A/HRC/45/13/Add.3 31. The Working Group has recognized as good practices the judicial or legislative decisions in several countries that have enabled the reopening of cases of enforced disappearance that had been suspended or dismissed.21 32. The Declaration provides that States may include mitigating circumstances in their legislation in two particular cases: when the accused discloses information that is instrumental in bringing the victims forward alive or that would contribute to clarifying the fate of victims or identifying the perpetrators.22 Such information can be crucial towards determining the fate or whereabouts of the victims and therefore of great value in terms of reparation. However, these mitigating circumstances should not lead to the absence of sanctions23 and must not be extended to perpetrators other than the person who revealed the information. E. Extension of investigations 33. Both the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (art. 13 (6)) and the International Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (art. 24 (6)) are forceful in affirming that investigations related to enforced disappearance must be carried out until the fate of the disappeared person has been clarified. The Working Group has interpreted that, as a rule, the investigation should also extend to the clarification of the whereabouts of the victim,24 and that these principles are based on the continuing nature of the crime of enforced disappearance.25 34. The Working Group rejects as contrary to the right to the truth and the obligation to investigate enforced disappearances the practices whereby, as a condition for the payment of monetary compensation as means of reparation, families are required to accept a death certificate, which results in the termination of both the search and the investigation, including into the circumstances of the disappearance and the responsibility of the perpetrators. In its general comment on article 19 of the Declaration, the Working Group noted that as a general principle, no victim of enforced disappearance shall be presumed dead over the objections of the family.26 F. Autonomy and independence of the authorities in charge of the investigation 35. The obligation to guarantee the autonomy and independence of the authorities charged with the criminal investigation and prosecution, including the judicial authorities, is the cornerstone that underpins any system that effectively guarantees victims’ rights. The Working Group’s experience has shown that institutional shortcomings and the absence of autonomy, impartiality and independence are among the greatest obstacles to investigating enforced disappearance. This can particularly be the case in countries where enforced disappearances occur repeatedly or in a generalized and systematic manner.27 36. In this regard, the Declaration requires States to establish independent authorities to receive complaints of enforced disappearances and to conduct prompt, thorough and 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 A/HRC/16/48/Add.3, para. 51, and its footnote 57. Declaration, art. 4 (2); see also International Convention, art. 7 (2). The Working Group specified the limitations that should be imposed on the right to pardons and mitigating circumstances, if applicable, in its general comment on article 18 (E/CN.4/2006/56, para. 49). A/HRC/16/48, para. 39 (general comment on the right to the truth in relation to enforced disappearance, para. 4); and CED/C/7, principle 7 (1). The Working Group also shares the assertions of principles 7 (4) and (5). E/CN.4/2001/68, and Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance, general comment on enforced disappearance as a continuing crime. E/CN.4/1998/43, para. 74. A/HRC/30/38/Add.1, paras. 73–74; and A/HRC/33/51/Add.1, paras. 33–35. 7