A/HRC/39/24 measures that should be taken to prevent atrocity crimes. Furthermore, the United Nations should have an integrated information management system for early warning of atrocity crimes, bringing together information and assessments of various United Nations entities dealing with human rights, conflict prevention, rule of law and humanitarian issues. Civil society should also be supported to collect and analyse information relevant to atrocity crime risk assessment. He encouraged civil society to include related information in their submissions to the universal periodic review and suggested mobilizing informal structures, such as traditional elders, religious leaders, community leaders, youth, and women’s groups. Finally, he noted that while women were often the first civilian victims of atrocity crimes, they did not have a proportional role in atrocity prevention, and he therefore recommended strengthening their influence in conflict prevention, peacemaking, atrocity crimes prevention and transitional justice processes. 11. Mr. Pollard added that judges, lawyers and prosecutors were playing a key role, not only in responding to human rights violations and abuses after they had occurred, but also in prevention efforts. However, that required a legal framework in which judges were independent and impartial, lawyers were independent and free to fulfil their duties, and prosecutors were impartial and committed to human rights and the rule of law. He noted that the special roles of judges, lawyers and prosecutors had long been established in related international standards, 2 and were also recognized in prevention-related reports by OHCHR,3 special procedures4 and States.5 12. In order to illustrate how judges, lawyers and prosecutors could contribute to prevention, he referred to judicial review of legislation and the possibility for individuals or organizations to challenge the validity or application of legislation. It was essential for claimants to have access to lawyers. In some States legal aid was provided, while in others the legal profession or individual lawyers organized pro bono assistance. Furthermore, torture became less likely if prosecutors refused to use evidence that they reasonably suspected had been obtained through torture. Moreover, anyone deprived of liberty must have access to an independent lawyer as soon as possible, and in any case within 48 hours. The risk of arbitrary detention was reduced if the deprivation of liberty could be challenged before an independent and impartial judge. Individuals and organizations should be able to seek judicial remedies not only for breaches of civil and political rights, but also of economic, social and cultural rights. He concluded that a pattern of interference with the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, attacks on the independence and freedom of the legal profession, and the instrumentalization of prosecutors were early warning signals of even more widespread and systematic violations of human rights in the future, which should trigger preventive action by relevant mechanisms, including the Human Rights Council. 13. Ms. Džumhur stressed the importance of prevention among the “five Ps” of human rights: prevention, promotion, protection, partnership and participation. Accessibility for protection should be ensured, for example through legal aid, supporting victims and witnesses and avoiding revictimization. Since most national human rights institutions could react to a violation but could not offer legal aid, civil society played an important role as partners in that area. She stressed the need, in post-conflict societies, for transitional justice, and to ensure that national human rights institutions had sufficient resources to implement their mandates in post-conflict situations. In addition, education of civil servants, the judiciary, university students and citizens on international human rights law should be stepped up. 14. She noted that recommendations from treaty bodies and special procedures were valuable, however their domestic dissemination by States was limited. As a good example 2 3 4 5 4 The Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, of 1985; the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, of 1990; the Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors, of 1990; and the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, of 2002. A/HRC/30/20. A/72/523. See www.norway.no/en/missions/wto-un/norway-/statements/human-rights/HRC/hrc-36th-session11---29-september-2017/joint-statement-on-councils-prevention-mandate/.