 You're on. You can start. Yeah. Well, good morning to everyone. Thank you for being with us today. On behalf of the European Observatory on Memories, I just want to welcome you to this morning session that is the last step of a two years project on the question of memorization after terrorism based on the research of Dr. Anna Milosevic from the University of Melbourne. Well, you probably know us. The European Observatory on Memory is a platform promoted by the University of Barcelona Solidarity Foundation with the support of the European Commission. It was founded already 10 years ago in 2012 and today we gather a network of more than 50 partners from different countries, more than 20 different countries. One of our main pillars is working with a transnational perspective that can contribute to acknowledge diversity within Europe, not only the EU, but also beyond the EU member states. Also, we support working with a multidisciplinary perspective, meaning this to work always from the most reliable academic research, but also engaging a variety of actors such as artists, journalists, filmmakers, etc. And what is the aim of this? So the aim is widened the scope in promoting public remembrance. And finally, one of our main goals is fostering citizens participation, something that is very connected with the project that we are presenting today. The citizens participation in memory policies gives gives the opportunity to regular citizens, let's say, to lead very interesting bottom up initiatives, such as some of the ones that we will see today. So, following all these aims, we decided two years ago we decided to explore and analyze the multiple memorials that have been rapidly appearing in the public space to remember the victims of terrorist attacks. That's sadly different European countries suffered in the recent years. To tell you the truth, at the beginning of this project we were a bit hesitating because most of our staff at the observatory, we are proper historians, let's say, so we are used to analyze past events, but not so recent events such as the terrorist attacks that has been affecting our community. That's why we rapidly contacted Anna Milosevic, who we already knew from other projects in the past, because she has been dealing with this kind of memorials since some time ago. Well, the result you will see has been an online exhibition that you can visit in our website, showing pictures and contextualizing the memorials, both spontaneous or official ones that appeared in the island of Otoya in Norway, in Paris, in Brussels, and finally in Barcelona. Also, we published the policy brief with recommendations for future memorials of this kind, based on the experiences of these four cases that I've just mentioned. From my point of view, it is a very interesting document that suggests to count on the victims and the local community for the making of new memorials in the future. Well, I just want to add our most sincere thanks to Anna Milosevic for her enlightening work, also to all the speakers that today will contribute to the debate with the experiences. Of course, to all of the Euro team for their efforts to make this project possible, especially Fernanda and David. And of course, thank you also to our donors and supporters, as it is the case of the European Commission and the Open Society Foundation. Well, that's all from my part. So Anna, the floor is yours. Thanks, Ariel. Well, also my behalf. Welcome to this session. I'm very enthusiastic to present the results of this, as Ariel said, two years research that was initially supposed to be one year, but since we're in the middle of the pandemic, it kind of prolonged into two years. I think quite interesting developments, not only the terms in which pandemic has influenced memorialization processes, but also, for instance, at the time when I was doing field work in Norway, a new terrorist attack happened that also gave us additional input for this policy brief because I was there and I was a live participant of something that was unfolding in that particular moment. So as Ariel said, yes, two years of work on this project and another six years of my own personal scientific interest in memorials after terrorism, all this experience has brought us today to bring some kind of attempt to give some kind of recommendations on how to make memorialization more efficacious. This means that we had this kind of broad objective with this project, which was to attempt to take an bird's eye view, bird's eye perspective on memorialization after terrorism. And we wanted to compare a number of different cases that terrorist attacks that unfolded over the last 10 years to understand what kind of memorialization strategies are there. So in what ways the local communities, local authorities, national authorities, even the European Union approach memorialization. So what kind of memorialization strategies they implement, they create and implement. We also wanted to know what were the challenges involved because every memorialization process, every memorialization strategy has its own challenges. What we understood early on that it was this gap between what were the proclaim objectives with memorialization, these objectives that were assigned to it, and there was also difference in the ways that memorialization has been received on the ground. So what I mean by this that for instance, you have certain monuments that are part of the state led efforts, for instance, in preventing radicalization, but we do not actually know like how efficacious they are. So we have no tools to measure them. And besides this gap between the intended and produced results of memorialization, there was also something that we