A/HRC/19/61 C. Added value 27. When used by States, a commission of inquiry can serve as a valuable tool in addressing the State’s duty under international human rights law to investigate and hold an independent inquiry into torture, deaths (for example, in the case of extrajudicial executions) and other atrocities (A/HRC/8/3, para. 12). 28. Although commissions of inquiry can vary in their origin and mandate, there are three characteristics that make them an effective and unique tool: they are generally ad hoc, autonomous and independent, as well as being victim-centred, therefore allowing greater and active participation of victims in the process of establishing facts and identifying the priority elements that comprise reparations. 29. For some victims and others, the importance of public truth-telling is not only that it reveals new information, but also provides a forum that officially acknowledges facts already known. Scholars in the field of transitional justice have emphasized that the importance of official acknowledgement of the facts is proportional to the extent to which the facts were previously hidden or disputed; the more facts are hidden or disputed, the greater the importance and significance of a correct and more complete official statement of the historical record. 30. Commissions of inquiry may satisfy some of the needs of victims for adequate healing and remedy by providing them with a public venue to tell their stories. In this context, commissions of inquiry may also aid in providing closure for family members of victims. Generally speaking, commissions of inquiry also deliver their findings in a timely manner, enhancing the victim-centred approach of this mechanism, especially when compared with judicial proceedings that ordinarily take much longer. 31. Commissions of inquiry may be established in the aftermath of major incidents where there are concerns about the ability of investigative bodies to uncover promptly, thoroughly and impartially the root causes of certain large-scale or politically motivated crimes or systemic violations. In these situations. As pointed out by a previous mandate holder, State authorities that would normally be relied upon to investigate and prosecute are reluctant or unlikely to do so adequately. 7 32. The independent structure and mandate of commissions of inquiry may also make them well suited for identifying institutional responsibility and proposing reforms. Due to the numerous sources of evidence and facts submitted to commissions of inquiry, they are often able to pinpoint the failure of particular policies and detect systemic shortcomings or practices of certain Government agencies. Lastly, commissions of inquiry can aid in identifying measures to promote reconciliation within divided societies by directly confronting past violations. 33. Commissions of inquiry are particularly useful where there is a lack of public information about a specific event or issue, such as when, for reasons of national security or intelligence, certain information is secret or classified. Under these circumstances, in order to respect the principles of constructive and meaningful participation of victims in establishing the facts, truth-seeking and holding perpetrators accountable, it is essential to ensure that a victim’s right to effective investigation and redress is secured. In this respect, commissions of inquiry can help to maximize the disclosure of relevant information into the public domain. Where information is received in camera, a commission of inquiry may submit an excerpt or summary of that information to the appropriate judicial authority to ensure that a State’s assertion that certain information is privileged is subject to the highest level of scrutiny. 7 A/HRC/8/3, para.12. 9