A/HRC/14/42 systematic and deliberate denial of the right to know the fate of one’s relative should be punished as a criminal offence under domestic law. Moreover, any available information must be provided not only to the families, but also to relevant institutions for tracing the missing persons. 49. In armed conflicts, protected persons must be allowed to inform or require the competent authorities to notify their families (or any other person of their choice) of their capture/arrest, address and state of health. The systematic and deliberate denial of this right should be criminalized under domestic law. The right of protected persons to correspond with the members of their family must also be ensured. 50. National and international institutions working in the area of human rights and humanitarian law, including ICRC, should be granted unhindered access to any place where people are being deprived of their liberty. 51. No punishment should be imposed for maintaining private or personal contact with relatives, or for seeking information regarding the fate or whereabouts of a relative who is detained or interned. The right must be upheld no matter the nature of the act the person is suspected of having committed, including criminal acts and against State security.10 VII. Criminal investigation and prosecution of human rights violations linked to missing persons 52. As it can be seen above, the efficient treatment of missing persons requires thorough commitment from all parties concerned and the necessary resources. Unfortunately, a number of stumbling blocks can be observed in practice which make the whole process very challenging. Information about missing persons can and has been used as pressure point in political negotiations, instead of being understood and accepted as a natural humanitarian obligation for all conflict parties.11 Cases/statistics of missing persons are used for the international political debate among conflict parties to show who the principal culprit for the violent conflict is. Thus, they tend to support intransigent positions, such as that one conflict party would not want to start the investigation of cases until the other side acknowledges guilt and responsibility. Furthermore, leaders who played a major part in perpetuating the conflict often remain prominent figures in the subsequent peace process, a situation that does not facilitate the resolution of missing person cases. 53. One additional challenge is that cases of missing persons can also constitute dormant cases of arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances or extrajudicial executions. Therefore, while focusing on the humanitarian dimension of missing persons in armed conflict, it is also necessary to take note of the work of human rights mechanisms in three fields, i.e., those of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances and of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, and work on impunity (including resolutions by the Human Rights Council on all related topics). 54. In the first panel discussion of the Human Rights Council on missing persons on 7 January 2009, the Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms. Kang, stressed the importance of fighting impunity and implementing appropriate domestic law. She stressed the importance of criminalizing in national legislation violations of international humanitarian and human rights standards. Furthermore, she referred to measures to be 10 11 GE.10-12433 See “Guiding Principles/Model Law on the Missing”. Christophe Girod and Angelo Gnaedinger, “Politics, military operations and humanitarian action: an uneasy alliance”. Available from www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/p0709. 11