A/HRC/36/50/Add.1 violence in communities, focusing on mid- or lower-level perpetrators of crimes, through a programme to encourage the “reception” of former militias back home. Another novelty was the joint truth-seeking effort with Indonesia, the Commission on Truth and Friendship. Initially criticized by observers who expected nothing short of a whitewash, that Commission’s final report supported many of the politically sensitive findings of the Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation in East Timor regarding crimes against humanity committed by Indonesian forces.17 22. Also notable are long-term efforts to persist on the path of transitional justice, in spite of delays and political challenges. In Cambodia, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia were established in 2006 to prosecute Khmer Rouge crimes from the 1970s. In Nepal, there have been successive attempts to develop the truth commission mandated in its 2006 Comprehensive Peace Accord, including a much-criticized 2014 law to create two commissions. With support from an important Supreme Court decision, which struck down amnesty provisions that ran counter to victims’ right to a remedy, there is hope that the commissions will yet make a meaningful contribution.18 23. Unlike in other regions, there is no specific model of success for transitional justice in Asia that is emulated by others. This is not necessarily a drawback, as it prevents a contextual mimicry. In addition, Asia does not have a regional human rights law system and, owing to the cultural diversity of the region, there has (so far) been less cross-country sharing than observed in other regions. Nevertheless, the wide range of experiences provide a clear basis for learning and continuation. III. Advances in transitional justice 24. The purpose of this section is to highlight (non-exhaustively) some key achievements and lessons learned in the field of transitional justice in the last three decades or so. The items were chosen with a practical intent, to be of use to countries undergoing transitions or that may undergo these processes in the future. A. Cross-cutting advances 25. The most important contribution of transitional justice has been, quite simply, its unpacking of the concept of justice into constituent and mutually reinforcing elements: truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence, in recognition of the fact that criminal justice alone would not be enough to satisfy the justice claims of victims of massive or systematic human rights abuse. 26. As part of this unpacking, a multifaceted normative framework has developed, which has been amply described in the Human Rights Council resolution in which the Council created the Special Rapporteur’s mandate as well as the Special Rapporteur’s reports.19 The framework, which did not exist 30 years ago, defines State obligations to redress gross violations of human rights and serious violations of international humanitarian law. Making victims “visible” and acknowledging their voice 1. 27. The first, and most important, advance in transitional justice that cuts across the four elements of the mandate has been the “visibilization” of victims, who are typically among the most marginal and vulnerable people in a society. Through different means, transitional justice helps victims occupy a space in the public sphere that they lacked before. Functionally, that space becomes for society the grounds of solidarity, a basis of justice and 17 18 19 Lia Kent, “Beyond ‘pragmatism’ versus ‘principle’: ongoing justice debates in East Timor”, in ibid. International Center for Transitional Justice, “‘We cannot forget’: truth and memory in post-conflict Nepal”, May 2017. A/HRC/21/46, especially. 7