A/HRC/30/42 C. Creating enabling environments 85. In the present report, the Special Rapporteur encourages further reflection and study on the ways in which the strengthening of civil society can contribute to prevention. In earlier reports, observations were made about the fact that , without civil society participation, little progress would have been made in the domains of truth, justice and reparations. It is overwhelmingly thanks to the unrelenting advocacy of civil society organizations that accountability remains on the political agenda in countries with past mass violations. It is difficult to think of the efforts of Argentina to achieve justice without the contribution of the organizations Madres de la Plaza de Mayo and the centre for legal and social studies (CELS); those of Chile without the contribution of the Vicaría de la Solidaridad; or those of Guatemala without the persistence of the centre for human rights legal action (CALDH), to name only a few examples. 86. Because “civil society” should not be reduced to “non-governmental organizations”, it is important to recall that, in all transitional processes, a variety of stakeholders, including trade unions and religious organizations, have made essential contributions. To illustrate, although the role of the Catholic Church during the dictatorships in Argentina and Spain and during the genocide in Rwanda has been questioned, its contributions to the search for accountability in Chile, Uruguay and to this day in Burundi are notable. Similarly, trade unions have made crucial contributions to many transitional processes, including in South Africa, Poland and , recently, in Tunisia. 87. Because most transitional processes have been “liberalizing” and therefore, over time, both trade union and church affiliations decline, the contribution of these groups tends to be overlooked. In the present report, the Special Rapporteur emphasizes the significance of their contribution not only for the sake of historical accuracy, but also because it gives an important indication about the type of civil society that we should aim at if we are interested in prevention. 88. Authoritarianism has not disappeared as a threat to human rights, and other threats have been added. Despite significant differences among them, systematic threats to rights share a common element: violence or threats of violence undermine civic trust, a phenomenon that creates a negative feedback loop and becomes both a condition and a consequence of the continuation of violence. 89. Hence the importance of strengthening civil society. In past reports, more concerned with issues of redress, the point to emphasize was that a strong civil society diminishes the costs and risks of raising claims, both for individuals and groups. In the context of a discussion about prevention, the point to emphasize is that in a strong civil society, in which individuals and groups are empowered to exercise their rights, the violation of rights is less likely. 90. Because civil society cannot be reduced to formal institutions, it would be a mistake to conceive the project of strengthening civil society on the model of an institutional reform process. Civil society by its very nature is not part of the State and therefore does not respond to State initiatives as if it were. 91. The strengthening and enhancing of the preventive potential of civil society are likely to come from such contributing factors as (a) the active promotion of the fundamental freedoms of expression and opinion, of peaceful assembly and association and of religion; (b) the establishment of an education system that provides opportunities to develop not just marketable skills but critical thinking; and (c) the preservation of traditions of openness, transparency and consultation, more 20