Jürgen Schurr programme was also established on account of the victims’ requests for such a programme. Cultural differences may impact upon perceptions of reparation: for instance, participation in criminal proceedings may be seen as crucial, whereas, for others, truth-telling and the admission of guilt by the wrongdoer will be most important. In some contexts, the fact that one can never undo what was done may militate against reparation, whereas, in other contexts, the symbolic effects can be extremely beneficial and contribute to reconciling a divided society. The context of the violations, the length of time over which they were per­ petrated, the type of violations and the number of victims, as well as perpetrators, involved may give rise to very specific perceptions of what form(s) reparations should take. Should compensation programmes be established? Is there a need for extensive medical and psychological rehabilitation? Has there been a situation of ethnic cleansing that requires a programme for the return of refugees and displaced persons? As a result of these different contexts, it is important to design reparations mechanisms that take into account the context of the crimes and the situation of the victims. Putting these rights into practice in the context of justice in transition In our work we frequently come across individual victims of torture who are seeking access to a remedy and reparation that can be, depending on the circumstances, a relatively straightforward process, at least in comparison to mass victimization. Remedies may be available at national level; if they are not, it might be possible to approach regional bodies, such as the African Commission on Human Rights, or international ones, such as the United Nations Human Rights Council, with a view to obtaining reparation. Victims can submit their claim to national courts or regional mechanisms and bodies, which will then decide on their case and issue judgments or recommendations, including the form of reparation that the victim is entitled to. For obvious reasons, national justice systems, as well as regional and international mechanisms, will find it difficult to make decisions and issue recommendations about the reparation of victims in cases where thousands or tens of thousands of victims are seeking justice and where a legacy of abuses needs to be addressed. Other opportunities then need to be found to provide victims with justice and reparation. A significant number of wide-ranging political, legal and practical challenges are involved in setting up a mechanism that ensures that the largest possible number of victims receive some form of reparation at the end of the process. 24 International Conference on Transitional Justice, Zimbabwe