A/HRC/45/13/Add.3 9. In its 2006 ruling on the Goiburú et al. case, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights stated that prohibiting acts of enforced disappearance, and the related duty to investigate them and punish perpetrators, should be considered a jus cogens norm.6 10. In its article 13, the Declaration describes in detail the obligations arising from the duty to investigate enforced disappearance thoroughly and impartially, making clear that such investigations should not be curtailed or impeded in any way. The present report is informed by the recommendations developed by the Working Group over the years and the practices of States and other entities. A. Prompt and ex officio nature of the investigation 11. Article 13 of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and article 12 of the International Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance set out the obligation for States to ensure the effective enjoyment of the right to issue a complaint to a competent and independent State authority, and to have such complaint promptly, thoroughly, effectively and impartially investigated. 12. The requirement to conduct prompt investigations is connected to the main objectives of finding the disappeared person alive and ensuring that sufficient evidence is obtained in order to establish the truth and identify the perpetrators. However, in many countries, law enforcement agencies implement a waiting period of up to 72 hours before initiating investigations on disappearances, which is problematic given that the first hours after the deprivation of liberty are key for the investigation of an enforced disappearance. This period can potentially provide perpetrators with an opportunity to circumvent the protections established by law, and to subject victims to unlawful interrogations, torture and, in some instances, extrajudicial executions. 13. In this regard, States must establish specific early complaint mechanisms for the reception and investigation of allegations of enforced disappearance that are easily available within the initial period of disappearance. In line with the Declaration (art. 13 (1)), these mechanisms should be independent and committed to carrying out impartial and prompt investigations into all allegations of enforced disappearances. 14. The Declaration and the International Convention stipulate that States cannot invoke the lack of a formal complaint as a valid reason to not initiate investigations. This clause is designed as a safeguard to help ensure that investigations take place, including in contexts where relatives are at high risk of facing reprisals or other situations where the complainant is unaware of existing mechanisms, and/or unable or unwilling to communicate with them for whatever reason.7 15. Practices in many countries demonstrate that the lack of willingness to investigate, on the part of State authorities, puts the burden on the relatives to collect evidence and find witnesses and, in some instances, even search grave sites to look for their loved ones. However, although States should assume the duty to investigate, relatives and civil society organizations supporting them should be allowed to actively participate in this process. 16. With regard to the question of “promptness” or investigations carried out “without delay”, it is well established that the delaying of investigations has often resulted in de facto impunity.8 These delays can also increase the anguish of the relatives of the disappeared, 6 7 8 4 Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Goiburú et al. v. Paraguay, ruling of 22 September 2006, Series C. No. 153, para. 84. See para. 7 of the annex to the present document for other precedents, and see also the contribution for this report of Fundación para la Justicia y el Estado de Democrático de Derecho and TRIAL International, “Mexico: aportación dirigida al Grupo de Trabajo sobre las desapariciones forzadas o involuntarias en vista del estudio temático sobre normas y políticas públicas para la investigación eficaz de las desapariciones forzadas” (February 2019), para. 6. Available at www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Disappearances/Pages/effective-investigation.aspx. See, for instance, references to France and Portugal in para. 23 of the annex. See the contribution for the report by the Human Rights Law Clinic, University of Texas School of Law, p. 48. Available at www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Disappearances/effective-