211 During 2010, ICHR held several meetings with the Permanent Investigation Committee, which was formed in order to consider the torture complaints filed by ICHR. The Commission received many complaints filed by ICHR. But until now, it did not add anything new to the work of other structures within the police system. Its work is not different from the Grievances Department, and its replies and investigations did not add anything new. The work of this Commission has taken the nature of formalities only, and no results have been reached in the majority of the complaints. This can be attributed to the lack of a cadre within the Commission, and to the absence of powers and responsibilities assigned to it. Gaza Strip The Government in the Gaza Strip formed many monitoring bodies and practiced many aspects of accountability. The Office of the Comptroller General of the Interior Ministry has continued to receive citizens' complaints and to follow up with the various authorities in the Interior Ministry. The Public Administration for the Inspector General of Police followed up control over the actions of police officers and its different departments according to specific tasks, including: 1) follow‐up on implementation of decisions; 2) inspection of police departments through direct control and performance reports; 3) disclosure of abuses and determining the responsibility of the perpetrators; 4) studying complaints from the public and services members; and 5) ensuring respect for court rulings. In spite of these structures, the reality of the Gaza Strip presented different patterns of human rights violations. According to citizens' complaints and ICHR’s monitoring and documentation of these complaints, control and accountability procedures require reconsideration, procedures that provide assurances of accountability and responsibility, punishment for those who commit crimes or errors, and compensation for victims, particularly victims of torture. And through following up the responses of the Security Services to ICHR’s correspondence relating to citizens’ complaints, we conclude there is no reason for a continuation of the previous approach, such as calling for a denial of most human rights violations, or arguing that they are individual errors which do not reflect an approach or a policy. Based on violation patterns and accountability procedures, we make the following observations: