QUESTIONS ANSWERED AND UNANSWERED In the final session of the symposium, Eleanor du Plooy, Project Leader for the Ashley Kriel Youth Desk and Project Leader for Gender Justice and Reconciliation at the Institute for Justice and Reconciliation, facilitated a challenging and critical discussion with all the symposium’s participants. The objective of the discussion was to distil the key lessons, encounter ourselves and the gaps in our various approaches, think through what was working and what was not, and consider what gains, successes, exclusions, and forms of violence and power were being engendered in our varying approaches and perspectives. The questions below emerge from both the discussion sessions after each panel and the final session. They find some answers in the above reports on the presentations, but, of course, in light of the complexity of the issues discussed, the prospect of singular, unambiguous answers is necessarily unlikley. The questions form an interrogative recap of the discussions at the symposium on one hand, but also represent the symposium organisers’ belief that the symposium is part of ongoing collaborative conversation and activism towards justice for sexual and genderbased violence. The questions are organised under broad headings, but there is, of course, substantial overlap between the different sections. While some of the questions lay out the trajectory of our discussions, they do not seek to synthesise, but rather to share some reflections, disruptions and question marks, in the hope that this contributes to ongoing humble, reflexive activism in pursuit of accountability for sexual and gender-based violence. Power, positionalities, and complicities 1. Who has the right to speak for victims? What power relations are at play when those with positions of power grant themselves the right to represent and determine who is left out? 2. How do civil society actors, particularly established civil society actors, contend with the positions of power they occupy? 3. How do the interactions between transitional justice practitioners or researchers and victims or survivors reflect dynamics of power, class, race and/or gender? 4. How do civil society actors influence donors and resource allocation, and in whose name is this power exercised? 5. How reflexive are civil society actors, international justice practitioners, academics and the ICC regarding their own complicities? 6. Are civil society actors too diplomatic with decision-makers? Do civil society actors ‘play it safe’ at the expense of victims and survivors of sexual and gender-based violence? 7. How do the lenses of accountability for sexual and gender-based violence in conflict, or in the context of mass violence, address the sexual violence committed by those who are supposed to protect, including, for example, civil society, ICC personnel and UN peacekeepers? 24\ Accountability for conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence: Successes, challenges, narratives, and omissions