A/HRC/30/42 (a) The “offer”, as it is not clear what is meant by a “guarantee”; (b) The “object”, as the reference in the foundational texts12 to the nonrecurrence of gross violation of human rights by States has widened to include the nonrecurrence of “international crimes” committed by State and non-State actors, the nonrecurrence of atrocities and even of the non-recurrence of violent conflict;13 (c) The “subject”, or who the beneficiaries of the guarantees are supposed to be, i.e., the victims, a wider group of “potential” victims or society at large; (d) The “duty bearers”, i.e., those supposed to fulfil their obligation to provide said guarantees. 21. In the present report, the Special Rapporteur aims at contributing conceptual clarity about “guarantees of non-recurrence”; acknowledging the breadth of the field, yet giving it some structure, without being necessarily comprehensive; and highlighting areas that have not received appropriate attention. 22. Furthermore, the main interests underlying the report are practical, and aim to show that the topic can be concretely acted upon; demonstrate that it is a fit object of rational policymaking, including planning, budgeting and monitoring; and offer a general framework for designing an actionable non -recurrence policy. 23. Conceptually, there is a difference between guarantees of non-recurrence and the remaining three core elements of a comprehensive transitional justice approach , namely, truth, justice and reparation. While those three elements refer to measures, guarantees of non-recurrence is a function that can be satisfied by a broad variety of measures. The foundational texts already demonstrate this variety, pointing to, inter alia, reforming institutions, disbanding unofficial armed groups, repealing emergency legislation incompatible with basic rights, vetting the secur ity forces and the judiciary, protecting human rights defenders and training security forces in human rights. 24. The core function of guarantees of non-recurrence is preventive in nature. It is one to which truth, justice and reparation are themselves supposed to contribute: criminal justice mainly through deterrence; truth commissions through disclosure, clarification and the formulation of recommendations with a preventive intent; and reparations by strengthening the hand of victims to claim redress for the past and future violations and to enforce their rights more assertively. 25. The preventive intent is the unifying thread in the foundational texts. Framing an indicative reply to the aforementioned conceptual questions, the “offer” of guarantees of non-recurrence relates to a combination of deliberate, diverse interventions that contribute to a reduction in the likelihood of recurring violations. The “object” is not the prevention of isolated violations, but of gross human rights violations and serious violations of international humanitarian law. Such violations presuppose systemic abuses of (State) power that have a specific pattern and rest on a degree of organizational set-up. 26. The present report is written on the understanding that the “subject” of the guarantees is the previously victimized society, seen at large, thus not limited to the 12 13 E/CN.4/Sub.2/1997/20/Rev.1; E/CN.4/2004/88; General Assembly resolution 60/147; and E/CN.4/2005/102/Add.1. See S/2004/616. 7