be seen as reaffirming democratic values are the trials that took place in Greece in 1974 and in Argentina from 1984 to 1987.)11 Prosecutorial efforts therefore require: •A  clear understanding of system crimes (i.e., genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes if committed on a large scale) and how they should be investigated and prosecuted; • T he development of processes that are likely to inspire public confidence in the institutions dealing with the criminal prosecutions and trials, both technically and substantively; and • An appreciation of the role victims should play in the judicial process and an emphasis on restoring victims’ dignity as rights-bearing citizens. Where the international community assumes a role in the process, it, too, must be clear about the objectives of such prosecutions. B. Developing a clear strategy Even with an appropriate political commitment to support criminal accountability, a welldeveloped, strategic plan is essential to the success of a prosecutorial effort. The main strategic challenges are: •A  large number of crimes will have been committed and it will be possible to investigate only a small number; and • Hundreds, if not thousands, of people may have been involved in the crimes and not all can be prosecuted. In a transitional or post-conflict setting, the initiative to prosecute often has to compete with other urgent political, social and economic demands (both domestically and internationally). Many post-conflict countries experience high levels of ordinary crime. Competition for resources and overburdened courts are obvious challenges in these environments. Moreover, an overly ambitious approach to prosecutions may cause a backlash, including potential threats to stability from perpetrators, increased difficulties in protecting large numbers of potential witnesses and renewed calls for legislative barriers, such as amnesty laws. 11 In both countries, the armed forces responsible for massive atrocities were, to a large extent, reintegrated into the democratic framework and submitted themselves to the rule of law. It is not suggested that trials alone were responsible for this, but there is enough evidence to suggest that they played a meaningful role in encouraging institutions to change the way they saw their role in society. Most of the crimes we are addressing in these contexts are committed by such institutions, so the policy should address that reality. The primary aim should be to contribute to making certain conduct unacceptable to those organizations themselves. It is worth noting that in Argentina there was a significant backlash to President Alfonsín’s originally robust approach to prosecutions, which resulted in pressure and threats from the military and eventually the “full stop” and “due obedience” laws limiting liability, as well as subsequent pardons granted under President Menem. (The legality of the two laws is currently under review.) However, there can be no doubt of the overall impact of the trials and of the fact that, after the trials, the military in Argentina resumed its proper role in society, and has not since exceeded this, even in the light of recent turmoil resulting from Argentina’s economic woes.