A/HRC/28/38 18. The panel discussion addressed questions of accountability for, and transparency in, the use of armed drones, with a focus on the rights of victims to reparations and the right to the truth. 19. Focussing on the right of access to justice for people affected by the use of drones, the Senior Attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights noted that it was important to remember that when a person was killed – whether because of an erroneous interpretation of the law or faulty intelligence – the harm was irreparable. The most that could be sought were answers to questions about whether the power of the State was lawfully exercised and the right to life fully respected and, where wrongdoing was found, acknowledgement made, redress offered and corrective measures taken to prevent the same harm from recurring. 20. Ms. Kebriaei noted that the main obstacle faced by claimants trying to access courts was the position taken by States that judicial inquiry into decisions regarding the use of drones was inappropriate. Drawing on her experience of courts in the United States of America, she noted that responses to requests for judicial review had included assertions of exclusive executive decision-making authority in matters of national security, immunity for officials, and the need for secrecy with regard to relevant government information. She noted that similar arguments had been made in the past decade with regard to national security policies in the context of detention, where gross human rights violations were alleged and those had presented obstacles to accountability. Ms. Kebriaei stressed that when courts deferred to those kinds of arguments, they left victims unable even to be heard in court and without hope of the possibility of any justice, with serious allegations of human rights violations left unaddressed. 21. The Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism noted that the lack of transparency by States regarding their use of drones was the single greatest obstacle to an evaluation of the impact of armed drones on civilians, as it made it extremely difficult to assess the legality of their use and ensure accountability. Regarding the duty of States to investigate, he noted that under international human rights law, whenever there was evidence of an alleged violation of the right to life, there was an obligation on States to conduct a prompt, independent and impartial investigation, with transparent results. Turning to the obligations of States under international humanitarian law, he highlighted the work done by the Public Commission to Examine the Maritime Incident of 31 May 2010, the Turkel Commission,2 which had examined the extent to which the obligation to investigate applies as a matter of international humanitarian law in situations where an armed conflict has arisen. The view of the Commission, which he shared, was that, in any case where there were unintended or unanticipated civilian casualties, there was an obligation to conduct an independent and impartial investigation. That did not preclude an investigation in the context of military justice systems, as long as those conducting the investigation were genuinely independent of those under investigation and not subject to the same chain of command. The Commission found that there was, first, an obligation to conduct a fact-finding inquiry, and if circumstances gave rise to a reasonable suspicion of of international humanitarian law having been violated, there should be a full criminal investigation. The results of both processes should be made public. He noted that as Special Rapporteur, he had applied that test to 37 drone strikes, where it was alleged that civilian casualties had occurred and had found that 30 cases required an independent and impartial investigation and transparent results. 22. The Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions focused on the importance of accountability for violations of the prohibition of the arbitrary 2 Available from http://www.turkel-committee.gov.il/files/wordocs/8808report-eng.pdf. 7