occurring under their responsibility (See ANGUELOVA Vs. BULGARIA( 2002) ECHR 38361/97. For an investigation into alleged killing by State agents to be effective, the persons responsible for carrying out the investigation must be independent and impartial in Law and Practice (See GULEC Vs. TURKEY (1998) ECHR 21593/ 93. In the instant case there was a Senate Committee convened by the Legislative Arm of the Defendant to investigate the circumstances and events that led to this case which considered submissions from various persons and groups and presented a report. While not castigating the report of the Committee, it is worthy of note to state that it did not make any specific finding as to the legality of the killings. It also appeared to have relied heavily on the submission of State agents in most respects lacking in any concrete evidence without question. Above all, the National Human Rights Commission, an independent body established under the law of the Defendant to investigate cases of violation of human rights occurring within the territory of the Defendant, made submissions before the Committee which tended to contradict the testimonies of the agents of the Defendant, but curiously no reliance was placed on these statements of fact. The Commission itself recommended the payment of compensation, having found that the grounds for the killings were largely unfounded. The Defendant did not deem it necessary to comply with any of them. The Court, based on the evidence before it, finds that the procedural requirements of International Law with regard to extra- judicial killings were not complied with 47