A/HRC/24/42 relevant constraints it sometimes comes at the expense of functions that commissions can actually complete. 41. The preventive function of truth commissions has widened (in theory) alongside the expansion of “fact-finding”. This has not happened necessarily by design. Mandates are not more elaborate concerning concrete preventive mechanisms; rather, the wide-ranging analysis seems to invite similarly wide-ranging transformation proposals in the name of prevention. Thus commissions have made proposals for the transformation of various institutions, including the judiciary, security forces, education, media, civil registries, electoral systems, and land tenure patterns. 42. Perhaps the only original function of commissions that has not seen a comparable expansion is victim tracing. This function has gained neither increased prominence, nor elaboration in commission mandates, yet the need for it has by no means waned. On the one hand, in most situations where truth commissions are implemented the fate of thousands of victims remains unclarified and thousands of bodies remain unidentified, even when mass burial sites have been located. On the other hand, professional competence in forensics has grown significantly. Considering how exhumations can contribute significantly to truth and justice processes, and the cross-cultural importance for families of victims and entire communities of ensuring proper burial of the deceased, the Special Rapporteur calls for renewed attention to the victim-tracing function of commissions. On their own, truth commissions are unlikely to assume full responsibility for exhumations and identification when a large universe of victims exists. Support from other institutions is needed, but commissions in the past have played a useful role in tracing victims and identifying burial sites.48 43. The victim-redress function of some earlier truth commissions has, by contrast, become a staple of virtually all commissions and has grown in complexity. Most mandates require commissions to make recommendations concerning victim reparation. Some commissions have specifically recommended establishing complex programmes49 which distribute a variety of goods both symbolic and material (including cash payments and the provision of services), and both to individuals and to communities. Truth commissions have often articulated comprehensive proposals, such as those by the Peruvian commission,50 the South African commission,51 and CAVR in Timor-Leste.52 44. The overwhelming majority of truth commissions have not been called to implement reparations programmes, but to make recommendations concerning their design. Given that reparations programmes are usually long-term projects that outlast the commission’s life, and that the more complex the programme the heavier its administrative load, there are 48 49 50 51 52 The TRC of Peru devoted significant attention to recommendations concerning exhumations. See Final Report (fn 39), vol. IX, ch. 2, sect. 3. For the notion of complexity in reparations programmes as well as detailed information and analysis of reparations programmes, see Pablo de Greiff, ed., The Handbook of Reparations (Oxford, New York, Oxford University Press, 2006). See TRC of Peru, Final Report (fn 39), vol. IX. Only parts of the comprehensive reparations programme have been implemented. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa (TRC of South Africa), Final Report, vol. 5, p. 312, paras. 22-23, available at: http://www.justice.gov.za/trc/report. The reparations proposals were rejected by the government, which implemented a significantly more modest programme, see, e.g., Christopher J. Colvin, “Overview of the Reparations Program in South Africa”, in De Greiff, The Handbook of Reparations (fn 49), p. 176. Report of the CAVR (fn 40), part 11, ch. 12. 13