noticed and that was the difference in how the objectives are assigned to memorialization. In other words, on the one hand side, we have state led memorialization efforts that project certain objectives to memorialization. And on the other hand side, we have victims, survivors, victims organizations that also have similar but also very quite different objectives when it comes to memorialization because victims and survivors as we understood through our research, they have their own specific memorial needs. So what we were asking with this policy brief is what actually makes memorialization strategy efficacious and for whom. So across four cases, we try to answer some of these questions, we went on the field. I spoke to a number of victims and survivors of attacks in Norway, in France, in Belgium, and in Spain. And we formulated some of the recommendations as you will see or as you have read in the policy brief. So I would like to walk you through these, let's say main key points of the policy brief. And first of all, I want to say that every case has its own specificities, but we have identified some of the common challenges in Oslo, Paris, Brussels, and Barcelona that have emerged during this research and also in the policy brief as you will see. There are some examples of the good and also the bad practices when it comes to memorialization. So the first point, the first, let's say, recommendation that we listed in the policy brief is the one of pursuing time sensitive memorialization strategies. So what this practically means this means that societal personal paths to recovery and coping with the consequences of terrorism, travel on different different timelines. And what we mean by this is that we have seen that there is a difference in between the society led efforts in memorialization and also stakeholder led efforts at memorialization. There is a difference between these ad hoc memorials and the permanent memorials that are usually created after the first year or on the anniversary of the of the first anniversary of the of the terrorist attacks. What we have also seen is that sometimes, as we know, spontaneous memorials emerging the immediate aftermath of terrorist attacks but sometimes they're untimely removal from the public space, can for instance, hinder the societal revolution of trauma that happens quite quite quite publicly. So one of monuments the one that are made to be like the permanent tokens of of remembrance and acknowledgement of the event and the victims. They are very much defer from their spontaneous counterparts in many many ways. But most importantly, in our own view, they are seen these permanent memorials is seen seen as being quite static and not reflective of the emotional impact that the trauma had on society in the immediate aftermath. There were some attempts, for instance, in Brussels at trying to reach that kind of gap and including the messages for instance from spontaneous memorials into permanent memorial, but those kind of plants were abandoned early on. Instead of that, there was another memorial that was made in memory of the victims that was placed in a different kind of location differently from the places where spontaneous memorials occupied public space in the immediate aftermath. And the issue that the victims and survivors often voiced in relation to that particular monument in Brussels is that it really lacked authenticity and it also lacked this kind of emotional charge that spontaneous memorials actually have. The second recommendation and I can go on with the different kind of examples. The second kind of recommendation that we put in the policy brief relates to memorialization that is mindful of victims Memorial needs. In the discussion talk more about what I identified from my research as Memorial needs of the victims, but in this part of the discussion I would like to just point out that symbolic recognition of victims appears to be more effective. When the ownership ones own personal experiences and trauma suffered is maintained. I meant by this is that it is crucial to have a memorialization strategies that are mindful of this kind of ownership of victims narratives and personal experiences and also about the consequences they have endured. And what actually happens on the ground as we can see, we have seen in a number of cases that this is often not the case, because the victims and survivors they're often not the part of the official memory work. Instead of being part of the consultation process about the monument and about the commemoration, how they believe it is fit. They're often presented their off their role is often a narrow down to one of bearing witness. The third recommendation relates to the enhancing citizen participation in the memorization efforts, because we have seen that aside from spontaneous memorials that happened in the immediate aftermath. We have permanent memorials that are usually used every year for the commemoration. But in the meantime, during the whole year, these places of atrocity where the terrorist attacks, for instance, happened, they have been used as still as places of memory. Because for instance, if you go to Barcelona, and you if you walk the Rambla you will see the some of the people will still leave the flower or teddy bear or some kind of object in memory of the people who have lost their lives at that specific point. What is also important is to try to work on on bringing the commemoration to enhancing the number of people who participate in commemorations, because what we have noticed over the years that with the passing of time. People are less and less attending these kind of commemorations. And sometimes the issue is not just the