Undertaking Effective Investigations A Guide for National Human Rights Institutions 3. DECIDING WHETHER TO INVESTIGATE The NHRI may have no discretion to choose what issue to investigate. Its legislation may require it to investigate each complaint that falls within its jurisdiction. If that is the case, then the following criteria are probably irrelevant. Once the NHRI has determined the human rights issue(s) involved, it must also be able to explain why it will investigate the matter. Just as importantly, it should be able to explain why it will not undertake an investigation, if that is the decision made. The following questions can assist the NHRI as it considers what issues it will investigate and why. Does the NHRI have the jurisdiction/mandate? The NHRI must have the authority to deal with the issue. Before it can undertake an investigation, it must be satisfied that the known facts of the matter fit within its mandate. For example, if the NHRI has the mandate to promote and protect human rights, it must be clear about the connection between the human rights issue at stake and that duty. Does the NHRI have the resources to do the investigation properly and within a reasonable period of time? There is not much point starting an investigation without having the capacity to conduct it. It is almost certain to end in failure. The NHRI needs sufficient human and financial resources to plan the investigation, conduct it and report on the findings, all within a reasonable period of time. Would an investigation be an effective use of those resources? As discussed in Chapter 3, the NHRI will not have unlimited resources. It will often have to make difficult decisions about where and how to focus its resources. Therefore, it may have to consider which investigation will provide the best result for the resources invested. For example, it may seek to address a systemic issue affecting a particular group in the community. It may seek redress for an individual whose human rights have been violated. It may also seek to undertake an investigation that will build community awareness of the NHRI and demonstrate its value as a human rights watchdog. Is another body investigating the matter, or should one be? If another competent body is investigating the incident or issue, such as the police or an auditing agency, that may be a valid reason for the NHRI not to conduct an investigation, at least at that point in time. If that agency is in a better position to conduct an investigation, let it do so. However, if there is a human rights dimension to the matter that is not being considered, or if the matter falls within the jurisdiction of the NHRI, that may be a valid reason to become involved. There may also be opportunities to collaborate with other agencies to conduct investigations. Is an investigation in the public interest? If it is clear that some agency should be seeking to address a particular issue – and none currently are – then the NHRI may want to take a leadership role in the matter. For example, an investigation may be necessary to restore public confidence in an agency or organization that has been criticized for breaching human rights. The more serious the allegations are, the more reason to conduct an investigation. Have there been a number of similar complaints? If the NHRI has received a number of similar complaints on the same issue, it might suggest an investigation is warranted. If a large number of complaints have been received, that might indicate an underlying systemic problem that needs to be addressed (see the following section in this chapter on identifying systemic issues). 30