A/HRC/22/52 violations”.38 The Human Rights Council has similarly recognized “the importance of respecting and ensuring the right to truth so as to contribute to ending impunity”.39 Statements to the same effect have been made by many of the United Nations' independent human rights mechanisms including the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Committee Against Torture, and various Special Procedures mandate-holders.40 25. The Inter-American Commission and Court of Human Rights have developed jurisprudence on the right to truth which is cast as a right jointly vested in the victim, his or her next of kin, and the whole of civil society. In one of its earliest decisions on the subject, the Commission observed that “[e]very society has the inalienable right to know the truth about past events, as well as the motives and circumstances in which aberrant crimes came to be committed, in order to prevent repetition of such acts in the future”.41 In Myrna Mack Chang v. Guatemala the Court held that42 “the next of kin of the victims and society as a whole must be informed of everything that has happened in connection with the said violations.” 26. The right to truth has been recognized by the African Commission on Human and Peoples‟ Rights as an aspect of the right to an effective remedy for a violation of the African Convention. In its Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa, the Commission held that the right to an effective remedy includes “access to the factual information concerning the violations”. Most recently and, for present purposes, most relevantly, the right to truth was expressly recognized by the European Court of Human Rights in connection with the former CIA programme of secret detention, “enhanced interrogation” and rendition, in the judgment of its Grand Chamber in El-Masri v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.43 3. The principle of accountability in international human rights law 27. On the other side of the equation, international law imposes corresponding obligations on States which can be conveniently gathered together under the rubric of the international law principle of accountability. This imposes specific duties on all three branches of government. The executive, the judiciary and parliamentary oversight bodies, as well as independent bodies entrusted with official responsibility for review of intelligence matters and/or the conduct of intelligence and law-enforcement agencies, each 38 39 40 41 42 43 10 United Nations Basic Principles on Remedy and Reparation for Gross Human Rights and Humanitarian Law Violations, op. cit., footnote 33, para. 24. Human Rights Council Resolutions 12/122 of 12 October 2009, para. 1, and 9/11 of 18 September 2007, para. 1. OHCHR, Study on the Right to Truth, op cit., footnote 31; Right to the Truth, United Nations Doc. A/HRC/5/7 (2007); Committee Against Torture, Concluding Observations on Colombia, United Nations Doc. CAT/C/COL/CO/4 (2010) para. 27; Concluding Observations on El Salvador, United Nations Doc. CAT/C/SLV/CO/2 (2009) para. 9; Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances, General Comment on the Right to the Truth, op. cit., footnote 31, para. 39; Special Rapporteur on Torture, Mission to Paraguay, A/HRC/7/3/Add.3 (2007) para. 82; Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of expression, Annual Report, United Nations Doc. A/HRC/14/23 (2010) para. 24; Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, Report to the General Assembly, United Nations Doc. A/61/384 (2006) para. 16; Rapporteur of the Drafting Group of the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee, Study on Best Practices on the Issue of Missing Persons, United Nations Doc. A/HRC/4/CRP.2/Rev.1 (2010) paras 40 et seq. IACommHR, Annual Report, 1985-86, op. cit., foonote 30, p. 193. Myrna Mack Chang, paras. 75 and 77. El-Masri, op. cit., footnote 6. See further paras. 32–35 below.