2.4. OTHER FACTORS IN DECIDING WHETHER TO CONDUCT A NATIONAL INQUIRY A national inquiry is a large undertaking and should not be commenced without serious consideration of all the issues and a clear decision to proceed. There are many factors to be considered. 2.4.1. The nature of the human rights issue The first factor is the nature of the human rights issue. A national inquiry is a good way to examine a situation that is recognised as serious, whether or not it is recognised as a human rights problem. Where there is broad consensus about an issue that needs to be addressed, but a lack of understanding of the issue itself or political hostility towards resolving it, the national inquiry process assists in developing broad consensus on the nature of the problem, its human rights dimensions, the urgency in addressing it and the best ways to do so. It is a process that promotes a political response because it builds community consensus, and therefore political pressure, for a solution. The capacity of the inquiry to attract media and public attention is therefore a critical issue in deciding whether to undertake one. Without media and public attention it will not be possible to build the necessary community support for addressing the issue and, as a result, the necessary political will to do so. But, if it is to attract media attention, it must be able to be conducted in public. Many human rights issues are sensitive and evidence has to be collected confidentially. An issue that primarily requires confidential evidence is not well suited to being addressed through a national inquiry process. 2.4.2. The capacity of the NHRI The second factor is the capacity of the institution to undertake a national inquiry. A national inquiry is a complex exercise that can be expensive and staff intensive. The NHRI must be able to access the necessary resources, both financial and personnel, to be able to undertake the inquiry effectively. Any decision to conduct a national inquiry must be preceded by a realistic assessment of the resources necessary to do so effectively and identification of those resources to ensure that they are available. Realistic budgeting and identification of resources prevent mistakes being made in embarking on an inquiry without having the capacity to do so effectively and successfully – right to its conclusion and beyond. Ensuring that staff with the necessary expertise and experience are available prevents a crisis developing during the conduct of the inquiry when some necessary skill is missing or when the number of expert staff required is not available. 2.4.3. The likelihood of effectiveness The NHRI must also look, in a realistic way, at the prospects of a national inquiry leading to recommendations that can be implemented and will be implemented. Those most affected by human rights violations – the victims and their families and communities – are entitled to remedies for past violations and action to prevent future violations. They should not have their hopes and expectations raised when there is no prospect of either remedy or prevention. If a situation is inherently incapable of resolution, then a national inquiry has nothing to contribute. In making this assessment, however, it is necessary to look long-term, not short-term. There may be no national resources or no political will to address a human rights situation immediately but it may be possible to find resources or build will over time. It is also necessary to look broadly at solutions, not narrowly. It is usually impossible to undo a violation that has been committed and so, if undoing the violation is the only criterion for deciding whether to undertake a national inquiry, then there is no point in doing so. However, there are other results that are equally valid: acknowledging victims, finding ways to give them redress and identifying preventive measures for the future. The assessment of possible results has to be long-term and broad. Chapter 2: The concept of a national inquiry | 9