See Introduction:
See I. International Human Rights Standards:

Non-governmental organizations emphasized the need for developing and adopting international standards as a practical outcome of their missions to countries where extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions were alleged to take place. For example, an Amnesty International mission to one country found in 1983 that the procedures of the authorities for recording and investigating violent deaths were totally inadequate for determining the causes of more than 40,000 deaths that had occurred between 1979 and 1984, or for identifying the parties responsible. The procedures were even inadequate to determine the precise number of these deaths.

Similarly, a delegation from the American Association for the Advancement of Science sent to another country to assist in the identification of thousands of persons abducted or killed between 1976 and 1983 concluded that the identification of the remains was beyond the capabilities of local institutions, and recommended the establishment of a national investigative centre with well-trained forensic scientists and a director with independent investigative powers. The delegation, however, was optimistic that even the identification of the remains of a small number of the "disappeared" and a determination of the causes of their deaths could be a significant deterrent if those responsible for the deaths could be identified and brought to justice.

Even when Governments order inquests, investigators often find it difficult to ascertain the facts surrounding arbitrary executions. Eyewitness accounts may be hard to obtain because witnesses fear reprisals or because the only witnesses were those conducting executions themselves. Assassins often conceal their crimes by making their victims "disappear". As a result, bodies of victims are usually found months or years later, buried in shallow, unmarked graves. Disposal in this manner often complicates identification of the body and determination of the cause and manner of death. In some cases, the natural decomposition of the body's soft tissue erases evidence of trauma such as bruising, stab wounds or gunpowder burns. In others, the perpetrators deliberately mutilate the person, either before or after death, in an attempt to thwart identification or to intimidate others.

Most countries have a system for investigating the cause of death in cases with unusual or suspicious circumstances. Such a procedure provides some reassurance that unexplained deaths do not remain unexplained and that the perpetrator is tried by a competent court established by law. In some countries, however, these procedures have broken down or have been abused, particularly where the death may have been caused by the police, the army or other government agents. In these cases, a thorough and independent investigation is rarely done. Evidence that could be used to prosecute the offender is ignored or covered up, and those involved in the executions go unpunished.

To address the need for developing uniform standards, the international community began to formulate a set of principles and medicolegal standards for the investigation and prevention of extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions. That work, which dates back to the beginning of the 1980s, made considerable advances with the preparation of the Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-Legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions recommended by the Committee on Crime Prevention and Control at its tenth session in Vienna in 1988. The Principles set forth in annex I were adopted by the Economic and Social Council in its resolution 1989/65, annex, of 24 May 1989 and endorsed by the General Assembly in its resolution 44/162 of 15 December 1989.

It is hoped that observance of the provisions of the Principles will lead to a decrease of extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions in two ways. First, use of the adopted procedures during death investigations should produce the evidence necessary for increased detection and disclosure of other executions. The persons responsible for such executions can then be held accountable through judicial or political sanctions. Secondly, adoption of the standards will also provide international observers with guidelines to evaluate investigations of suspicious deaths. Non-compliance with the standards can be publicized and pressure brought against non-complying Governments, especially where extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions are believed to have occurred. If a Government refuses to establish impartial inquest procedures in such cases, it might be inferred that the Government is hiding such executions. The fear of condemnation by the international community may encourage government compliance with the inquest standards, which, in turn, should reduce extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions.

An additional benefit of compliance with these standards is that a Government suspected of involvement in an extra-legal, arbitrary and summary execution would have an opportunity of satisfying the international community, as well as its own people, that it was not responsible for the death of a particular person or persons. A Government's compliance with these standards, regardless of the outcome of an inquiry, may increase confidence in the rule of law, including the commitment of Governments to human rights.

Followed by:
III. Model Protocol for a legal investigation of extra-legal arbitrary and summary executions ("Minnesota Protocol")
IV. Model autopsy protocol
V. Model protocol for disinterment and analysis of skeletal remains
Annex I. Principle on the effective presention and investigation of extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions
Annex II. Postmortem detection of torture
Annex III. Drawings of parts of human body for identification of torture