impact, particularly on Government institutions.26 In countries with high levels of illiteracy, difficult transport and deep social fractures (ethnic, linguistic, religious, class or regional differences), outreach is even more important. Furthermore, despite the incentive effect of the benefits, it has sometimes proven more difficult to draw people into a reparations programme than to encourage them to give testimony to a truth commission, because the former requires not just providing testimony, but making a request, filing applications, and presenting documents and evidence. The outreach that is called for, then, is particularly intensive not only in terms of dissemination of information about the existence of the reparations programme, but also in terms of assisting those going through the process. Whatever the outreach measures, it is important to be sensitive to gender differences and to be ready to adjust outreach efforts so as to draw in as many female beneficiaries as possible. Similarly, if the conflict has forced many into exile, it is important to establish outreach efforts that can capture exiled groups. • Access. If a reparations programme aspires to provide benefits to all potential beneficiaries, it must create a structure that makes the benefits easily accessible. Short application deadlines,27 requiring potential beneficiaries to file applications in person (as opposed to by post or by proxy) or creating a closed-list system (that is, a system in which the list of applicants is not only closed by a given deadline and not opened again, but also usually requires applicants to go through other hurdles such as being recognized by a truth commission) virtually guarantee that some victims as defined by the programme will not receive benefits, thus rendering the programme “incomplete.” Short application deadlines will have a particularly negative impact on female victims, as well as some minorities, who frequently require more time to overcome their reluctance to approach justice initiatives as well as official institutions, because they have traditionally been excluded, marginalized or outright abused. • Evidentiary thresholds. The other structural factor that may exclude many otherwise deserving potential beneficiaries is the way in which evidentiary requirements are determined. Setting the bar too high will leave out many victims. In making these decisions, the general availability of records, including police records,28 the role of the media at the time 26 27 28 Guatemala’s Commission on Historical Clarification as well as, more recently, Morocco’s Equity and Reconciliation Commission have been said to have had insufficient outreach efforts. In Morocco, for example, the report was posted on the Commission’s website, but six months after it finished its work hard copies of its report had not been widely distributed and no summaries had been produced. In a country with high rates of illiteracy and low rates of Internet access, clearly more could be done to make the report available. Peru’s Commission produced a summary that was widely distributed as a pamphlet in the country’s leading newspapers. In Sierra Leone the Truth and Reconciliation Commission produced pamphlets that relied mostly on graphics rather than text to get its message across to the illiterate population. This is a frequent complaint against reparations programmes in many parts of the world, including South Africa, Morocco and Brazil. Some countries, including Brazil, have introduced legislation extending application periods. On Brazil, see Ignacio Cano and Patrícia Galvão Ferreira, “The reparations program in Brazil”, in The Handbook…. In some countries abusive security forces kept meticulous records which were subsequently recovered, while in others, even if records were kept, they were destroyed. In some countries security forces destroyed even the identity papers of their victims. These factors affect where the evidentiary threshold for accessing benefits should be. 17