A/HRC/45/CRP.4 during deliberations that the courts deal with the backlog of cases involving serious crimes, including murder, rape, robbery, and theft. While hailed as a positive step toward enhancing access to justice, participants noted several concerns regarding the mobile courts’ potential to reduce the impunity gap for conflict-related crimes in South Sudan: • First, the geographic scope and cases covered by the mobile courts thus far are quite limited relative to the large magnitude of serious crimes, pending cases, and suspects still held in detention without trial. • Second, there are concerns on due process and the potential that the approach adopted by the mobile courts may compromise fair trial principles due to the limited time allocated to the hearing of cases and the absence of early engagement between prosecutors and affected victims prior to trial. For instance, mobile courts recently heard 12 cases and sentenced accused persons in less than two weeks. • Third, the proceedings have highlighted the need for more deliberate efforts to cultivate local ownership and effective participation of victims and affected communities in the mobile courts’ proceedings, if they are to contribute to truth, national reconciliation, and healing. Participants observed that there appears to be heavy involvement of external actors that are not well versed or connected with local contexts, authorities, or communities in preparing for and conducting the mobile courts’ proceedings. • Participants were also concerned about the potential effect of public hearings of sexual violence cases on the safety and well-being of victims and their families. Further, the mobile courts’ hearings are characterised by a large presence of security personnel, which unwittingly has the effect of limiting the participation of local communities and individuals not associated with the cases. Consequently, some cases that could easily be resolved through alternative dispute resolution are brought for hearing before the mobile courts, thereby reducing the already limited time available for determination of serious crimes. Potential avenues for obtaining justice and accountability for atrocities in South Sudan 60. Despite the existing political hurdles, it was felt that the quest for accountability for past atrocities must not be abandoned as it is a cornerstone of sustainable peace in South Sudan. Some participants felt that the government’s willingness to ensure that perpetrators of conflict-related crimes are held responsible would be the clearest signal of its intention to genuinely pursue national reconciliation and healing and rebuild a transformed South Sudanese society. They further questioned the value of pursuing implementation of all other aspects of the R-ARCSS in the absence of accountability for past violations. 61. During group discussions and cognisant of the foregoing reality, participants deliberated on potential domestic, regional, and international avenues to keep the quest for accountability in South Sudan alive. a. Political measures 62. US Ambassador Kelly Currie indicated that sanctions against politicians and Cabinet Ministers blocking implementation of the peace agreement and accountability processes, including those already issued by the US Government were cited as a progressive measure. In addition, participants called for the AU to engage more robustly on the establishment of the HCSS, including requiring the R-TGoNU to sign the MoU and adopt the draft Statute within specific timelines. Most participants proposed that, in the absence of concrete movement by the R-TGoNU, the AU should consider alternative avenues to initiate an accountability process as envisaged in the R-ARCSS. However, some participants were of the view that collaboration with the Government of South Sudan is essential if any accountability process is intended to effectively contribute to the broader goals of national reconciliation, healing and sustainable peace. b. Regional accountability measures 63. It was noted that, as South Sudan has ratified the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights may provide a feasible avenue for state accountability and reparation for conflict-related human rights violations committed in South Sudan, subject to admissibility considerations. Solomon Dersso encouraged participants to join in advocacy efforts aimed at promoting ratification of 40