passing of time sometimes the issue is also in trying to inform the public about the event that is memorialized. For instance, in France in 2020 when there was the first French National Day and remembers of the victims of terrorism, and the Spanish King was there present. A lot of people were practically behind the fence barriers, and they were not able to participate in the event, or they were not even aware of what is going on. And I co-authored a paper which I don't took. I don't know if he's online on that particular topic where we compared actually the relevance of the EU, the remembrance and the French, the remembrance and we were both present that day. See exactly what was the societal reaction to that first National Day for the victims of terrorism in France were not actually informed about the event. What is also important to to understand is that when monuments lack authenticity when they're not created at the places where the terrorist attack happened where the victims lost their lives, or they do not have the visibility in the public space that also creates tensions. There also creates tensions within the community of victims and survivors. So it is not the problem is not only in monuments inability to communicate, but also in there is an importance of there is it is very important to smartly choose the location for the for the monument. And finally, let's say in the fourth recommendation, we talk about the ways of reconciling the private and public dimension of remembers what we mean by this is that remembers memorization strategies are used by a different number of actors who initiate and guide the process. So as I said, there were there are these state led efforts at memorization. Such as for instance, commemoration days or creation of a specific museum that will kind of transmit the narrative about the events that had happened. But on the other hand, victims and survivors, they also use these places of memory, the places where the terrorist attacks happen to remember and deal with their own, their own endured consequences and with their own experiences. So, in terms of memorial needs of victims and survivors, it is quite important to understand that impact that these places have for them. So, in many, many cases, victims and survivors they have voiced that these kind of places of memory may have therapeutic purpose for them, which is something quite different than actually a public event that is, for instance, a commemoration with that is led by the state officials. For instance, in Uhtoya, victims and survivors and family members of the persons who lost their lives, they made their own memorial in remembrance of that day, where 77 people lost their lives. So, this is one of the examples that we identified as an example of good practice where the victims and survivors and their family members take the ownership of the memorization process, it make of it something that actually works for them that addresses their memorial needs. So, this is very briefly the four points of the policy brief and I will stop here and I'm very curious to have feedback from the other discussants and also from the audience on what they believe to be the efficacious ways of creating and implementing memorization strategies. So, I'll stop here on David. Thank you, Anna, for summarizing the recommendations of our policy brief. And I think it's time to start the roundtable. So, David, go ahead. Okay. Thanks, Uriel. Thanks, Anna, for this interesting presentation of the results of your policy brief. So, well, in my case, I will present the next roundtable where we are going to be discussing some of these topics pointed from the presentation of the policy brief that the researcher Anna Milosevic has executed within the frame of this project. So, we have to say that the job has been done, but there are plenty of jobs to be done from now on because it's like, you know, a topic still new on the research area. But for this, for this specific roundtable, we would like to deeper into some of these points that Dr. Anna Milosevic has already pointed. So, we have like this background that we are going to present on four main questions that comes from the four keynotes from the policy brief by Anna Milosevic such as what is the perfect timing to finally close a memorialization process after terrorist attacks? Are these memorials to the victims of terrorist attacks linked to a narrative that connects easily with the citizenship around them? In mind that citizenship is going to be like the main users of this monumentalization or memorialization. Are the victims needs properly taken into account within this process of memorialization? And in relation with these third points, how can we manage a process of memorialization where both public policies and private needs of the victims are well treated? So, those are the key points that Anna presented on this on this policy brief and for sure we are going to go deeper into this roundtable. In this roundtable, we have like quite an heterogeneous representation of those stakeholders, of those agents involved in this process of memorialization after terrorist attacks such as victims, victims associations, such as public policy representatives or even architectural designers involved in the design of these monuments. So, I will proceed to briefly introduce them. Well, we have to say that we have had a lifetime casualty because of health issues but I will present the roundtable that we have right now. So, first of all, we will have Mr. Bassist Metz, who's a landscape architect designer of the memorial to Brussels terrorist attacks in 2016. We will have also Mrs. Leah Main-Réchaud-Hang, I hope I have pronounced it well, Leah, who's