does not aim to deny the standards attached to this term in the context of professional investigatory practice and legal proceedings. Moreover, the way in which the term civil society “investigations” is used in this Handbook equates with the term “documentation.” This includes documenting crime scenes, victims’ stories and other relevant materials. The terms “fact-finding” and “information-gathering” are also used. They largely relate to the same activities. 1.4.2 First-respondents v. Investigators The choice of the word “unofficial investigators” is also deliberate. The major challenge was to find a term that was both comprehensive and also specific. The word “first-respondents,” for example, which is a popular term in the justice and accountability community, may be too limiting. The term would have excluded those who enter into contact with information about human rights violations later on in the documentation continuum. In situations on serious human rights violations, the first-responders are often actors working in the humanitarian field. While some of these humanitarian actors engage with accountability mechanisms on many levels, others feel that their humanitarian mandates are incompatible with gathering information on the “guilty” side because their ability to operate in contexts of violence depends on their perceived “neutrality.” 1 It is subject to each organization themselves whether to engage in documenting activities. This Handbook should be seen as neither encouraging nor advocating for humanitarian actors’ involvement with mechanisms of redress. However, should they want to engage with documenting the occurrences, they are 1 See Marc DuBois, ‘Civilian protection and humanitarian advocacy: strategies and (false?) dilemmas’ MSF-Holland July 2007, available at http://odihpn.org/magazine/civilian-protection-and-humanitarianadvocacy-strategies-and-false-dilemmas/; and Gabor Rona, ‘The ICRC Privilege Not to Testify’ Confidentiality in Action, 2004; Kate Mackintosh, ‘Note for humanitarian organisations on cooperation with international tribunals’, 2005; Steven Ratner, ‘Should ICRC Reports on Detainee Visits be Turned over to Military Commission Defence Counsel?’, 2013; Stéphane Jeannet, ‘Recognition of the ICRC's long-standing rule of confidentiality - An important decision by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia’, 2000, available at https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/57jqhq.htm; Toni Pfanner, ‘Cooperation between truth commissions and the International Committee of the Red Cross’, 2006 available at https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/article/review/review-862-p363.htm; Anne-Marie La Rosa, Humanitarian organisations and international criminal tribunals, or trying to square the circle, 2006 available at https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/article/review/review-861p169.htm. 16