A/HRC/27/56 B. Impartiality of prosecutors and representativeness of the charges 80. Measures seeking to protect the independence of prosecutors are means to enable the exercise of impartial decision-making about which cases to investigate and prosecute. 81. Nothing undermines the perception of impartiality of prosecutorial efforts more than patterns of one-sided prosecutorial attention, such as the deliberate foregoing of the possibility of investigating and prosecuting violations committed by one side of a conflict. Even sequencing prosecutions in a way that decreases the possibility of the cases of one party being investigated and prosecuted can raise serious questions about the legitimacy of efforts, and threaten the contribution that criminal justice initiatives can make to strengthening the rule of law. 82. A defensible prosecutorial strategy cannot close itself off from the possibility of pursuing cases on any side of a conflict, even with the rationale that the violations of one party are less serious than those of others. Removing the bars leading to one-sided prosecutorial activity does not mean that equal numbers of crimes or perpetrators from each side to a conflict need to be prosecuted if the level of crimes committed by each side is uneven. It does not entail precise arithmetical proportion either. However, criminal justice must not become an instance of mere “turn-taking”. Prosecutorial investigations must follow credible indicia, and decisions to prosecute must be based on evidence alone, assessed in an even-handed manner. Recent prosecutions and trials in Bangladesh43 and Egypt44 provide grounds for concern. 83. The greater the departure — tied to factors relating to identity, politics, or affiliation — from patterns of violation as corroborated by evidence, the more significant will be concerns about the legitimacy of the efforts. False symmetries or the thesis that “mutual guilt” should lead to reduced accountability result in such a problematic departure. 84. The possibility of investigating and prosecuting any party regardless of partisan considerations is only one of the consequences of adopting methodologies designed to capture the magnitude and character of atrocity crimes. The other important consequence is the broadening of the scope of investigations, going from an exclusive interest in direct and intermediate perpetrators to other parties and structures that knowingly collaborated with or intentionally profited from the perpetration of violations. In the long run, a prosecutorial strategy cannot be effective if it leaves those structures in place. 85. A prosecutorial strategy also has an impact on the charges eventually presented. A deeper understanding of the systemic and complex nature of the pattern of violations allows for charges that are more representative of actual crimes committed. Such patterns identified during investigations should be reflected in the facts and the charges of the indictment. 86. Furthermore, the Special Rapporteur is concerned about the tendency observed in recent (post-)conflict situations of focusing mainly on types of charges that make the State appear as the ultimate victim of the majority of the violations (offences against national security, terrorism, criminal conspiracy), while violations of human rights and humanitarian law are either ignored or demoted to a secondary level. This, for example, has been the focus of ongoing prosecutions in Mali, which have left out of consideration other grave and 43 44 16 www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=13204&LangID=E; and www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=12972&LangID=E. www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=14596&LangID=E; and www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=14457&LangID=E.