The State’s obligations to ensure the right to truth are mainly procedural and include the obligation to investigate until the fate and the whereabouts of the person have been clarified, the obligation to have the results of these investigations communicated to the interested parties, the obligation to provide full access to archives and the obligation to provide full protection to witnesses, relatives, judges and other participants in any investigation.244 the success of these mechanisms. Some examples include: • The Gambian Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission was established by an act of Parliament and is empowered to investigate human rights violations. It convenes public hearings at which victims, witnesses and perpetrators are invited to testify. The Commission’s mandate includes establishing and making known the fate of victims.249 The African Commission has noted that the obligation to investigate provides for a full and public disclosure of the truth.245 In several decisions, the ACHPR has ordered States to carry out investigations into the atrocities to clarify the events. In Malawi African Association and others v. Mauritania, the ACHPR recommended that the government “arrange for the commencement of an independent enquiry in order to clarify the fate of persons considered as disappeared and to bring and identify to book the authors of the violations perpetrated.”246 In another case, the Commission, directly addressing the issue of disappeared persons, called on the State to promptly carry out an independent investigation to clarify the fate of the victims and to take all diligent measures to prosecute and punish the perpetrators.247 • In Senegal, former Chadian president Hissène Habré was tried before a special court in relation to thousands of cases of, inter alia, torture, arbitrary detention and disappearances. The investigative judges conducted an extensive 19-month-long investigation which included taking statements from witnesses and working with the 1992 Chadian Truth Commission. Habré was convicted of crimes against humanity, war crimes and torture in May 2016, a decision subsequently upheld by an appeal court.250 However, there are several obstacles affecting such mechanisms, for instance: • In Kenya, the Truth and Justice Reconciliation Commission established in 2008 to investigate human rights violations committed since the country´s independence to 2008, experienced several difficulties, including political obstacles preventing implementation of any recommendations, and the processes that followed being marred with corruption and debates about fairness.251 There is some evidence of best practice in this space: one mechanism used to investigate ED and ensure the victims’ right to truth is that of truth commissions. Truth and reconciliation commissions are non-judicial bodies tasked with determining the facts, root causes and impacts of past human rights violations in a specific country and establishing a clearer historical record of the conflict.248 They provide an opportunity for victims and their families to discover the truth about the crime, the perpetrators or whereabouts and fate of their loved ones. However, the outcome and impacts of truth commissions vary depending on their mandate, duration, legal powers, and ability to refer cases for prosecution and name the perpetrators. The political context in which the truth commissions are set up can shape • The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa noted the prevalence of ED as a State tool to dispose of political opponents and recognised that ED was carried out by both State and non-State actors. However, despite this recognition the Truth Commission failed to identify the fate or whereabouts of 477 victims, even though the Commission 244 Declaration, Article 13, para. 3 245 ACHPR, General Comment No.4 on the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights: The Right to Redress for Victims of Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment (Article 5), paras 44 and 68. 246 Malawi Africa Association v Mauritania, Comment Nos. 54/91, 61/91, 98/93, 164/97 à 196/97 and 210/98, African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, 11 May 2000. 247 ACHPR, Instituto de Direitos Humanos e Desenvolvimento na Africa e outros v. Democratic Republic of Congo, June 2016; English version. 248 Skaar E., Transitional Justice for Human Rights: The Legacy and Future of Truth and Reconciliation Commissions. International Human Rights Institutions, Tribunals, and Courts. International Human Rights. 2018. Springer, Singapore. 249 HRC, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence, 9 July 2020, para 36. 250 Amnesty International, Hissène Habré appeal ruling closes dark chapter for victims, 27 April 2017. 251 Kenya Transitional Justice Network, Summary: Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission Report, August 2013, at p. 3. 37