A/HRC/25/49/Add.1 with or without financial support from the authorities. Authorities at all levels of government also intervene, depending on the national/ethnic, political and ideological content of the memorial activity. The international community, too, has been very active in this context. 90. The building of new memorials dedicated to the 1992-1995 war has a deep impact on the country’s cultural landscape in ways that frequently clash with transitional justice principles. First, memorials are commonly used to mark one group’s dominance over specific territories. Some memorials have been erected at places of return or at places where other communities suffered. For example, tensions were exacerbated by the construction of an Orthodox church on a disputed location near the Srebrenica-Potočari Memorial Centre,32 where mass graves have been discovered. 91. Second, the memorialization process in the country is “characterized by the creation of new and deletion of old narratives” in “a relatively organized way”, to show that the old narratives were inappropriate even in the past and did not meet the needs of the community as a whole or some parts thereof and, in particular, that “they do not correspond to the needs of the current appearance of the community as a result of the 1992-1995 armed conflict”.33 92. The absence of a memorial may be equally problematic. For example, the Omarska camp in Prijedor, run by Serbian forces during the war and the site of mass murders and torture, remains unmarked, despite requests by survivors. The site is today a mining complex owned by Arcelor Mittal, which allows victims to conduct commemorative activities on the site for three hours every year on 6 August. The Special Rapporteur was informed that, while Bosnian and Croat members of the State Presidency had participated in these commemorations in 2012, no Serbian member had ever attended. By contrast, a memorial to fallen Serbian soldiers has been established in front of the camp. Furthermore, the site has been used as the filming location for a recent historical Serbian film production, which made no mention of the events of 1992-1995 and is seen by many as contributing to the denial of the traumatic events in the camp. According to interlocutors, victims and their families fear to speak up except in closed circles. 93. Memorialization processes are hindered as commemorative activities are sometimes rendered very difficult, for example around Srebrenica,34 although interlocutors reported that the situation has improved. 94. The memorialization of those who risked their lives to save people from the other groups appear to be minimal, although interesting private initiatives have been undertaken to that end.35 95. The legal basis for erecting monuments is fragmented between the laws and regulations of entities, cantons and municipalities, and there is no framework law dealing with memorialization processes at the State level (though some laws regulate the issue within their own sphere).36 96. The transitional justice strategy for Bosnia and Herzegovina (2012-2016) drafted with the support of UNDP, involving the Ministries of Justice and of Human Rights and Refugees, has not yet been adopted. An important aim of the strategy is to ensure that memorialization processes are fully integrated into the broader framework of transitional 32 33 34 35 36 S/2013/646, annex, para. 59. Popović, UNDP report (see footnote 31), p. 30. S/2013/646, paras. 60-61. Svetlana Broz, Good People in an Evil Time (New York, Other Press, 2004). Popović, UNDP report (see footnote 31), p. 27. 19