedy and reparation. Since transitional justice mechanisms have been established pursuant to the Enforced Disappearances Enquiry, Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act, 2071 (2014), to provide justice to victims in conflict-related cases, the State party argues that the authors could still file a complaint with the Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons. 4.4 The State party argues that the Commission is mandated to hear conflict-related cases involving enforced disappearances, to provide information on the fate of disappeared persons, to make recommendations to the Government of Nepal in prosecuting alleged offenders and to provide reparation to the victims. 4.5 While admitting that dealing with violations of international human rights and humanitarian law during an armed conflict is not an easy task, the State argues that the Commission can find answers to questions about how individuals and communities confront past atrocities, reconcile and rebuild after conflict. Its objective is restorative, in that it aims to alleviate victims’ pain, and retributive, in that it aims to punish perpetrators. The ordinary criminal justice system cannot be used effectively for seeking the truth, prosecuting perpetrators, providing reparation or rehabilitation to victims, shaping the collective memory to facilitate the reconciliation process and reforming institutions so that they can deal with violations of human rights during the armed conflict. Truth-seeking is at the centre of the work of this transitional justice mechanism, which is tasked with identifying perpetrators and victims and documenting patterns of abuse for institutional reform. 4.6 In line with the provisions of the Interim Constitution, the Comprehensive Peace Accord and the verdict of the Supreme Court in the case Rabindra Prasad Dhakal on behalf of Rajendra Prasad Dhakal (Advocate) v. Nepal, including writ No. 3575 dated 1 June 2007, Parliament enacted the Enforced Disappearances Enquiry, Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act, 2071 (2014). The Act aims at achieving greater national unity and reconciliation, as envisaged in the Accord, by observing the principles of human rights more effectively. Furthermore, the objectives of the Act are to ensure truth, justice, reparations and public acknowledgement of victims, prevent future abuse and combat impunity. 4.7 Section 26 of the Act expressly prohibits the recommendation of amnesty for perpetrators of offences of a grave nature. Pursuant to the Act, the Government has established the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons, the latter of which is tasked with carrying out investigations into cases of enforced disappearance during the conflict. Both Commissions were established in February 2015 with a mandate to achieve their objectives within two years. The State party believes that the establishment of the Commissions is a significant step forward for its transitional justice process. 4.8 The State party adds that the Commissions are major components of the peace process and that they seek to heal the pain and injustices suffered by victims of conflict, to restore their ruined lives and relations, and to rebuild social trust. Following discussions and consultations with victims of the conflict, civil society organizations, human rights 5