CCPR/C/113/D/2022/2011 to establish contacts with witnesses. Since 1998, 721 graves have been exhumed and 48 other graves have been re-exhumed in this area, including in the municipality of Prijedor, where the body of Mr. Hamulić could perhaps be found. The State party further informs the Committee that when its observations were submitted the Institute had filed to the Office of the Prosecutor two requests for the exhumation of remains from a site in HambarineCopici. 4.3 The State party maintains that according to the municipality of Prijedor the authors had not submitted any request to it and that therefore it has no information concerning their case. Likewise, the Attorney of the Republika Srpska has no information related to this case. Authors’ comments on the State party’s observations 5.1 The authors submitted their comments on the State party’s observations on 12 May 2011. They refer to the general comment of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances on enforced disappearance as a continuous crime and, in particular, to its paragraphs 1, 2, 7 and 8. They consider that the State party, in its observations, does not object to the admissibility of the communication and substantially acknowledges the merits of the allegations formulated therein. The authors further consider that those observations corroborate their allegation that Mr. Hamulić remains registered as an “unaccounted for” missing person and state that no match has been found through the online inquiry tool set up by the International Commission on Missing Persons. The tracing process is, therefore, still open and still under the responsibility of the Bosnian authorities, who are under the obligation to establish his fate and whereabouts; should Mr. Hamulić have died, to search for, locate, respect and return his remains to his family; to disclose to the latter the truth regarding the circumstances of his enforced disappearance and regarding the progress and results of the investigation into the fate of their loved one; and to guarantee them redress for the ongoing violations. 5.2 The authors state that, so far, none of them and none of the eyewitnesses of the events that led to the enforced disappearance of Mr. Hamulić have been contacted by personnel of the Missing Persons Institute regional office in Istočno or the field office in Sarajevo referred to by the State party, while they consider that they would be able to provide those authorities with information that could be relevant to locating him. 13 They further point out that the State party, in its observations, provides general references to the existence of mass graves that lack precise information as to where their relative’s remains could be located. Should the Institute have reliable information according to which the mortal remains of Mr. Hamulić could be located at the Hambarine-Copici site, the authors should be informed accordingly without delay and be involved in the whole process of locating, exhuming and identifying the remains. 5.3 The authors further argue that the high number of war crimes still requiring investigation does not relieve the State party from its responsibility to conduct a prompt, impartial, independent and thorough investigation into cases of gross human rights violations or from regularly informing relatives of the victims on the progress and results of those investigations. Although the enforced disappearance of Mr. Hamulić was promptly reported to various authorities, the authors have not been contacted or received any 13 The authors refer to the report on best practices in the matter of missing persons prepared by the drafting group of the Advisory Committee on missing persons (see A/HRC/AC/6/2, paras. 53, 56 and 80-97) and to the general comment of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances on the right to the truth in relation to enforced disappearance, in particular, paragraph 4. 9