a policy officer from the Victim Super-Europe, which is an organization that gathers many other national organizations around Europe to support victims. And we will have as well, later on, Mr. Jordi Ravassa, who is a councilman from the City Council of Barcelona, and he was, well, he's the councilman in charge of democratic memory. And he was, of course, in charge of the process of memorialization in Barcelona after terrorist attacks in Ramblas back in 2017. So, I'm excited, Mr. Jordi Ravassa, we will come back later since his agenda is quite busy, but we will count on his expertise as well. And of course, finishing by the expert in the field, Dr. Anna Milosevic, researcher at the Liouven Institute of Criminology at the Catholic University of Liouven and as you have already discovered the leading researcher of this project. So we have, like, more or less 15 minutes for speaker in a way that you can present whatever you think this is proper in this first time of the roundtable. And after that we will have plenty of time to an open discussion or to get some questions from the audience. I have to say as well that this event, besides this Zoom platform that we are gathering, can be also followed by our YouTube channel from the European Observatory of Memories. So, within the organization we will gather any question from the audience that will come within your speeches. If any of the speakers will also point any question to one of your colleagues, you can also use as well our intern chat in Zoom, so we can also pose the question later. So, that was enough from my side, and I would then like to give the floor first to Basis Metz. Okay, thank you. Thank you so much, David and Anna. Okay, Bas, the floor is yours. I'm, maybe, how does one design a memorial? I'm a landscape architect. I have my office in Brussels and most people design public spaces and large parks, maybe infrastructure landscapes, but it was never the idea to design memorials. I think it's important that it came up as almost by accident or maybe by a new need to find a new way of giving place to grief within the landscape. I think that it's important to know that I'm not an architect, I'm a landscape architect, and the fact that we have been working on three memorials these last years with always this kind of hope that within the landscape a good place can be found to find a way of dealing with grief, with commemoration, with maybe contemplation. So I think that that's the first important element whereas before memorials, if you remember memorials from the World Wars, were always this kind of cultural or architectural elements. So I have been involved, as has been said with the Brussels 2203, so the attacks in 2016 memorial in the in the forest, the Sonia forest. I've been involved for a couple of years now, years now with the memorial for the Yutoya attacks of 22nd of July. And recently we have been asked to make a series of memorials for the victims of the COVID crisis. We have built one of these in Kortrek in Belgium, but we are planning to build one in Brussels one in Wallonia and a couple more in Flanders as a family of we call them monuments for the victims of the COVID crisis. I wanted to share with you today the process of this first memorial that I have designed in Brussels. You can share my screen. If all goes well you should see my screen. And it's also interesting to note here that this came to light in discussions. This was not a planned thing, but it came to live in discussions and I want to narrate this. I think it's really important that it's really about individual engagement more than a kind of top down planned process and how this came about. I was contacted by Celine Fremont, who was then the Minister of Ecology in Brussels. She told me she had been contacted by a friend of a victim of the attacks in Brussels who wanted to plant a tree in her favorite park. The victim was a foreigner, so the grave was not in Belgium, and she wanted a tree in her favorite park to commemorate that victim. And the Minister then told her let's plant 32 trees for the 32 victims, maybe not in a park but rather in a forest, maybe not in the center of Brussels, maybe just outside of it. So it really becomes a place for contemplation, a place different than the let's say the usual memorial plague that you would put at the place of the attacks themselves. And when she told me that, I told her like, but how are you going to plant trees in a forest? I mean, it's not so easy. It's easier to plant trees in a park. And so a bit by accident, she said like, I don't know. I was like, okay, I'll let me help you. I was like, okay, fine. And so we said about his journey. And I remember this was in November 2016, so only six months after the attacks. And I would walk in the morning through the forest looking for the right place to add trees to the existing forest. And I didn't want to cut any existing trees, of course. So I was looking for a clearing, looking for a place naturally that could allow to add these 32 trees. And in that process, which is very short, because this was decided November 10th. And the memorial was opened for the one year commemoration. So March 22nd, very fast process in which we did meet the victims group, which was a very important moment as well. And suddenly to be confronted with people that had lived the attacks that had lost my family members, dear members. I was so impressed with their courage to be part of this victim group. And I remember that they were telling me like, we want a place for us. And here I'm addressing some of the points that Anna brought up. They said we don't want a place that ministers use. I mean, we want a place that we can go to with