A/HRC/40/33 60. It was stressed that the international community had failed too many times to prevent the most serious atrocities and that, rather than lacking information, the international community lacked the political will to act upon clear signs preceding genocide. One delegate therefore called for a genuine culture of prevention, where early warning was complemented by early action. 61. One delegation urged the members of the Human Rights Council to consider the crimes committed by Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) against the Yazidi, Turkoman and Christian communities in Iraq as war crimes, to help the joint investigative mechanism established by the Security Council to gather evidence against ISIL and to bring justice to the victims of those atrocities. 62. On the regional level, the development of policies and programmes by the African Union and the subregional organizations in Africa to prevent and punish genocide was noted. The African Union and its organs had invested in strengthening their capacities in relation to early warning and rapid response in situations that could lead to genocide. The African Union was cooperating with its member States, international organizations, the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, civil society and religious leaders to build more resilient societies and respond to crises in Africa and elsewhere in the world. 63. Regarding action on a national level, one delegation encouraged Member States to appoint focal points on the prevention of genocide pursuant to resolution 37/26. V. Concluding remarks 64. In the concluding remarks, the panel emphasized that the current multilateral system was not adequate to prevent genocide. A system that put people at the heart of the international community’s concerns, before considering the political interests of States, was needed. 65. While improvement of the international legal framework was necessary, the universal ratification of both the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court was first required. The African Union’s communiqué calling for the ratification of the Convention and other human rights treaties was positively noted in that context. States should establish universal jurisdiction over the crime of genocide, and support for the International Criminal Court had to be ensured. 66. The panel considered that the Human Rights Council should use early warning systems and that it needed to work together with treaty bodies, the special procedures and the High Commissioner to ensure a holistic approach on prevention. The panel observed that national risk analysis was important to protect populations from atrocities, and that it was essential to invest in structural prevention at the national level, including by supporting other States in the implementation of national strategies for prevention. 67. The panel noted that the independent impartial and international mechanisms for the Syrian Arab Republic and Myanmar and any future mechanisms of that nature were a critical innovation, and allowed for the preservation of evidence for national and international prosecutions. The Human Rights Council had to continue shedding light on atrocities, calling for justice and accountability and generating the political will needed for more accountability mechanisms. 68. The panel provided a historical footnote, describing how Raphael Lemkin had been unhappy when attending the reading of the Nuremberg judgment, because crimes against humanity had been confined to crimes committed in relation with armed conflict. He then attended the first United Nations General Assembly, where he found support from the countries of the South for his proposal for a resolution on genocide. The panel stressed that the Convention was in fact one of the first international legal initiatives to have come from the global South. 12