PART III - HOW TO DOCUMENT ALLEGATIONS OF UNLAWFUL
KILLINGS
2. BASIC AIMS OF DOCUMENTATION
This handbook aims to set out the standard for the ideal
documentation, but we appreciate that in all cases you may not be
able to achieve this. Do not let this put you off pursuing a case.
You may still be able to use the information either on its own, or
together with other allegations. Simply, do your best. It is likely
that if you are unable to gather information it is because the
state is antagonistic to your work and/or the witnesses feel
insecure about giving evidence. In these circumstances you can
explain your concerns to the human rights mechanism you have chosen
and they can take your difficulties into consideration when
examining the case and, at best, can themselves request the
information from the state. You can assist by enabling the human
rights mechanisms to clarify the questions that they should be
addressing to the state or the recommendations they can make.
The primary goal of documenting allegations of human rights
violations is to create a full, accurate, reliable and clear record
of events, which can enable fair and just conclusions to be reached
about the situation in a particular country. This means that when
you are documenting allegations, you should:
- Aim to obtain good quality information
- Take steps to maximise the accuracy and
reliability of the information
- Explore all relevant issues as fully as possible
- Keep accurate and clear records of all information and
all action taken
- Abide by all ethical and security considerations
- Where appropriate, obtain copies and/or details of domestic
decisions: If you want to bring a case before one of the
international complaint procedures (see Part IV), you will need to
show that the victim was not able to obtain a remedy at the
domestic level. In order to do this, you will need to provide
copies of any domestic decisions, whether judicial or
administrative, taken in the case. This would include any decisions
not to prosecute or not to open an investigation, and copies of any
petitions made by the victim or victim's family (or at least a
record of dates, times, to whom, and by whom, a report was made),
as well as any court decisions taken. These will also be able to
provide you with a great deal of detail about the case as well as
direct you to potential sources of evidence
|
 TIP - Suggestions for your documentation kit
Your organisation should consider keeping an easily accessible
supply of these items. Where appropriate, keep them securely and
keep them together:
- Memo pads
- Sketch Pad
- Clipboard
- Files
- Supply of pens and pencils
- Camera with automatic flash (spare film and batteries)
- Reliable maps with grid references
- Measuring tapes (50 metres)
- A safe for secure items
- Tape recorder or dictaphone
- Video recorder
- Torch
|
2.1. Good quality information
You should aim to obtain the best information possible under the
circumstances - this does not mean that you must always reach the
highest standard before submitting information, but it does mean
that you should do your best to put together a strong allegation
using all the information available to you. The level of detail
necessary to make an allegation will vary depending on the purpose
to which it will be put. For example, judicial procedures, whether
domestic or international, usually require a high standard of proof
and, therefore, they will need detailed and comprehensive evidence.
By contrast, international reporting procedures may be able to act
without the provision of hard evidence or extensive supporting
documentation, but with a well-written, sound and reasonable case
summary that outlines the basis for the complaint. (For more
detailed information about international complaints and reporting
mechanisms see Part IV)
Regardless of the level of the detail you should still aim to
obtain good quality information. You should:
- Be objective about the evidence. Human rights violations
often occur in contexts where emotions and allegiances are very
strong and can influence the reports and allegations received. It
is important to do your best to remain objective when assessing the
nature of the information - regardless of your opinion of the
general situation and however strongly you might feel about the
allegation, you need to consider its quality
objectively.
- Aim for high standards. The information MUST be
sufficiently accurate, reliable and of good quality to initiate
action before a domestic authority or an international body. As you
will see below, the degree of quality, accuracy and reliability
necessary, may vary according to the course of action selected, but
you should always aim to reach the highest standard possible in the
circumstances. How rigorous you choose to be is a decision for you
or your organisation, but remember that the information you submit
is a reflection of your own reliability - this will affect your
reputation with the international bodies, and the seriousness with
which your allegations, and those of your organisation, are
considered in future.
- Be well-organised. Keep accurate, detailed and clear
records of all the work done on a case including dates and times of
telephone calls and letters, and interviews with informants and
witnesses. Organise and preserve the evidence carefully and
securely. Try to be methodical about your work and keep lists of
outstanding and incomplete tasks.
|
TIP - Organising your
work
Methodical and accurate documentation is assisted by a
well-organised work place. Here are some suggestions for how work on a case can be recorded and
stored:
- Case management file: logs of all of your activities and
notes, and "to do" lists
- Communications file: useful contact information, records
of letters, telephone calls, faxes, emails. Bear in mind witness
security!
- Evidence files:
- Witness statement file: Copies of all witness
statements. Consider anonymising them. Keep original statements and
witness details in a secure location with limited access (the
safe)
- Photograph file: Record and description of all
photographs, dates taken and by whom. Keep negatives and/or copies
in the safe
- Physical evidence file: a log of all evidence collected,
date, by whom. Keep evidence itself in the safe
- Document file: Copies of all documents and/or a record
of all documents obtained. Keep original documents in the safe
- Sketch and map file: Maps of the scene, wound charts and
diagrams which are not connected to other documents or statements.
Keep originals in the safe
NOTE!
|
2.1.1. Evaluating the evidence
When evaluating the evidence to establish whether you have good
information, you are examining whether it is credible and reliable.