our kids. And even they told me, and I was really struck by that, they told me we want a place that nobody else knows where it is. I mean, they wanted to be secretive dares. And so I really tried to take it into account to make a place where that's not easily accessible. It is accessible, but you have to walk a bit. You have to find it. You have to really want to go there. And so we, and I think this discussions with the victim group were really essential in trying to respond to their needs and to make something that becomes dares rather than something that they have to adopt. So it was really catered to what I thought would be their needs. So we found this, and it took me a while to find the right spot, but I find a clearing on a higher elevation in between two little gullies that come up or make this little pond in a series of ponds. And I was quite interested by the fact that it was a natural clearing once lying on a higher point, and that you had to cross this little pond symbolically going to the other side. And so here we, we, and then there's this other discussion. I wanted, I mean, my commission was to plant 32 trees. But I didn't think that was enough. I mean planting trees in the forest. It's a nice gesture. But how could we make it more eternal in a sense or more, more, I mean, trees do die as well. So, so we decided to make this circle in stones at a perfectly horizontal level around which we planted those two 32 trees and we planted them as at a distance of people holding hands. So the 32 together draw this kind of circle in the forest, and the stones draw a circle in the soil in the ground. So quite straightforward design in the end. And then we started the construction works in January. And I remember we had this first meeting, everybody telling me this was totally impossible to get it done within the timing. And so I also remember telling them, okay, now that we know it's not possible, let's see how we can do it. And in a sense, and that's really everybody's involvement, everybody was in somehow related to these attacks. Myself, I had been in a palace that had been attacked and had been in Boston at the time of the attacks. So it was really very close to all of us. And some people had lost their one. So, so it was really the from the quarry to the people sculpting the stones to the people installing them everybody made this impossible timing happen. So here we see the stones which selected we selected them from a quarry of bluestone in Belgium, and these bluestones have been used as gravestones since ever. So that was quite appropriate. They were CNC so they were they were they were delicately cut into segments of a circle a perfect circle, installed without disrupting the force floor special foundation that that's that's permeable for the for the roots. And so we were ready just before the commemoration and now this is kind of growing as a kind of an independent element in the in the forest we chose birch trees that are the understory of these beach forests. So, so special to the Brussels forest. And, and it's been, and that's what I wanted to stress since since it was made with the victims. It's been used every year for commemorations in 2017. There was a cellist that was invited to play 2018 there was a choir that came to sing 2019. Unfortunately, COVID came, but then that's why switch to another presentation. People themselves came up with with ideas of commemorating so this is a picture that was taking the day of the of the first commemoration. So here you see at every commemoration people would bring their flowers when it was the COVID. Well, this was also interesting. I came here in November. And I was wondering why why are these flowers here in November it's it should have been March, but then it was used as you can see 20th of November, the victims of Bamako. So suddenly, this, this was used for to remember another type of terrorist attack, which was, I was, I was. Yeah, I was happy to see that that it became a sign of commemorating victims of terror attacks, wherever in the world, and whenever they had happened. This was also interesting 2020 at the heart of the COVID crisis we could not organize anything, but then suddenly some people started to put these branches on the on the circle, which I thought was very powerful as a as a kind of a kind of a message to remember that this is daily life happening there's kids running around people told me that at night, they have special yoga classes or meditation classes so it's also like the fact that it's so this is the distance of the people holding hands. The fact that it's, it's, it's not a sacred place, or I mean, kids can walk on it you can sit on it you can have a picnic on it as well it's this kind of marking of a place that is different and where where grief can can happen. So this process with you. And again, I am a landscape architect, the fact that I'm doing this is more kind of a maybe personal engagement and I do think that those memorials need to be hyper personal and the same happens in Utoya we stopped many times to the victim groups. And it's important that it is something made for and by these people that that need them the most and then so which brings us back to the, I think that the timing that the citizens, the victims needs, and this this this subtle equilibrium between public policies and private needs. They all need to be addressed when making these types of memorials. Okay, thank you Vas for your interesting intervention and thank you for for sharing with us your, your expertise as a landscape architect. I would like now then to pass the floor to, to Leah Mantra, in order to, to listen her experience. Thank you David, and thank you for