Atty. Rubin (GEWHRC) said if the purpose is investigation, the tool for data privacy may be modified to include for confidentiality, in the context in which it will be used, for instance for submission for Inquiry or Information. She took note of the suggestion and promised that the tools which will be included in the guidelines to the regions will be cascaded. Atty. Jasmin Navarro-Regino (CHR-R03) pointed out that confidentiality and consent is indicated in Form 9. According to Atty. Rubin, ‘informed consent’ can also be observed in the process of informing and explaining the objectives before complaint forms are accomplished, for instance. She suggested the review of Protocol 1 and how this is being observed in the actual process. Ms. Leah Barbia (CHR GEWHRC) stated that the intake form has to be differentiated from the informed consent form. The latter is used in data gathering especially on situation of rural women. There is a need to explain the objective of the research and data gathering. This informed consent form will have to be signed by FGD participants or else data may not be used in the research report. Further, she said a standard guide in preparing the initial content can be drafted. On observing objectivity in the conduct of research Atty. Pilipinas C. Palma (CHR-R10) asked for practical tips on how to maintain objectivity and on how to deal with triggers. Dr. Laguilles-Timog suggested to be aware of the biases in the conduct of the FGD or interviews. As much as possible triggers should be controlled and tolerated but if there are offensive remarks or actions from the participants, the researcher can 33