A/HRC/16/24 February 2011 requesting specific information on investigations undertaken in response to the FFM report. On 8 March 2011, the de facto authorities asked the Committee for additional time in which to submit the information and the Committee agreed to extend the deadline. The de facto Gaza authorities sent a document on 13 March, with two annexes, in response to the Committee’s detailed list of questions. 17. The Committee met with a number of NGO representatives in Geneva on 27 January 2011 and in Amman on 20 and 21 February 2011. NGOs also made written submissions to the Committee and during teleconferences with the Committee members further documented incidents they had brought to the attention of authorities in Israel and on the Palestinian side. 18. The Committee also interviewed Israeli and Palestinian victims and witnesses. On 9 and 14 March 2011, the Committee held video- and teleconferences with Israeli victims and witnesses, who provided information on the human and material damage suffered as a direct consequence of rocket attacks launched from the Gaza Strip. These individuals described their injuries and the continuing physical and psychological effects of living near the border in constant apprehension of further attacks. They also noted their complete inability to gain redress for these crimes. 19. On 15 March 2011, the Committee held video- and teleconferences with Palestinian victims, who recounted their first-hand experience with Israeli criminal investigations into incidents reported by the FFM. These witnesses detailed their frustration with the Israeli investigating authorities and gave articulate voice to their perception that Israeli justice mechanisms were completely ineffective and non-existent. Although these victims and witnesses had suffered serious injuries during Operation Cast Lead and had cooperated fully with investigators, after two years they have heard absolutely nothing with respect to the status of their cases – apart from one family that had learned in an official government report that the criminal investigation into the killing of their young children had been closed without elucidation of the circumstances that led to such a tragedy. 20. On 25 February 2011, the Committee held a teleconference with Noam Shalit, who reminded the Committee of the continuing isolation and captivity of his son, Gilad Shalit, who has had no communication with his family, nor has he been allowed visits by the International Committee of the Red Cross to monitor his detention conditions since he was captured and detained during an incursion into Israel in June 2006. Mr. Shalit expressed concern about the psychological and physical well-being of his son after five years in detention and appealed for his immediate release. 21. The totality of this information has provided the basis for the Committee’s efforts to implement its mandate “to assess domestic, legal or other proceedings undertaken by Israel and the Palestinian side.” 22. The Committee carried out its work under considerable challenges and constraints. In particular, given that the Committee did not travel to Israel, the West Bank or Gaza, it was unable to meet with a number of persons who could have supplied first-hand, updated information as to the status and impact of investigations and legal proceedings undertaken by the respective parties into the violations alleged in the FFM report. Moreover, the Committee worked under strict time limitations in order to meet the time frame imposed on it by the Human Rights Council. III. Applicable law and standards 23. In its previous report to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/15/50), the Committee extensively analyzed the legal framework and standards applicable in the context of the 5