organizing this important discussion and inviting victim support Europe as well. The policy paper that was presented by Anna really resonates with the work that we do, and especially on memorials because we have published a guidance document a few years ago in 2019, which set out some of the principles we think are key in in the organization of memorials and commemoration events so I'll, I'll speak a bit on that later on. For those who don't know victim support Europe, we are the European umbrella organization of victim support services. We will present more than 65 victim support services in Europe and around the world, which, which directly supports and give information to around 2 million victims per year. So in support Europe we are based in Brussels in Belgium. And our main work is around policy work and advocacy so we work to advance the rights and services of all victims of crime in Europe and abroad. While we are this generic organization so we, we are advocating for all victims of crime. We've been also involved in the development of policy recommendation on specifically victims of terrorism. Since 2015, after the terrorist attack in Paris in November 2015. In that context, we've been approached by our French member France victim to help them connect victims and families, and especially foreign victims with support organization in their own countries. So to ensure that these people who have been affected by the attacks were able to have support and information in their own in their own countries. We've been also quite active and involved in the adoption of the combating terrorism directive that was adopted in 2017. We pushed for amendments and inclusion of different articles related to the needs and the rights of victims of terrorism. And we also published, we worked with the Libé committee at the European Parliament, and we published a study study reports on on the needs of victims of terrorism as well. So I'll see my colleagues can who are here can also share the links in the chat. And more recently we just concluded the EU project. We run for the European Commission, the EU CVT, the European Center of Expertise for victims of terrorism. It was a pilot project of two years run by a consortium of organization led by Victim Support Europe. During these two years we developed several reports EU handbook on the rights of victims of terrorism. So 26 national handbooks we conducted training in in the 26 member states. And we also created this online hub of expertise and exchange for practitioners and an expert in the field. So really our work is based on the needs of victims of crime, which can be divided in five broad categories. So you have the needs of respect and recognition, the needs for information and support, the needs to access justice, the needs for protection and compensation. And specifically for victims of terrorism. One of the primary needs is that of recognition. And as the concept of recognition is quite broad, it can be perceived and expressed in in really different ways. And one of them is commemoration. And commemoration is important on both level on the personal level for for the direct and indirect victims and on the societal level as community will also feel overwhelmed by grief powerless in the face of these violence of a terrorist attack. So as at VSC we've been working with different experts around the world within our informal group of expert called Invictim. And we have developed this idea of circle of impact. So this means that the whole society is impacted by a terrorist attack there are many different actors involved in this attack so of course the victims, the people that are on the site of the attack are the primary actors involved, but then we look a bit not so much closer and we see the families and the loved one the colleagues of the of the people impacted are also a part of this circle of impact. And then the first responders are also a part of the circle of impact and then the broader circle will be the whole society and the community itself. So it's important to keep all of these actors and stakeholders in mind when we when we speak about commemoration and commemoration because they all need to be included in in a way or another. So what we saw and try to analyze in our paper that that was published a few years ago was around the different functions of the first memorial event of commemoration. So, of course, the main ones are around recognition and remembering. It's important that the and we saw it with the presentation of past just before that it's important that we recognize those affected by the terrorist attack, the consequences they faced, but it's also important to remember what happened and show that the event and the victims are remembered. We saw that the commemoration can also be an integral part of the healing process for victims, their relative the families, and really anyone affected by the terrorist attack. And we come back to the circles of impact here. The memorial event can also be very important to for victims to to to meet other victims to be together to to meet new people to meet maybe first responders that had helped them during or after the attack. And really some some of this commemoration event can really become a unique opportunity to meet other victims, ask them questions, thank some people and really come together and have this also more private environment for the victims, the families and the survivors. And this commemoration event memorials can also be seen as a political statement of defiance against those who carried out the attacks to show that they have attacked attacked attacked the values of the nation and and how the the community and the nation as a whole