A/HRC/40/33 law, and in particular genocide, war crimes and ethnic cleansing. Those processes delivered truth, justice and reparations, and thus constituted a vital tool in breaking the cycles of impunity, discrimination and marginalization and the risk of recurrence. 6. The High Commissioner noted that the joint study highlighted the importance and potential preventive impact of the work of the Human Rights Council and OHCHR. The International Criminal Court formed a central pillar of the work to punish, and thus prevent, the gravest of international crimes. States had the primary responsibility for prosecuting alleged perpetrators, but the International Criminal Court could step in when a State was unwilling or unable to deliver justice. That made it possible to bridge, if not eradicate, the impunity gap for international crimes, including genocide. 7. The High Commissioner welcomed the recent decision by the International Criminal Court’s Pre-Trial Chamber I, which had found that the Court had jurisdiction over the alleged deportation of members of the Rohingya people from Myanmar to Bangladesh and other possible crimes. 1 While not specifically addressing the crime of genocide, the decision offered real hope regarding accountability for the crimes committed. The High Commissioner urged all States to support the International Criminal Court, as it was indispensable for justice and deterrence. In the year of commemoration of the twentieth anniversary of the adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the High Commissioner called upon all remaining countries to sign or ratify the Statute. 8. The High Commissioner noted that genocide was never committed without clear, multiple warning signs. Patterns of abuse against a given group, an intent to harm and an established chain of command always preceded a brutal and horrifying outcome. In the case of the Rohingya, warning signs had abounded: a people oppressed from birth to death, an army answerable to no one and systematic, State-led human rights violations, including the arbitrary deprivation of nationality, which had gone unpunished for decades. Seventy years after the adoption of the Convention, the High Commissioner observed, one remaining challenge was to improve the recognition of and subsequent action on those warning signs, including hate speech, both in the real world and on social media. 9. In closing, the High Commissioner noted that the Secretary-General of the United Nations had emphasized that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the international treaties deriving from it represented the best prevention tool, since they identified many of the root causes of conflict and provided real-world solutions. It remained essential, as the seventieth anniversaries of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights were being celebrated, for everyone to stand up for the great vision of a more humane and peaceful world. 10. Zohrab Mnatsakanyan, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia, observed that 10 years had passed since the adoption by consensus on 28 March 2008 of the first Human Rights Council resolution on the prevention of genocide, sponsored by Armenia (resolution 7/25). Since then, the Council had been developing the normative framework for prevention in a regular and consistent manner. Mr. Mnatsakanyan noted the distinguished panellists’ remarkable record and commitment to advancing the prevention agenda internationally, and within the United Nations in particular. 11. Since 1998, Armenia had consistently worked, within the United Nations and with its many partners, to raise awareness of the Convention and of the continued risks and challenges relating to atrocity crimes, and towards building legal and institutional capacity for prevention. Armenia stood firm in its resolve and commitment to the promotion of the human rights agenda and the prevention of atrocity crimes, including genocide. It had worked towards that agenda with the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, including in 2015, when the General Assembly, in its resolution 69/323, had unanimously proclaimed 9 December as the International Day of Commemoration and Dignity of the 1 International Criminal Court, Pre-Trial Chamber I, request under Regulation 46 (3) of the Regulations of the Court, decision on the “Prosecution’s Request for a Ruling on Jurisdiction under Article 19(3) of the Statute”, ICC-RoC46(3)-01/18, 6 September 2018, paras. 73–79. 3