The Missing Persons Indicator Project: Findings and Direction
The Missing Persons Indicator Project: Findings and Direction
Foreword
Sanji Monageng ICMP Commissioner
Throughout the world, huge numbers of people go missing every year – on migration routes, in armed conflict, as a consequence of human rights violations, from natural disasters, and many other causes.
Governments have legal obligations to conduct effective investigations into the fate of missing persons regardless of the circumstances of disappearance. No stone should be left unturned in order to help survivors learn what happened to their loved ones.
The Missing Persons Indicator Project shines a light on how States are addressing the issue of missing persons. It is heartening to see university students give up their time to participate in this project, which will contribute to a better understanding of the global missing persons landscape. Sound policies and effective governance require good data, and here we have an effort to produce just that.
Sanji Monageng is Botswana’s High Commissioner to the Republic of South Africa. She was appointed a Judge of the Southern African Development Community Administrative Tribunal in 2019. The same year, she became the founding President of the Competition and Consumer Tribunal of Botswana. Before that, she was a judge at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, serving from 2012 to 2015 as Vice President of the Court.
Why indicators?
“The human rights journey from standard-setting to effective implementation depends, in large measure, on the availability of appropriate tools for policy formulation and evaluation. Indicators, both quantitative and qualitative, are one such essential tool.
I trust that the continued engagement, dialogue and cooperation among all stakeholders, including the human rights and development communities, will truly help foster human rights-based and people-centred development at country level. Indicators are in this sense a potential bridge between the human rights and the development policy discourses.”
Navi Pillay, then United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2012 (UN Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner (OHCHR), Human Rights Indicators: A Guide to Measurement and Implementation (2012) UN Doc HR/ PUB/12/5, pg IV).
The States being analysed have been identified via the UN Treaty Body Database.
Method
The Missing Persons Indicator Project, a collaboration between the International Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP) and Bournemouth University, is conducted by dedicated student volunteers following a step-by-step process. The systematic guidance safeguards uniform information retrieval and inputting through trusted sources in reference to specific indicator data. All research is conducted using university provided databases and open-source materials.
Once sources have been analysed and cross-referenced, the studentresearchers input their findings into Microsoft Lists, selected as it offers a user-friendly interface and functionalities. Furthermore, it integrates with the software environment ‘R’ which facilitates visualisation for further analysis and comparison.
Throughout the research, one student acts as a ‘data-checker’, independently verifying previously inputted data, and documenting any discrepancies for further review.
Context indicator
Description: With the context indicator researchers are seeking to make a qualitative assessment as to whether the State has experienced extraordinary events that may be correlated to a rise in missing persons cases.
Rationale: To ensure the indicators have real-event correlation, context indicators will help understand potential explanations behind high numbers of missing persons cases. Events, such as a natural disasters for example, can be the cause for an increased number of persons going missing.
Data captured: Information on disasters and conflicts that have affected States. We are capturing such ‘contexts’ in time intervals for appropriate data visualisation.
Structural indicator 1
Recognition of missing persons and associated rights at international and regional level
Description: The commitment shown by States to international legal instruments is an indicator of their duties and obligations in relation to missing persons.
Rationale: Recognising these rights is a fundamental first step in securing the rights of missing persons and their families. States have an obligation to respect, protect and fulfil these rights.
Data captured: Information on signature, accession and/or ratification to international legal instruments, that have been selected for their relevance to missing persons both in terms of protection and resolution of cases.
Structural indicator 2 Domestic legislation
Description: The domestic legislation by States is an indicator of their duties and obligations in relation to missing persons.
This indicator also explores whether gender differences are ignored, acknowledged or perpetuated within legislation.
Rationale: Generally, through ratification of international legal instruments, governments commit to put into place domestic measures and legislation compatible with their treaty obligations and duties.
Specifically, the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance requires relevant authorities to have official records and registers of all persons deprived of their liberty (Article 17(3)). This would require implementation in domestic law. Structural indicator 2 ascertains what these laws and policies are.
Data captured: Domestic legislation and associated gender perspective.
Structural indicator 3
Institutional framework
Description: The institutional frameworks and mechanisms established by States, or within States, are an indicator of their fulfilling of duties and working towards the resolution of missing persons cases.
Rationale: Policy and practice follows on from the governing laws.
This indicator records the institutions in charge of advancing missing persons efforts. Sometimes Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) are the implementer of such policy and help redress the plight of missing persons.
Data captured: Information on institutions and organisations that have a missing persons and/or enforced disappearance mandate and associated gender perspective.
In-country search
Description: With this list the project is seeking to find any relevant information regarding missing persons or enforced disappearances that States have publicised in any language other than English.
Rationale: Conducting searches only in English may result in States’ information as to missing persons or enforced disappearances legislation and institutions being overlooked. As such, conducting an advanced search in a State’s local language helps to mitigate the ethnocentric approach.
Data captured: Information on non-English materials (laws and institutions) linked to missing persons efforts.
Case study visualisations
The following pages present case study visualisations produced with Missing Persons Indicator Project data. They have been selected on the basis of geographic diversity and historical/ongoing missing persons cases related to atrocity.
