A/HRC/42/66 evidence and electronic hardware for evidence received from the fact-finding mission and other entities. 56. Upon assuming his position on 1 July 2019, the Head of the Mechanism has consulted with stakeholders in order to hear their concerns and suggestions, to explain his mandate, and to develop strategies further for the implementation by the Mechanism of its mandate. One of the key messages that the Head has sought to convey is that the unique and technical mandate of the Mechanism is to build case files, which differs from the mandates of the fact-finding mission, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar and the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General on Myanmar. V. Conclusions 57. The Mechanism is at a very early stage of its operations. Many challenges lie ahead on the its journey towards fulfilling the ambitious mandate conferred upon it by the Human Rights Council. The experience of courts and tribunals dealing with international crimes, as well as other comparable international accountability mechanisms, has shown that such investigations are complex, and that it can take time for such information, documentation and evidence to be shaped into strong case files ready for prosecution. Successful investigations require painstaking efforts to locate and obtain the testimony of individuals with knowledge of the crimes, particularly those with evidence concerning the planning, preparation or orders that may have led to crimes, to collect any documentary or forensic evidence that may corroborate witness accounts, and to gather and evaluate all evidence, both inculpatory and exculpatory. 58. The Mechanism is, however, acutely aware that each day that passes without accountability for international crimes brings concomitant suffering for the hundreds of thousands of refugees stranded in makeshift refugee camps outside Myanmar, and hoping and waiting to be able to safely return to their homes, to those displaced from their homes to other locations within Myanmar, and to the many others who have themselves been victimized or who have lost family members to international crimes within the Mechanism’s mandate. The voluntary and sustainable return of refugees to their home communities in Myanmar is likely to be dependant, to an important extent, on a process of accountability for those most responsible for the crimes that uprooted them from their homes. Few are likely to seek to return to a place where those that perpetrated serious crimes against them, or their families, still reside with impunity and retain the means or authority to inflict further harm. 59. The Mechanism is keenly aware of victims’ expectations of its work and the weight of the responsibility that it has been given to pursue avenues towards justice. Nonetheless, even when assisted by the brave efforts of victims and witnesses who seek justice for the serious international crimes committed in Myanmar since 2011, the efforts of the Mechanism alone will not be sufficient. States in the region should cooperate with the Mechanism, in order to maximize its effectiveness, and the international community as a whole should affirm its enduring commitment to seeking accountability for the most serious international crimes and violations of international law committed in Myanmar since 2011. 60. Continued impunity for such crimes is only likely to lead to further violence and suffering, and accompanying risks to peace and security in the region and beyond. The prospects for a peaceful and prosperous future for the people of Myanmar, where all its peoples share the benefit of development and its bountiful resources, depend on the clear demonstration that such crimes will not be tolerated. The Mechanism looks forward to its ongoing engagement with the Human Rights Council towards that end. 10