A/HRC/19/61 addition, a commission should have legally granted powers to protect witnesses, victims and their families from possible reprisal for their testimony. 44 E. Methodology 66. In discharging its duties, a commission must be careful to design a strategy for the effective discovery of every fact relevant to its mission, as set out in its terms of reference. To ensure inclusiveness and ownership of a commission’s methodology, broad and genuine consultations with relevant international and national actors, including civil society, should be undertaken when drafting the commission’s terms of reference. Moreover, it is important to disclose the terms of reference and working methods to the public as a means to ensure their confidence in the proceedings and ultimate findings of the commission. 67. Hearings that are open to the public, like those pioneered by the truth and reconciliation commissions created in South Africa and Peru, are strongly preferred.45 Open hearings where victims and witnesses may speak directly to the public in their own voices are crucial to building understanding and trust in the public in the methodology used by the commission of inquiry. At the same time, it is important that open hearings be conducted in a manner that respects the dignity of each victim and witness, and protects the rights of alleged perpetrators, in the criminal law setting, from any breach in the presumption of innocence. The preference for open hearings should be without prejudice to some exceptions made for testimony to be received in camera, as required, for example, to ensure confidentiality and the security of victims or witnesses or when there are legitimate claims of national security interests. 46 Under no circumstances should “secrets of State” be invoked as a justification to conceal the commission of human rights violations. The members of the commission of inquiry should alone be the judges of whether confidential or closed proceedings are necessary. Only in exceptional circumstances should hearings be confidential; in such cases, the precise justification for the confidentiality must be transparent and disclosed to the public. F. Evaluation of evidence 68. The purposes of a commission of inquiry warrant a more flexible approach to rules of evidence, including the credibility of witness testimony. 47 In assessing the credibility of evidence, a commission of inquiry should give special weight to corroborated testimony and to testimony subjected to cross-examination. A commission should also apply general rules in their assessment of the credibility of witnesses, including demeanour, subject to cultural and gender sensitivities. A commission should always accept testimony that is not subject to cross-examination, and should also avail itself of testimony that, if rendered in court, would be excludable as hearsay. 44 45 46 47 18 Ibid., para. 108. Perpetrators must not, however, be permitted to dominate or intimidate proceedings whereby victims are pressured into forgiving in the interest of national reconciliation. The Arar Commission heard the testimony of 85 witnesses in public sessions. The Order in Council establishing the inquiry set out directions for dealing with information that was subject to National Security Confidentiality. See the Report of the Events Relating to Maher Arar: Analysis and Recommendations, Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar, 2006, sect. 3.2. Istanbul Protocol, para. 117.