CCPR/C/113/D/2028/2011 the State party, enforced disappearance is per se a continuing violation of several human rights9 that is ongoing and continues to be committed until the victim is located. In her son’s case, domestic authorities, including the Constitutional Court, have qualified Mr. Ičić as a “missing person”. However, his fate and whereabouts have not been ascertained up to now. Furthermore, the authorities have not implemented the decision of the Constitutional Court of 13 May 2008 and the Office of the Prosecutor has not undertaken any measure to sanction those responsible for such failure. The complaint 3.1 The author maintains that Mr. Ičić was victim of enforced disappearance by members of the Bosnian Serb forces; that an enforced disappearance is of multi-offensive nature; and that, in his case, it amounts to a violation of articles 6, 7, 9, 10 and 16, read in conjunction with article 2, paragraph 3, of the Covenant. She points out that his fate and whereabouts have remained unknown since 10 June 1992 and that his disappearance occurred within the context of a widespread and systematic attack directed against the civilian population. The fact that he was apprehended by members of the Bosnian Serb forces and last seen alive in the hands of the guards of the detention camp in Omarska in life-threatening circumstances allows her to conclude that he was placed in a situation of grave risk to suffer irreparable damages to his personal integrity and life. She notes that this detention camp was notorious for the number of arbitrary killings of inmates followed by the removal and concealment of their mortal remains. 3.2 In spite of the author’s efforts, she has not received any relevant information about the causes and circumstances of Mr. Ičić’s disappearance. Although she promptly reported his disappearance to ICRC, which has shared this information with the relevant State party’s authorities since 1992, no ex officio, prompt, impartial, thorough or independent investigation has been carried out to find out his fate and whereabouts; in the event of his death, his mortal remains have not been located, exhumed, identified or returned to his loved ones; and no one has been summoned, investigated or convicted for his enforced disappearance. 3.3 The State party is responsible for investigating all cases of enforced disappearance and providing information on the whereabouts of missing persons. In this respect, the author refers to a report of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances that states that the primary responsibility for carrying out these tasks remains with the authorities under whose jurisdiction a suspected mass grave falls. 10 She argues that the State party has an obligation to conduct an ex officio, prompt, impartial, thorough and independent investigation of gross human rights violations, such as enforced disappearance, torture or arbitrary killing. The obligation to conduct an investigation also applies in cases of killings or other acts affecting the enjoyment of human rights that are not imputable to the State. In these cases, the obligation to investigate arises from the duty of the State to protect all individuals under its jurisdiction from acts committed by private persons or groups of persons which may impede the enjoyment of their human rights. 11 9 10 11 6 The author refers to the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights; article 14.2 of the Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, adopted by the International Law Commission; the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances; general comment No. 9; and the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, art. 8, para. 1. See E/CN.4/1996/36, para. 78. See Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 31 (2004), para. 8.