A/HRC/40/33 55. Accountability for violations of human rights was part of the prevention effort. Representatives noted that the International Criminal Court had already had a preventive effect and that, through its establishment, much progress had been made in the fight against impunity for perpetrators of atrocities. On the African continent, an NGO representative said, the main challenge remained the persistence of impunity and the complete disregard for the International Criminal Court by many countries. In the same vein, another NGO representative noted with regret a trend towards impunity. Faced with the veto in the Security Council on a referral to the International Criminal Court, the resolution by the General Assembly establishing a mechanism for the Syrian Arab Republic at least represented a glimmer of hope. One delegate emphasized that impunity for the crime of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity encouraged their reoccurrence and acknowledged that, due to political realities and the legal definition of genocide, convictions for the crime of genocide were difficult and rare. Another highlighted the need for transitional justice measures, the need to reveal the whereabouts of missing persons and the need to provide redress to victims. 56. Some delegations agreed that understanding the causes and consequences of genocide and the remembrance of the victims of yesterday played a key role in the prevention of genocide, including by providing an opportunity to learn lessons from the past. Education and capacity-building constituted the foundation of any prevention efforts. One delegate proposed a holistic approach, going beyond criminal sanctions and fostering structural policies promoting a world free of genocide, including human rights education and measures against xenophobia and racial discrimination. One delegation in particular stressed its work in remembering and learning from the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, eradicating its roots and ideology, and in unifying, reconciling and improving the economic and social welfare of Rwandan people. That State had endeavoured to share its experience, including by contributing to peacekeeping missions. An NGO representative noted a worrying increase in attempts to deny crimes to which victims had been subjected, and stressed that there was a collective responsibility to ensure that victims were never forgotten and never denied. One delegation drew a distinction between the denial of genocide – non-recognition – and freedom of expression as recognized by the European Court of Human Rights. 57. An NGO representative highlighted the preventive effect of the Convention itself, stating that the Convention signalled that mass killings were and remained unacceptable and intolerable. B. International, regional and national responses 58. One delegation emphasized that the silence of the Convention on what form prevention measures by Member States should take did not justify a lack of action. Specifically, several delegations pointed at the role of the Human Rights Council and all Geneva-based organizations in the prevention of gross violations and abuses of human rights, including those that could lead to genocide. The Council should focus on strengthening the effectiveness of its prevention mandate and improving early warning systems. Early warning signs could be recognized through focusing on country-specific situations, establishing monitoring and investigative mechanisms and offering technical assistance and access to special procedure mechanisms within their mandates. One delegate stressed the need for technical assistance to States in relation to their early warning systems. 59. Delegations identified a need to improve efforts to mainstream prevention across the United Nations system, starting with the prevention of all human rights violations and abuses. They emphasized that preventing violence and ensuring accountability also fell within the responsibility of the Security Council. The hope was expressed that the reform process within the United Nations would improve coordination between the Security Council, the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council. Some delegates referred to the responsibility to protect doctrine, including as set out in the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document. 11