A/HRC/21/50 VII. State obligations to investigate, prosecute, punish and provide reparations 21. Customary law, IHL and IHRL obligate states to investigate allegations of serious violations of their respective regimes and, when appropriate, prosecute suspected perpetrators and compensate the victims. The UN General Assembly expressed the obligation in the clearest of terms when it declared in the ―Basic Principles on the Right to Remedy,‖ “In cases of gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law constituting crimes under international law, States have the duty to investigate and, if there is sufficient evidence, the duty to submit to prosecution the person allegedly responsible for the violations and, if found guilty, the duty to punish her or him.”26 22. The obligation is founded in part on Article 2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR),27 wherein an effective remedy is required. The obligation to investigate is specifically confirmed in the interpretation given that provision by the Human Rights Committee.28 23. The obligation is slightly different for internal armed conflicts under IHL. There, the obligation to investigate war crimes and prosecute the suspects is a matter of customary law.29 The notion has been reaffirmed on several occasions by the UN Security Council specifically in relation to the conflicts in Afghanistan, Burundi, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kosovo and Rwanda.30 In a resolution on impunity adopted without a vote in 2002, the UN Commission on Human Rights recognized that perpetrators of war crimes should be prosecuted or extradited.31 The commission has similarly adopted resolutions — most of them without a vote — requiring the investigation and prosecution of persons alleged to have violated IHL in the internal armed conflicts in Sierra Leone, Chechnya, Rwanda, Sudan, Burundi and the former Yugoslavia. It is now broadly regarded as a customary international legal obligation to investigate and punish alleged perpetrators of IHL violations – in either international or non-international armed conflicts.32 24. It is thus beyond doubt that each instance of alleged gross human rights violation, and all ―serious‖ IHL violations — perpetrated by individuals on either side of the conflict in the Syrian Arab Republic — must be investigated, and, if appropriate, prosecuted. A 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 50 See Supra, fn 43, Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, UNGA Resolution 60/147, 16 Dec. 2005, Art. 4. Article 2 of ICCPR requires a State party to respect and ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in it and also to ensure an effective remedy for any person whose rights have been violated. General Comment 31, para. 8. Unlike in internal conflicts, the obligation in international armed conflicts rests not only with customary law, but also with the ―grave breaches regime,‖ set out in the four Geneva Conventions. See Article 49 of the First Geneva Convention, Article 50 of the Second Geneva Convention, article 129 of the Third Geneva Convention and article 146 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The ‗grave breaches regime‘ contains a specific list of crimes that, whenever violated, oblige the state to ‗try or extradite‘ the suspected perpetrator. The International Humanitarian Fact Finding Commission, http://www.ihffc.org/, was set up for the purpose of conducting such investigations. UN Security Council, Res.978 (§558), Res.1193 (§559) and Res.1199 (§560); UN Security Council, Statements by the President (§§561–569). UN Commission on Human Rights, Res.2002/79 (§589). See ICRC‘s Customary IHL Rule 158.