Here are some suggestions for how to do this:-
- The source of the information: Where was the information
obtained? Directly from the victim, from the victim's family or
friends, from a witness present at the scene of the incident, from
someone who heard it from someone else, from a media report? The
further away from the incident or the victim you get, the less
dependable the information is likely to be.
- The level of detail: Is the allegation very detailed?
Are there unexplained gaps in the account? Do you only know the
very bare facts? The more detail you can obtain, the better,
because it helps others to understand what happened.
- The absence or presence of contradictions: Is the
account consistent throughout? Are there contradictions in the
account or elements that do not make sense? Good information should
be consistent, or at least, try to provide a reason for any
inconsistencies - for example, if a victim or witness has made two
statements which contradict each other, it could be because one is
untrue or for some other reason, such as, that it is a result of
intimidation. Minor inconsistencies are common and may not affect
the overall quality of the information, but major inconsistencies
should prompt you to seek further verification of the
information.
- The absence or presence of elements which support
(corroborate) or disprove the allegation: Do the witness
statements corroborate each other? Does the physical evidence back
up the testimonial evidence? Is there a medical certificate or
autopsy report that confirms the victim's injuries? The more
supporting documentation you can provide, the more likely it is
that the allegation will be found credible. It may be necessary to
obtain the assistance of an expert in order to corroborate
allegations in the information. Whether this is appropriate will
depend on the circumstances of the particular case (e.g. whether
the expert has access to the evidence resources s/he needs in order
to form an opinion) and how far your organisation feels it can
commission such opinions. Equally it may become apparent that
certain information is only accessible through the state, e.g. if
the police have custody of a dead body. However, you should note
such barriers to corroboration in your documentation as they
demonstrate the attitude of the state to the investigation.
- The extent to which the information demonstrates a
pattern: Is the allegation one of many alleging similar facts?
Is it the only one of its kind that has ever been received in a
particular area? Where there is evidence of a commonplace practice,
there may be a higher presumption that the information is
true.
- The age of the information: Is the information very
recent? Does it relate to facts that occurred several years
previously? The fresher your information, the easier it is to
investigate or verify the facts alleged.
Remember that this is an indication of what the very
highest standard would be. It is often not possible to
obtain information of this quality - this does not mean that you
cannot use it. Instead, the quality of your information will be a
factor when the time comes to select the procedure(s) to which you
will send it.
The emphasis in this chapter is placed on documenting the
allegation in such a way that you should, in principle, be able to
submit it to virtually any available procedure. Any minimum
requirements or restrictions specific to a particular procedure are
noted.
|
TIP - Good quality information
first hand + detailed + internally consistent +
corroborated from several angles & sources
+ demonstrating a
pattern + fresh
= highest standard
|
2.2. Accurate and reliable information
Verifying the accuracy and reliability of information can be a
difficult and sensitive task and, to a large extent, you are
dependent on the good faith of those who supply you with
information. It is, however, possible to maximise the likelihood
that information is accurate and reliable by taking certain
general precautions, by seeking corroboration of
allegations and the observations of witnesses, and by exercising
good judgement.
General precautions, which you can take to maximise
reliability, include:
- know your sources and familiarise yourself with the context in
which allegations are being made
- maintain contact with sources - you may need to obtain or
verify details at a later stage
- ask for victims. and witnesses names and contact details even
if you keep them confidential
- be more cautious and thorough with vague or general
information
- avoid basing allegations purely on media reports or rumours
without seeking corroboration
When carrying out interviews with witnesses, you can
maximise both accuracy and reliability by:
- using precise questions and not influencing the answer of the
questions (e.g. by asking "leading questions" - questions which
already suggest the answer you are looking for)
- approaching the account in a chronological fashion so that it
is easier for you to pick out and address inconsistencies
- reviewing apparent inconsistencies from several angles,
rewording your questions if necessary - the interviewee may be
confused or may not understand your question
- asking if there were any witnesses to the alleged incident or
if there is any supporting documentation, such as a medical report
or a copy of a petition lodged as a result of the incident -
explain that supporting documentation can help to make an
allegation stronger and increases the opportunities available to
seek a remedy
- observing and noting the interviewee's demeanour and body
language, asking yourself - does this person seem credible? In this
context, you should be aware of the influence of the age, culture,
gender and psychological state of the interviewee
- if the witness is an informant who may be implicated,
considering whether they are minimising their own role in the
incident
- whenever possible, where an interviewee has indicated the
existence of potential corroborative evidence, trying to
obtain it
Ultimately, you should exercise judgement - where you
have reason to doubt the accuracy or reliability of an allegation,
it is worth spending a little more time seeking corroboration than
when all the circumstances indicate that it is sincere. If you have
reservations about the allegation, it is likely that others will
have them too, because they will have the same perspective as you,
as presented in your submission. If you cannot resolve your doubts,
you may be wasting more time and resources preparing the allegation
than you would in either dispelling or confirming them.
2.3. Urgent cases
Remember that where you have genuine cause to believe that a
person is in danger due to death threats or because they are being
tortured or have disappeared and urgent action is needed, you
should act quickly even where some doubts still remain as to
reliability - it is clear that in such circumstances the security
of the person should take priority.
