A/HRC/30/61 the investigation has revealed that Eknaligoda was taken to an army camp in Girithale in North Central province following his abduction on 24 January 2010.9 71. The above developments are most welcome, but it is important that the momentum in these cases be sustained and broadened to the many other criminal cases languishing before the courts. The High Commissioner recalls that breakthroughs of this kind have been reported before other sessions of the Human Rights Council, only to stall later on. C. Mass graves 72. In previous reports, OHCHR highlighted the pending investigations into mass graves that had been discovered in different parts of the country. Developments in 2015 in the investigation into gravesites at Mannar and Matale have highlighted ongoing forensic challenges and possible tampering with evidence. 73. In recent years, many other graves have been found in the former conflict zone, often of persons who died in shelling during the final stages of the conflict. This fact highlights the critical need for greater local capacity and international technical assistance in the field of forensics, particularly forensic anthropology and archaeology. Ensuring the preservation and investigation of sites will be critical to any future criminal investigation and to the identification of missing persons for their families. VII. Looking ahead 74. The new Government has pledged to deal with accountability issues “within the country’s legal framework”.10 Much of the debate has turned on the type of mechanisms that achieve this, and whether they should be domestic, international or a hybrid of the two. As the Human Rights Council stressed in its resolution 25/1, however, what is needed is a “comprehensive approach to transitional justice incorporating the full range of judicial and non-judicial measures”, including individual prosecutions, reparations, truth-seeking, institutional reform and vetting of public employees and officials. 75. The commitment made by the new Government to pursue accountability through a domestic process is commendable, particularly in a context where some political parties and sections of the military and society remain deeply opposed. The unfortunate reality is, however, that the State’s criminal justice system is not yet ready or equipped to conduct an independent and credible investigation into the allegations reported by the investigation team,11 or to hold accountable those responsible for such violations, as requested by the Council in resolution 25/1. 76. First and foremost is the absence of any reliable system for victim and witness protection, particularly in a context where the risk of reprisals is very high. In February 2015, the Government finally passed a long-pending law on victim and witness protection, although no concrete steps have yet been taken to render it operative. OHCHR has previously highlighted various shortcomings in the law that could compromise the independence and effectiveness of the new system (see A/HRC/27/CRP.2, para. 25). Much will depend on the integrity of appointments to the new witness protection authority, the vetting of police assigned to it, and the resources allocated to make it functional. 9 10 11 14 “Sgt. Major confesses to grilling Eneligoda”, Daily News, 11 August 2015. See the election manifesto of the United National Front for Good Governance, available from www.colombotelegraph.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Election-held-LAA.xls-.pdf. See A/HRC/30/CRP.2.