A/HRC/14/24 55. Mission reports have also addressed the important role of international and nongovernmental actors, including NGOs, national human rights institutions, OHCHR, and the International Criminal Court, in promoting accountability. H. Reparations of killings 56. Whenever a State is responsible for an unlawful killing, international law requires reparations in the form of compensation and/or satisfaction. This obligation is based in general customary international law, as well as duties arising from human rights and humanitarian law.23 The State is also required to ensure that victims have access to remedies, including judicial remedies, for violations of their rights. 57. As a general matter, a great deal more can and must be done by States to meet their reparations obligations. Governments in many countries visited by the mandate, such as Kenya and Sri Lanka, have not met their obligations, either because they have not created reparations programmes, or because programmes are difficult for victims’ families to access, or because tort remedies have undue jurisdictional impediments. Reparations should also be adequately provided for under post-conflict transitional justice mechanisms. This is often not the case (see A/HRC/14/24/Add.2). 58. Increasingly, and out of concern that paying “reparations” would be an admission of State wrongdoing, Governments involved in armed conflict have created other forms of payments. These “ex gratia” or “condolence” payments are often paid to the families of civilians killed during armed conflict. This practice, particularly by the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq, has important benefits, although problems remain in administration and distribution.24 It does not, however, absolve States of their responsibility to acknowledge wrongdoing where it has occurred. I. Victim groups 59. Understanding the dynamics and causes of killings in particular situations will often require a focus on the victims’ membership of especially vulnerable groups. Thus, for example, building upon Ms. Jahangir’s work (see for example E/CN.4/2000/3, paras. 7884), my reports have addressed the particular vulnerability of women in relation to practices such as honour killings, domestic violence, sexual violence as a cause of death, “femicide” and killings of “witches”.25 Country reports have addressed other vulnerable groups, including: refugees; indigenous persons; those deemed to be “socially undesirable”; suspected criminals; children; the elderly; the disabled; those perceived to be or identifying as gay, lesbian, bisexual or transsexual; human rights defenders; and journalists. J. Mandate and working methods 60. I have placed particular emphasis on enhancing understanding of the scope of the mandate and of the working methods adopted. In addition to ensuring continuity with the work of my predecessors in relation to the types of violations dealt with and the mandate’s legal framework (see E/CN.4/2002/74, para. 8), I have: 23 24 25 14 A/HRC/11/2/Add.4, para. 35, footnote 35. Ibid., paras. 35-36 and A/HRC/11/2/Add.5, paras. 67-66. See E/CN.4/2004/7, paras. 66-69; A/HRC/11/2/Add.4, paras. 63-64; A/HRC/4/20/Add.2, paras. 2226; A/HRC/11/2/Add.3, paras. 49-51, 87; and A/HRC/11/2, paras. 43-59, 68.