A/HRC/25/49 12. The understanding that memorialization should be a means of combating injustice and promoting reconciliation was expressed in the Durban Declaration of the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, in which States emphasized “that remembering the crimes or wrongs of the past, wherever and whenever they occurred, unequivocally condemning its racist tragedies and telling the truth about history are essential elements for international reconciliation and the creation of societies based on justice, equality and solidarity”. 13. The goals assigned to memorialization processes are thus multi-faceted and, regardless of diversity in form and shape, memorials have both private/reflective and public/educative purposes.7 They are geared not only towards the past (recalling events, recognizing and honouring victims and enabling stories to be related), but equally to the present (healing processes and rebuilding of trust between communities) and the future (preventing further violence through education and awareness-raising). Memorialization processes can promote a culture of democratic engagement by stimulating discussion regarding the representation of the past and contemporary challenges of exclusion and violence. 14. The multiplicity of memorial entrepreneurs means that memorialization may focus more on one goal rather than another, in some cases heightening or leading to tensions and mutual suspicion. Other goals may also be pursued, more or less openly, such as nationbuilding and constructing national identities, or, worryingly, as a tool to affirm predominance over a territory, gather people around one emphasized identity and justify various political agendas. B. Critically assessing memorialization policies and practices 15. The question is whether memorials do and can fulfil the purposes assigned to them as described in paragraph 13 above and, if so, under which conditions?8 In the last 20 years, more memorials and museums (of history/memory) were established than in the previous two centuries, suggesting the need to undertake a broader, more detailed analysis of the issue. 16. While memorialization processes mark the recognition of victims, the will to ensure reparation for mass or grave violations of human rights and non-recurrence, they can also amount to memorial tyrannies. This occurs when continuously multiplying memorials do not take into account alternative voices or suffer questions, enclose people within their past and leave little space for the remembrance of other events and relations between groups of people.9 17. On the whole, the worldwide trend of greater memorialization can be seen as positive. However, too much memory, especially if presented in the form of irreconcilable versions of the past, might hurt rather than help a society.10 All post-conflict and divided societies confront the need to establish a delicate balance between forgetting and remembering. It is crucial that memorialization processes do not function as empty rhetoric commemorating the dead, while losing sight of the reasons and the context for past tragedies and obscuring contemporary challenges. 7 8 9 10 See Bickford, “Memoryworks/memory works”. Ibid. See also the contribution from the National Council of Human Rights of Morocco, open consultations, 5 July 2013, available from http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/CulturalRights/Pages/HistoricalMemorialNarratives.aspx. Bickford, “Memoryworks/memory works”. 5