identified that 20 people had been killed by the military government or actors following the coup, and detailed these violations. The commission also found that the police and army had obstructed investigations into some of the human rights violations, and attributed responsibility for the violations to several key actors including de facto President Micheletti. The commission made a list with more than 80 total recommendations to the Honduran government, such as increasing political transparency, police reforms, and providing conditions which would ensure that human rights defenders could work free from harassment or obstruction. This included seven key recommendations relating to human rights including the following: pursuing, prosecuting and punishing perpetrators of human rights abuses committed during the interim government; establishing a national plan of reparations for those having legitimate and verifiable human rights grievances; providing sufficient resources and independence to the Public Prosecutor’s Office, in order that it may respond promptly to human rights complaints; conducting an independent review of the actions of the human rights commissioner during the interim government; reviewing legislation to ensure that Honduran law is compatible with international norms and standards, particularly in relation to personal security related to freedom of expression – especially that of journalists – and freedom of association; guaranteeing that tribal and indigenous people have access to justice in their own language; and ensuring compliance with the International Labour Organization convention regarding the duty to consult about the use and exploitation of natural resources in aboriginal territories. Criticism There has been a mixed response to the commission. Much criticism has been levelled at the fact that there was no mandate to investigate human rights violations or abuses during or following the coup. There has also been criticism for the members selected, none of whom had a significant background in human rights, the fact that several of the members hail from countries which were supportive, and into the large role that the international community played in forming the truth commission. The distrust towards President Lobo also manifested itself into a general distrust towards the commission. Aftermath The report itself had limited impact on society in Honduras, due to factors such as the distrust for President Lobo, however, some groups welcomed the information presented and admittance of wrongdoing, and it was met by praise from Secretary General of the OAS, José Miguel Insulza, who thought it would likely result in positive change for Honduran