A/HRC/36/54 preceding or following the disappearances. In the many cases in which, from the human rights viewpoint, the Commission only has reasonable grounds to fear that enforced disappearances have occurred, further evidence will need to be gathered within the framework of a more thorough investigation before these acts can be categorized as enforced disappearances under international criminal law. B. Genocide 75. Although, within the context of certain violations such as arrests, torture and sexual violence, the Commission was able to show that Tutsis were targeted by insults of an ethnic nature, it is not in a position to establish the existence of a political will to destroy that ethnic group “in whole or in part”, as required by the definition of genocide given in article 6 of the Rome Statute. 76. The Commission nevertheless remains concerned about certain speeches by State authorities and officials of the ruling party. Although such statements do not constitute direct and public incitement to commit genocide, 44 they help to create a dangerous climate of hate and to terrorize the population, and could rekindle ethnic tensions. C. Individual responsibility 77. The Commission has reasonable grounds to believe that the above-mentioned crimes against humanity are attributable primarily to State officials at the highest level and to senior officers and members of the National Intelligence Service, the police, the army and the Imbonerakure. 78. The Commission has drawn up a non-exhaustive list of alleged perpetrators of crimes against humanity, accompanied by information concerning specific acts that they are suspected to have committed or ordered. It has made a distinction between direct responsibility and the responsibility of military commanders and superiors, as provided for in the Rome Statute.45 79. Given the need to respect the presumption of innocence and to protect victims and witnesses, the Commission has decided not to publish that list, which will be placed in the safekeeping of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. The latter may share it with any competent body and/or court conducting credible investigations or seeking to gather information on individuals or institutions pursuant to a United Nations mandate. D. Accountability mechanisms 80. In view of the lack of independence of the Burundian judiciary and the impunity enjoyed in respect of the gross violations committed by agents of the State and members of the ruling party, including the Imbonerakure, the Commission believes that the Burundian State is neither willing nor able genuinely to investigate or prosecute those violations. 46 It therefore falls to the International Criminal Court to investigate those violations and establish criminal responsibility in respect thereof. 44 45 46 16 Article III of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and article 25, paragraph 3 (e), of the Rome Statute. Article 28 of the Rome Statute. Article 17, paragraph 1 (a), of the Rome Statute. GE.17-13865