Indicator 1
Indicator 2
Indicator 3
Bosnia-Herzegovina
Bosnia-Herzegovina has ratified or accessioned all the relevant international treaties available to them, have criminal laws relating to missing persons and enforced disappearances, and established a specific Missing Persons Institute in 2005. Despite a seemingly comprehensive and uniform approach, our indicators reveal that since 2008 Republika Srpska has separate institutions including the Centre for the Research of War, War Crimes and the Search for the Missing.
Light = Low risk, strong support Dark = High risk, low support
Indicator 1
Cambodia
Cambodia acceded to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (CED) on 27 June 2013. However, accession to the CED comes with expected domestic actions which, 11 years later, have not yet been implemented. As such enforced disappearance is still not criminalised as an autonomous offence and Cambodia does not have an official national register for the missing.
Light = Low risk, strong support Dark = High risk, low support
Indicator 3
Indicator 2
Indicator 1
Indicator 2
Guatemala
Structural indicator 1 highlights that although Guatemala was a signatory to the CED on 6 February 2007, it has not yet ratified or acceded the treaty. This means that the State need only consider the treaty, but is not bound by it in the same way as if it had been ratified. Despite this, structural indicator 2 evidences that Guatemala positively incorporates gender in its missing persons legislation. The specific law in question is entitled the Law for the Immediate Search of Missing Women, 2016.
Indicator 1
Indicator 2
Indicator 3
Structural indicator 3 points to a government institution specifically for attending to missing persons and enforced disappearances, called The Martyrs Foundation. Despite this, structural indicator 2 suggests that there is no specific Iraqi legislature covering criminal legislation or the legal status of missing persons. The OHCHR stated, that given “enforced disappearance still does not exist as an autonomous crime in national legislation, it cannot be prosecuted as such in Iraq”. 1
1 Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED) Report of the Committee on Enforced Disappearances on its visit to Iraq under article 33 of the Convention, (19 April 2023) Un Doc CED/C/ IRQ/VR/1 (Recommendations), pg 4.
Light = Low risk, strong support
Dark = High risk, low support
Indicator 1
Indicator 2
Indicator 3
Rwanda
Rwanda has not signed or ratified either the CED or the Rome Statute, has no missing persons or enforced disappearance legislation and has no specific government institutions for dealing with missing persons. The UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances in 2022 stated that “the existing legislation fails to offer sufficient protection against this crime, leaving persons vulnerable to the discretionary practices of the institutions holding criminal justice powers”. 2
2 UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances General Allegation 127th Session: Rwanda (9-13 May 2022) para. 11.
Light = Low risk, strong support
Dark = High risk, low support
Limitations
Indicators, by their very nature, capture only a snapshot of information at a given time. The data from this project was conceptualised to be used primarily for diplomatic purposes and to support the ICMP in engaging with individuals in the search for their loved ones.
The data points are founded within an international legal perspective, seeking to highlight institutional formulations of States’ relationships to missing persons. In this way, the project does not have the scope to uncover informal mechanisms relating to missing persons in each State, and as such, they may be missed.
It is always a challenge to convert qualified information into a uniform, accurate category. Whilst much guidance is given, mitigation is offered through capturing ancillary information, and cross-referencing is conducted, some recording decisions remain subject to judgement.
The in-country search seeks to mitigate language barriers by recording legislation that may be found through an Advanced Google search. However, currently, there is not capacity within the research team to analyse these through local language speakers.
Future direction
The Missing Persons Indicator Project is designed to support policymakers worldwide surrounding States’ obligations and their relationship with missing persons.
In the future, to further situate these structural indicators, ‘Process’ or ‘Outcome’ Indicators must be theorised and collated. Such indicators will contextualise the effectiveness of treaties, legislation, policies and institutions, thereby helping to inform policy creation with worldwide scope. Moreover, further indicators could extend into capacity and technological capabilities in-country.
By understanding the legal landscape, indicators can act as an early warning system, helping identify where preventative measures and protection levels may need strengthening.
To further inform its future direction, the project team is piloting the use of AI in both data collation and data checking. This pilot is in its infancy, and throughout the coming years the team is keen to harness students’ knowledge of this evolving area to support the project’s progress.
Special thanks
None of this would be possible without the dedicated work of the student researchers at Bournemouth University. Their enthusiasm, efforts and attention to detail is instrumental for the project’s success. Since 2021 the following undergraduate and postgraduate students, on a variety of degree courses, have dedicated their time freely to the project:
2021/22: Hannah O’Sullivan, Hayden Corby, Charlotte Quenault, Shaina Snashall, Siobhan McClatchey, Boluwatife Ojikutu, Mercy Adegbenro, Jumoke Ajileye, Lydia Gee and Eve Daley.
2022/23: Farhana Patel, Chiedozie Chukwujiuba, Nichola Hunter-Warburton, Antoni Dembski, Rhiannon Appleby, Jack Jowett, Lydia Gee and Hayden Corby.
2023/24: Lydia Gee, Angel Beaumont, Nichola Hunter-Warburton, Susie Moore, Lola Jones, Jazz White, Poppy Holland, Jasmin Sidhu-Bansal, Arman Ali and Maise Lee.
Citation:
Fisher, E., Biggins, D., and Klinkner, M. (2024) The Missing Persons Indicator Project: Findings and Direction
Contact: For further information, please contact indicators@bournemouth.ac.uk
