ABSTRACT
A 2005 draft resolution by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights requested that a study by the Offi ce of the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights defi ne the
basis, scope, and content of a “right to the truth,” and best practices and recommendations for the implementation of this right in the aftermath of confl ict or of massive or systematic human rights violations (United Nations Commission on Human Rights 2005b ). The resolution mentions both judicial and non-judicial truth-seeking mechanisms “such as truth and reconciliation commissions.” The “Study on the Right to the Truth” (hereafter, “the Study”), submitted in 2006, traces the legal and historical basis for the right, fi nding recognition of the right in international treaties and instruments; national, regional, and international jurisprudence; and resolutions of universal and regional intergovernmental bodies (United Nations Commission on Human Rights 2006 ). The right to the truth is “both an individual and a collective right” (paragraph 36) held by victims of gross human rights violations, their families and relatives, and also “society” (paragraph 58). The truth in question encompasses causes leading to the individual victim’s victimization; causes and conditions pertaining to the violation of international human rights and humanitarian law; progress and results of investigations of violations; circumstances and reasons for the perpetration of the violations; the circumstances in which violations took place; the fate and whereabouts of victims if dead or missing; and the identity of perpetrators (subject to appropriate safeguards) (paragraphs 38-40). The 2006 Study acknowledges multiple mechanisms that can implement the right to the truth, including international and national criminal tribunals, truth trials ( judicial proceedings limited to investigations and the compilation of case fi les, without prosecution), truth commissions, national human rights institutions, archives, administrative and civil proceedings, and historical projects (paragraphs 47-54). It concludes that the “the right to the truth about gross human rights violations and serious violations of human rights law is an inalienable and autonomous right,” (paragraph 55) and a “non-derogable right” not subject to limitations (paragraph 60). A follow-up report by the Offi ce of the High Commissioner on Human Rights in 2007 surveys responses to the Study by 16 countries and several non-governmental organizations (United Nations Human Rights Council 2007). It describes the right to the truth as “evolving steadily” (paragraph 87) and recommends further in-depth study of the contribution of criminal justice systems, the protection of records and archives concerning human rights violations, and the institutional means, procedures, and mechanisms for implementing the right to the truth (paragraph 92).
