A/HRC/27/56 98. Finally, the effective participation of victims in the articulation of prosecutorial strategies depends, as does their participation at all stages in the criminal justice process, on the ability to guarantee their safety. The Special Rapporteur calls on Member States to fulfil their duty to guarantee the safety of victims and all other participants in processes meant to redress serious violations. IX. Conclusions and recommendations Conclusions 99. Criminal prosecutions contribute to the recognition of victims as rights holders, (re-)establishment of trust in the legal and judicial system, strengthening of the rule of law and the promotion of social reconciliation and cohesion. Prosecutions can exemplify the principles of equality and the supremacy of law. 100. States have a duty to investigate and prosecute violations of human rights and humanitarian law which constitute crimes under national or international law. This duty flows from the right to an effective remedy, including the right to truth. Failure to investigate and prosecute such violations gives rise to a separate breach of human rights treaty law. 101. States may not relieve suspected perpetrators of individual responsibility through amnesty, prior immunity or indemnity, the defence of obedience to superior orders, unreasonably short statutes of limitation or other impediments. 102. States have the duty to assist each other to bring to justice persons suspected of having committed crimes under domestic or international law. The Special Rapporteur is concerned at the recent regress in the area of universal jurisdiction, in which some “pioneer countries” have opted to be more restrictive in their legislation regarding the extraterritorial jurisdiction over international crimes. 103. The Special Rapporteur is gravely concerned at amnesties for suspected perpetrators of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and other gross human rights violations or other serious violations of international humanitarian law. Such amnesties risk further entrenching impunity. They have also even proven counterproductive in the sustainable prevention of the recurrence of violations and vicious circles of violence. 104. Experience demonstrates that only a fraction of those bearing responsibility for massive violations are ever investigated. The main reasons for this in situations of transition are the high number of suspected perpetrators, the relative scarcity of financial and human resources, limited capacity and lack of will. The dearth of prosecutions calls into question other transitional justice initiatives. 105. A prosecutorial prioritization strategy consists of establishing a strategic order in which cases and situations of violation and abuse are investigated and prosecuted. For transitional justice situations, the main risks in not adopting such a strategy include: dispersing and duplicating investigations; a large number of poor investigations, weak indictments and, as a result, acquittals and/or low sentences; further eroding the trustworthiness of the judicial system; de facto limited criminal liability, particularly for the senior-level perpetrators; retraumatization and revictimization of victims; specific crimes requiring specialized prosecutorial efforts, including sexually-related crimes and the recruitment and use of children in hostilities, are frequently not pursued. 20