Open-Source Practitioner’s Guide to the Murad Code - Pilot Version
The Open-Source Practitioner’s Guide translates the applicable principles and minimum standards of the Murad Code into standards and practices for practitioners who search for or use online digital open-source information and may intentionally or unintentionally handle information related to systematic and conflict-related sexual violence (SCRSV) during online inquiries or investigations. The aim of the Guide is to help digital open-source investigators, researchers and other information-gatherers recognise and consider critical legal, ethical, human rights and practical issues related to open-source information – and take thoughtful, pre-emptive preparatory actions – in order to avoid harming survivors and others and to ensure that the open-source research work is effective.
This is a pilot version of the Guide. We encourage practitioners to use the Guide and to share their feedback on its content and application by 30 June 2025. Feedback will be considered for incorporation into the final version, which will be published (with translations) later this year.
Practitioners are encouraged to share feedback on the pilot Guide’s content and application with the Institute for International Criminal Investigations and Human Rights Center at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law by 30 June 2025. If you would like to provide additional feedback to the questions provided in the feedback form, please note that you can download a Word version of the Guide and suggest edits in tracked changes.
Who is this Guide relevant for?
The standards and practices recommended in this Guide are intended to apply to all open-source practitioners, including those who are not intentionally looking for or handling open-source material depicting or related to SCRSV but may come across it nonetheless. Practitioners include those paid to make online inquiries, and those who choose to handle open-source information without being paid. Outside of being part of a specialised team investigating SCRSV, there are numerous scenarios in which open-source practitioners may come upon evidence of SCRSV even when they are not intentionally looking for it. Some examples include:
A practitioner may discover a video containing evidence of crimes that do not qualify as SCRSV, such as the beating or killing of civilians by armed forces, only to find that the footage pans across imagery which may imply the existence of SCRSV, such as unclothed persons being held captive.
A practitioner looking for evidence of a militia’s conscription of children may inadvertently find evidence of sexual enslavement of children when searching for information online using keywords that yield both sets of content.
A practitioner may encounter videos or photos with one or more proxy indicators of SCRSV that merit further investigation by expert investigators. These may include the burning of buildings, the forced separation of genders, the presence of armed combatants, the conscription of children, and more.
A practitioner may come across marketplace listings (along with “product” reviews) on social media for various services that suggest trafficking in people.