A/HRC/45/45/Add.2 appointed by the Ministry of Defence, a representative of human rights organizations (chosen by the President from a list of three candidates submitted by those organizations) and the Presidential Human Rights Commissioner. The Special Rapporteur welcomes this initiative and hopes that the Commission, which has not yet been set up, will be operational soon. 27. The Special Rapporteur has also received information about difficulties in gaining access to the files of the Truth Commission report of 1993. Of the three recorded copies, only the archives deposited with the United Nations have been confirmed. However, issues related to the confidentiality of the testimony recorded in the files and the need to digitize and copy the archives currently restrict access. III. Justice A. National Reconciliation Act 28. In 2017, the Governing Board of the Legislative Assembly established an ad hoc commission to study the implications of the ruling that invalidated the General Amnesty Act. The commission faced strong criticism because of: (a) its mandate, which includes interpreting the implications of the ruling, a task which cannot and should not be a prerogative of the legislative branch; (b) its composition, as four of its members presented a conflict of interest; and (c) the lack of transparency and effective participation by victims and civil society. 29. In February 2019, the chair of the commission submitted a proposal for a national reconciliation law containing provisions that in practice would lead to a de facto amnesty through the application of statutes of limitations, restrictive deadlines for criminal investigations, the elimination of prison sentences and the granting of sentence-reduction benefits without preconditions. The proposal was strongly criticized, including by OHCHR,12 the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights13 and the Special Rapporteur during his visit. As a result, the bill was withdrawn and the ad hoc commission ceased its operations, which were delegated to the Political Commission of the Legislative Assembly.14 30. New draft laws debated in the Legislative Assembly also included provisions contrary to international law, prompting further reactions from the Special Rapporteur. 15 In February 2020, the Legislative Assembly adopted the Special Act on Transitional Justice, Reparation and National Reconciliation (Decree No. 575). The Act included measures relating to reparation, historical memory, the search for truth and access to archives, but it also contained impunity mechanisms such as the commutation of sentences for those responsible for violations, in some cases by up to a quarter of the original term, and the imposition of a time limit of only one year for the Attorney General’s Office to investigate allegations of violations. The Act was vetoed days later by the President for failing to comply with the requirements of the ruling of unconstitutionality 44/2003 and 145/2013. 31. The Special Rapporteur notes with concern that the various drafts and discussions surrounding the National Reconciliation Act include legal provisions that are reprehensible under international human rights law, such as statutory limitations, measures to exclude responsibility and measures intended to replace, eliminate or void the effects of a conviction for serious human rights violations. 32. In this connection, the Special Rapporteur recalls that the jurisprudence of international and regional human rights courts establishes the obligation to prosecute and punish, with appropriate penalties, the perpetrators of gross violations of human rights and 12 13 14 15 GE.20-09158 www.ohchr.org/sp/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=24267&LangID=E. www.oas.org/es/cidh/prensa/comunicados/2019/104.as. elmundo.sv/se-desactiva-sin-propuesta-la-comision-ad-hoc-de-amnistia/. www.ohchr.org/SP/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=24619&LangID=E. 7