A/HRC/45/13/Add.3 51. The European Court stated in Öcalan v. Turkey (paragraph 115): “Where a military judge has participated in an interlocutory decision that forms an integral part of proceedings against a civilian, the whole proceedings are deprived of the appearance of having been conducted by an independent and impartial court.” 52. The European Court stated in Tahsin Acar v. Turkey (paragraphs 221–223): “(…) The essential purpose of such investigation is to secure the effective implementation of the domestic laws which protect the right to life and, in those cases involving State agents or bodies, to ensure their accountability for deaths occurring under their responsibility. What form of investigation will achieve those purposes may vary in different circumstances. However, whatever mode is employed, the authorities must act of their own motion once the matter has come to their attention. They cannot leave it to the initiative of the next of kin either to lodge a formal complaint or to take responsibility for the conduct of any investigative procedures (…) For an investigation into an alleged unlawful killing by State agents to be effective, it may generally be regarded as necessary for the persons responsible for and carrying out the investigation to be independent from those implicated in the events.” 53. In the case La Cantuta v. Peru, the Inter-American Court reiterated that an effective investigation must be independent and impartial.172 In the case Serrano-Cruz Sisters v. El Salvador, the Inter-American Court found that the investigation lacked impartiality of the investigating authorities because the prosecutor was involved in the visit of one of the potential witnesses of the case interpreted as acting in the defense of the respondent State at the Inter-American Court, while simultaneously acting as prosecutor at the domestic level as well.173 54. The Inter-American Court stated in Serrano-Cruz Sisters v. El Salvador (paragraph 103): [T]he prosecutor demonstrated that he had not maintained his impartiality in the investigation and that the line of investigation in the criminal proceedings was not totally separate from the State’s defense before the Inter-American Court. 55. In Greece, pursuant to article 14 and 15 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) and the relevant proceedings persons involved in any way in committing the felony of enforced disappearance are not allowed to participate under any capacity, not even the one of a secretary, during the criminal preliminary proceedings. These include the preliminary examination, filing criminal charges, interrogation, the intermediate proceedings of judicial councils and the main proceedings before a court. 174 In France, a public prosecutor or investigating judge who directs the judicial investigation could not entrust it to a police service, which would itself be suspected of the crime of enforced disappearance. 175 In relation to the newly established Office of the Missing Persons (OMP) in Sri Lanka, the Working Group reiterated the importance of ensuring that the OMP’s independence is scrupulously respected. The Working Group further underscored the State’s obligation to ensure impartial and thorough investigations into enforced disappearances, with the competent authorities having the necessary powers and resources to conduct the investigation effectively.176 F. Right to Truth in relation to effective investigation 56. The Human Rights Committee, the Inter-American Court and the European Court affirmed the existence of the right to know the truth afforded to relatives of victims of gross human rights violations. Importantly, the collective dimension of this right is viewed as intrinsically intertwined with the obligation to carry out an effective investigation into the factual circumstances of a disappearance. Furthermore, it is asserted that this right holds a 172 173 174 175 176 IACHR, La Cantuta v. Peru, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 9, 2006, Series C No. 162 para. 110; See Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, Monsenor Oscar Arnulfo Romero and Galdámez v. El Salvador, IACommHR Report No. 37/00, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.106 doc. 3 rev. (13 April 2000) para. 80. IACHR, Serrano-Cruz Sisters v. El Salvador (see footnote 128) para. 103. Greece, Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) of 1 January 1950, Articles 14 and 15. France, submission to the WGEID of 11 March 2019, paragraph 7. AL LKA 1/2020. 31