An eight-page note released on Tuesday pointed out the inconsistent provisions of the Act, questioning the power of the Commission to recommend amnesties for cases of rights violation other than rape. Amnesties are impermissible if they interfere with victims' rights to an effective remedy, including reparation, the note read.

The UN rights body has also questioned the powers granted to the Commission to investigate complaints in the two bodies, the court and the National Human Rights Commission, relating to incidents that occurred during the armed conflict. The rights body was also sceptic over the powers of attorney general or public prosecutor while judging whether a case can be executed or not.

"The Commission must not be used to avoid or delay criminal investigations and prosecutions," the note read.

The authority of the Commission to facilitate reconciliation even without the consent of the victim has also been deemed as a major concern. The note stated that reconciliation primarily takes place at an inter-personal level and should not be forced upon people by the Commission.

The note presented by the rights body had queries over the independence of the commission and its head since the Act does not contain provisions that facilitate consultative and transparent selection processes. The note recommended using the public selection procedure to choose members of Recommendation Committee which will eventually pick the chairperson and members of the Commission.

The eight-page statement also mentioned that effective reparations not only include restitution, compensation and rehabilitation, but also measures of 'satisfaction' and guarantees of non-recurrence.