A/HRC/45/CRP.4 Reparation measures should go beyond compensation and material measures 69. Commission Chair Yasmin Sooka encouraged the R-TGoNU and all stakeholders involved in the design of a reparation programme should consider other forms of reparation that may be implemented alongside compensation and material measures. 70. Commission Chair Sooka also advised on options that may be considered include the potential to design return to one’s place of residence or land for the vast population of displaced South Sudanese as reparative restitution measures. Rehabilitation measures, including medical and psychological care, can also be initiated to address physical injuries, psychological trauma, and other persisting health-related complications experienced by victims. Participants observed that, due to the history of poor governance, some of the victims may have no expectation of tangible benefits from the state and may therefore emphasise symbolic measures that would greatly promote sustainable peace. Such satisfaction or symbolic measures may include truth-seeking and an accurate documentation, and the state’s acknowledgement of and public apologies for the harm and losses experienced by victims as a result of conflict-related violations; commemoration, tributes, and memorials of significant events or departed members of community such as renaming of schools and roads, among other measures. Security sector and other institutional reforms envisaged in the R-ARCSS should also be considered and designed as potential measures of reparation, which could contribute to prevention of cycles of conflict and related abuses in South Sudan. Relationship between reparation, development and humanitarian assistance 71. Participants noted with concern the varying interpretations of reparation envisaged in Chapter V of the ARCSS, with state actors being more focused on development-based interventions such as building schools and other infrastructure. These concerns demonstrate the dilemma faced by several post-conflict countries who grapple with addressing competing demands for resources for humanitarian assistance, development, and reparation. Moreover, in most cases, as in South Sudan, victims of massive or systemic violations have historically been socially, politically and economically marginalised, and are in need of essential services and infrastructure that development and humanitarian assistance efforts can provide. Experts underscored the importance of drawing a distinction, as well as potential linkages. between the concepts of reparation as a transitional justice measure and development or humanitarian assistance, which are all contemplated within the ARCSS. Post-conflict reconstruction, development, and humanitarian assistance to address victims’ immediate basic needs such as shelter, food, healthcare, and education, will have to be pursued in tandem with reparation measures in South Sudan. However, the key criterion for determining whether any overlapping measures can be considered as reparation, will be the existence of state acknowledgement in the design and delivery of such measures. 72. Reparation requires direct and explicit state acknowledgement of victims and past violations committed against them; victims’ right to remedies for violations as the basis for provision of reparations; and state responsibility and commitment to provide remedies in recognition of violated rights and to address the consequences of violations suffered by victims. Experience in other transitioning contexts has demonstrated that any measures, including monetary payments, provided to victims in the absence of state acknowledgment, risk being perceived as mere hand-outs or “blood money,” thereby negating the intended aim of reparation – to promote truth, national reconciliation, and healing, including rebuilding a trust relationship between citizens and the state. The case of victims involved in the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United States of America was cited as an illustration where, even though affected individuals and families received incredible amounts of money from the state, they were unsatisfied because there was no acknowledgement about what happened. Important issues to resolve during the development and implementation of a reparation program for South Sudan • Linkage between the Compensation and Reparation Authority (CRA), Commission on Truth, Reconciliation, and Healing (CTRH), and Hybrid Court for South Sudan (HCSS): participants observed that it is unclear how the reparation mandates and operations of the CRA, CTRH, and HCSS will be linked in order to avoid double reparation, maximize available resources and reduce the burden on victims seeking reparations. The R-ARCSS anticipates the establishment of a CRA with powers to provide material and financial support 43