A/HRC/24/42 Argentina;90 and (c) the assignment of follow-up responsibilities to independent human rights institutions, as seen in practice in Sierra Leone.91 77. Stand-alone official bodies have two main virtues: they can play a useful convening and coordinating role among specialized agencies and ministries, and, as autonomous bodies, they enjoy a certain degree of political independence. However, as agencies and ministries are not under their authority, in the face of recalcitrant attitudes, they prove to be feeble. Units within ministries, by contrast, can be effective implementers – but within their narrow domain of competencies, and provided political willingness exists. Finally, independent human rights bodies have more autonomy than stand-alone institutions and moral authority unmatched by either stand-alone bodies or units within ministries. Nevertheless, they tend to have narrow competencies and even less power to direct than stand-alone specialized official institutions. 78. Absent governmental commitment, an “institutional fix” to the lack of implementation of recommendations is unlikely. Discussions about follow up, however, have concentrated on institutional solutions rather than on functions. The urgent challenge is to strengthen the incentives governments have for implementation. This will not happen without a vigilant and involved civil society and a cooperative and yet demanding international community. Increased attention should be paid to monitoring the implementation of recommendations, because such processes can generate useful incentives, and because effective monitoring is in any case necessary for sound accountability. A good model of a monitoring mechanism is the interactive recommendation matrix established by the Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone with the collaboration of the United Nations.92 79. There is an urgent need to strengthen the leverage of civil society with a view to improving the implementation record of governments. Therefore, the Special Rapporteur encourages reflection on means available to truth commissions, governments and international donors to strengthen civil society. During their operation, commissions can strengthen civil society organizations and encourage the formation of networks of organizations. After their operation, they can recommend the establishment of regular forums where NGOs could share with governments the results of monitoring, which would strengthen the accountability of authorities for the effective implementation of recommendations. 2. Archives 80. Archives – both the commission’s own and general/national archives – are a natural extension of the life and legacy of a truth commission, and permanent in nature. They are instruments for realizing the right to truth. 90 91 92 22 to the legislature concerning four broad areas: reparations, historical memory, justice, and institutional reform, see Final Report (fn 39), vol. IX, ch. 2, sect. 4. This body, however, was never established. In Argentina, for example, responsibility for the implementation of the various reparation plans was eventually assigned to the Secretaría de Derechos Humanos within the Ministry of Justice, Security, and Human Rights, see e.g., María José Guembe, The Reparations for Grave Human Rights Violations: The Argentinian Experience, in de Greiff, The Handbook of Reparations (fn 49), p. 21. Not by design but by default, in Sierra Leone, the Human Rights Commission – the establishment of which was one of the recommendations of the TRC – has assumed the role of a Follow-up Committee envisaged by the Act, see TRC Act 2000 (fn 85), part V. Available at http://www.sierraleonetrc.org/index.php/resources/recommendations-matrix.