Recommendations and results • Evaluation: Were the recommendations relevant, appropriate and able to be implemented? • Evaluation: Were they implemented, fully or partially? Empowerment • Monitoring: Is the process of the inquiry enabling victims and their supporters to advocate and act more successfully? • Evaluation: Did it enable victims and their supporters to advocate and act more successfully? Monitoring and evaluation processes have to make sure they ask the right questions that relate to the issue, context and results of the inquiry. When evaluating a national inquiry, asking whether all the recommendations were implemented quickly is the wrong question. Recommendations are important to an inquiry and so looking at the record of implementation of recommendations is important but it is not the only issue. Not all recommendations will be implemented and not all will be implemented immediately or quickly. Sometimes, implementation may take some years. The right question is whether the inquiry has benefited the victims of human rights violations. If all or some recommendations were implemented, did they help the victims? If few or no recommendations at all were implemented, did victims benefit in some other ways? Did the inquiry help prevent future violations? In one sense, implementation of recommendations is ultimately in the hands of the Government and others to whom the recommendations are directed. It is beyond the control of the NHRI. If evaluation is done on the basis of implementation alone, then, if the Government and others are not persuaded or compelled to act on the inquiry’s recommendations, the inquiry was not successful. However, victims may have benefited greatly from the inquiry even if there has been no implementation of the recommendations. In assessing the benefit to victims, a broad perspective is required. Implementation is not the only measure of benefit to victims and not the only measure of the inquiry’s effectiveness. Evaluation should also look towards the inquiry’s impact on the longer-term position of the NHRI itself. A national inquiry, through raising the profile of the NHRI and establishing it as an effective advocate for human rights, can add to the stature of the NHRI. The evaluation should look broadly at whether the inquiry has added to the authority, stature and credibility of the NHRI. This is not necessarily an objective of the inquiry but it is obviously important. KEY POINTS: CHAPTER 16 • Monitoring and evaluation is an essential part of the national inquiry process that should be incorporated into the inquiry’s strategy from the start. • Monitoring is a continuing process, taking different forms at different times, developed and adapted to the particular circumstances and the stage of the project. It should be undertaken while the inquiry is underway. • Evaluation occurs at conclusion of the inquiry. There should be a major evaluation sometime after the inquiry’s completion. • Evaluation can be internal or external. • Monitoring and evaluation questions should relate to how effectively the inquiry is meeting, or has met, its objectives. Chapter 16: Monitor and evaluate | 79