CCPR/C/GC/36 in view of the particular circumstances of the case, adequate measures of compensation, rehabilitation and satisfaction.120 States parties are also under an obligation to take steps to prevent the occurrence of similar violations in the future.121 Where relevant, the investigation should include an autopsy of the victim’s body,122 whenever possible, in the presence of a representative of the victim’s relatives.123 States parties need to take, among other things, appropriate measures to establish the truth relating to the events leading to the deprivation of life, including the reasons and legal basis for targeting certain individuals and the procedures employed by State forces before, during and after the time at which the deprivation occurred, 124 and identify the bodies of the individuals who have lost their lives. 125 States parties should also disclose relevant details about the investigation to the victim’s next of kin,126 allow the next of kin to present new evidence, afford the next of kin legal standing in the investigation,127 and make public information about the investigative steps taken and the findings, conclusions and recommendations emanating from the investigation,128 subject to absolutely necessary redactions justified by a compelling need to protect the public interest or the privacy and other legal rights of directly affected individuals. States parties must also take the necessary steps to protect witnesses, victims and their relatives and persons conducting the investigation from threats, attacks and any act of retaliation. An investigation into violations of the right to life should commence when appropriate ex officio.129 States should support and cooperate in good faith with international mechanisms of investigation and prosecutions addressing possible violations of article 6.130 29. Loss of life occurring in custody, in unnatural circumstances, creates a presumption of arbitrary deprivation of life by State authorities, which can only be rebutted on the basis of a proper investigation that establishes the State’s compliance with its obligations under article 6.131 States parties also have a particular duty to investigate allegations of violations of article 6 whenever State authorities have used or appear to have used firearms or other potentially lethal force outside the immediate context of an armed conflict, for example, when live fire has been used against demonstrators,132 or when civilians have been found dead in circumstances fitting a pattern of alleged violations of the right to life by State authorities.133 30. The duty to respect and ensure the right to life requires States parties to refrain from deporting, extraditing or otherwise transferring individuals to countries in which there are substantial grounds for believing that a real risk exists that their right to life under article 6 of the Covenant would be violated.134 Such a risk must be personal in nature135 and cannot derive merely from the general conditions in the receiving State, except in the most extreme cases.136 For example, as explained in paragraph 34 below, it would be contrary to article 6 to extradite an individual from a country that had abolished the death penalty to a country in which he or she might face the death penalty.137 Similarly, it would be inconsistent with article 6 to deport an individual to a country in which a fatwa had been issued against him or her by local religious authorities, without verifying that the fatwa was not likely to be followed;138 or to deport an individual to an extremely violent country in which he or she had never lived, had no social or family contacts and could not speak the local language.139 In cases involving allegations of risk to the life of the removed individual emanating from the authorities of the receiving State, the situation of the removed individual and the conditions in the receiving States need to be assessed, inter alia, based on the intent of the authorities of the receiving State, the pattern of conduct they have shown in similar cases, 140 and the availability of credible and effective assurances about their intentions. When the alleged risk to life emanates from non-State actors or foreign States operating in the territory of the receiving State, credible and effective assurances for protection by the authorities of the receiving State may be sought and internal flight options could be explored. When relying upon assurances from the receiving State of treatment upon removal, the removing State should put in place adequate mechanisms for ensuring compliance with the issued assurances from the moment of removal onwards.141 31. The obligation not to extradite, deport or otherwise transfer, pursuant to article 6 of the Covenant, may be broader than the scope of the principle of non-refoulement under international refugee law, since it may also require the protection of aliens not entitled to refugee status. States parties must, however, allow all asylum seekers claiming a real risk of a violation of their right to life in the State of origin access to refugee or other individualized or group status determination procedures that could offer them protection against refoulement.142 7