A/HRC/42/CRP.5 responsibility help address this demand by providing for forms of reparation that are reformative and additional to what criminal accountability most often provides. 17 42. Under the rules of State responsibility, reparation is often assessed not by the injury caused to individuals but by the injury caused to a State, which includes material and moral damages.18 In the case of a State that commits genocide or other violations against its own people, it would be more appropriate for reparation to benefit the individuals directly harmed and the international community as a whole.19 Such reparation may include, as required, restitution, compensation and satisfaction, either singly or in combination. 20 The purpose of these reparations is to “wipe out all the consequences of the illegal act and reestablish the situation which would, in all probability, have existed if that act had not been committed”.21 The enormity and scope of the destruction that Myanmar caused to people’s lives makes it impossible to suggest that reparation could ever achieve this purpose. At the same time, the enormity and causes of the acts that the Mission has documented indicate that Myanmar’s reparation obligations are far reaching and wide ranging. 22 43. Restitution may require, depending on the breach, restoration of liberty; enjoyment of human rights, identity, family life and citizenship; return to one’s place of residence; and restoration of employment and return of property. This may include requiring juridical restitution through legislative modifications.23 Compensation may be required for economically assessable damage, such as physical or mental harm; lost opportunities, including employment, education and social benefits; material damages and loss of earnings, including loss of earning potential; and costs required for legal or expert assistance, medicine and medical services, and psychological and social services. Compensation may also be payable in respect of damage suffered where restitution is either not possible or not possible in full. The inability to restore people’s homes and property, because they have been destroyed, is an example of a situation in which compensation is payable as a result of inability to make restitution. Satisfaction may require effective measures aimed at the cessation of continuing violations; verification of the facts and full and public disclosure of the truth; the search for the whereabouts of the disappeared and killed and assistance in the recovery, identification and reburial of bodies; official 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 12 ICJ, Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, (Croatia v. Serbia), Judgment of 3 February 2015, para. 129. Article 31 of the Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with commentaries (2001). Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with commentaries (2001), para. 3 of the commentary to Article 33. See, also, Article 48(2) of the Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with commentaries (2001). Article 34 of the Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with commentaries (2001). Permanent Court of International Justice, Factory at Chorzów, Merits, 13 September 1927, p. 47. Reparation under the rules of State responsibility are in addition to a separate obligation that States have under international law to provide full and effective reparation to persons who make direct claims of gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law against the State. See, Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, Principle 18 (“…victims of gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law should, as appropriate and proportional to the gravity of the violation and the circumstances of each case, be provided with full and effective reparation…which include the following forms: restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition.”). Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with commentaries (2001), para. 5 of the commentary to Article 35. Note, also, that where a wrongful act is ongoing, such restitution may overlap with the obligation of cessation. See, Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with commentaries (2001), para. 6 of the commentary to Article 35. Notwithstanding the distinction between reparations owed to individuals and reparations owed to States, given the nature of damage incurred by the act of genocide against individuals, this paragraph is also informed by the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, Principles 18–22.