A/HRC/34/62 have persisted in their efforts to not only keep the memory of their loved ones alive, but to obtain truth, justice and reparation; (b) Contributing to consultations on the design of transitional justice policies, including truth commissions. While the early truth commissions benefited from only very limited and informal exchanges with victims, a trend towards broad, inclusive and transparent national consultations prior to the establishment of transitional justice mechanisms is clearly emerging. National consultations in Burundi, Liberia, Nepal, Sierra Leone, Timor-Leste and Tunisia exemplify this trend;28 (c) Selection of commissioners and composition of commissions. Given that the credibility of truth commissions depends to large extent not only on methodological questions but on the trustworthiness of commissioners, some truth commissions adopted consultative procedures for the selection of commissioners, apportioning seats to representatives of different stakeholders, including victim groups. This was the case in Kenya, Liberia, Sierra Leone, South Africa and Timor-Leste. In some cases, commission members were themselves victims,29 their relatives,30 part of the wider victim community, 31 members of victim groups or victim representatives; 32 (d) Proposals for recommendations. In some cases, victims have articulated proposals to be considered by truth commissions as part of their recommendations, including recommendations on reparations made to the commissions in Peru and, recently, in Côte d’Ivoire. In a different setting, the consultation process around the peace agreement in Colombia established a mechanism for civil society organizations, including victim groups, to submit suggestions in writing for the negotiating table; (e) Follow-up mechanisms and initiatives. In his report on truth commissions (A/HRC/24/42), the Special Rapporteur highlighted the worrisome lack of uptake by national authorities of commission recommendations. The reasons for this are various and complicated. However, even recommendations emanating from commissions with a mandate that concords with their nature and capacities often go unheeded. No institutional “fix” has fully resolved this problem. 39. Thus, as victim organizations, among other civil society organizations, have played a critical role in placing transitional justice on the public agenda, they have also played a critical role in guaranteeing a certain degree of follow-through. This role includes not only general advocacy, but also specific monitoring of the implementation of the recommendations made by truth commissions. For example, in Sierra Leone, an interactive recommendation matrix was prepared by the Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone with the collaboration of the United Nations, which included contributions from various ministries and civil society groups. 33 Also in Sierra Leone, a project titled Witness was created which, in turn, helped establish a follow-up project in which several NGOs, including victim organizations, were involved. 28 29 30 31 32 33 10 See A/71/567. The Equity and Reconciliation Commission in Morocco had a large number of members who had been victims, including its president. In Ecuador, one of the four members of the Truth Commission was the parent of two children who were disappeared in 1988; another was the brother of an executed member of the left-wing group Alfaro Vive Carajo and a third was a former member of that group. In Canada, one of the three members of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which was mandated to investigate charges of abuse and other ill effects for First Nations children that resulted from the Indian residential school legacy, passed through a residential school. Truth and Dignity Commission of Tunisia. See www.sierraleonetrc.org/index.php/resources/recommendations-matrix.