respond to this and support remember the victims and the survivors. More concretely on the on on how we think what what we think are the key principles in organizing a memorial event. The first and foremost principle and that was raised by Anna as well in her presentation and in the paper is really to have the victims at the heart of a memorial event. Not only any, any, any event or anything happening without the, without the victims and the survivors being at the center. So this means that their wishes and it's to be taken into account there needs to be a genuine consultation and participation by victim. And on the day of the events but fall for the whole organization and thinking around the organization of this event. This can be a challenge because the first of the identification of victims at some scene of attacks, when it's an open, open scene, people might flee, they, they are not registered as official victims. So that can be one of the challenge to be able to contact everyone for the organization. But this is where victims association come into account and they are, they should be involved in the process of discussion involved really early on to participate to, to the thinking and the, the organization of the event and really have this ownership of the event as well. So in this in mind, good planning and collaboration between different actors is really important so it just a really practical example but you need to ensure that invitations are sent in, in good time, well in advance, you need to make sure that everyone can attend the event. So that foreign victims shouldn't be forgotten. In many of the recent attacks in Europe we've seen that there were many foreign victims people that are on on holidays or on a business traveled for example. And then not living in the in the country where the memorial event would take place. So they need to, to be informed about the event. And they also, the government also needs to take up his role and cover the cost of travel and ensure that everyone is aware of what is happening and when. Maybe just on the, the program and the content we what we saw as the important elements to keep in mind when organizing such event is again the victim at the center. So it means that there should be enough space for victims to express themselves victims and survivors their families, the victim association, the politicians, because they will be there. They shouldn't take this event as a as a political rally for them. This is about the victims, the survivors, and, and not about politics. So it's important also to think about if it's, if it's an event organized with places to sit. It's important to see to think where where should all these people sit. And you don't want the politicians and the VIPs to be seated on the first row, and the victim to be seated at the back. There should be seats that are reserved for victim survivors and family. Different rituals. We saw in the image of of basements as well. About the can there can be music there can be poetry that is said. Maybe some poems read flowers laying down candle lighting candles showing photograph or saying out like the names calling out the names of the victims. I'm just looking at the time. Maybe one really important point that is also important to raise is about the presence of support before for the victims, the families, the survivor before, during and after the event. So this means that prior to prior to the events during the preparation phase victims and survivors family needs to understand the have understand the expectation of the event. They, they need to be able to meet with support workers and understand the potential emotional impact that these event can have. During the event, it means that there should also be professional support visible and approachable during the during the event. Also maybe think of a more private location where where people can can meet and speak to each other have this peer support as well. And then after the event to have the availability of psychosocial workers psychologist able to respond to the specific needs of the victims their relative and the family. And I think on this one additional important point and then I'll stop here is around the media. Bass in his presentation mentioned that this location in the in the forex one in Brussels is is more or less unknown private only for the victims in some other commemoration or memorial places. And more often at the first anniversary of the event, the media will be there and there'll be media coverage. So on one hand, you want the media to cover this kind of events because you want the community the whole society to know about this event. But at the same time you need to ensure that the media is is briefed that they they should be aware of what they can cover who they can take in pictures. What can they with whom they can speak with whom they can't speak and the victims and the families the survivors also needs to be aware of the presence of the media. And if they do not speak if they do not wish to to speak with them there it should also be quite clear some clear instructions as well. So, I'm happy to answer any questions or discuss any any other points. Thank you. Thank you Leah. Thank you so much for your. You hear me well. Sure. Thank you for your interesting presentation. Sure, we are going to get back deeper into into the topics that you have just presented. But right now we are going to give the floor to to Dr Anna Milosevic. Yeah. Thank you David and thanks to Leah and to us for their presentations. Discussing this part of the event is actually just, I want to zoom in on what I mentioned in the first part, which is actually memorial needs, what are memorial needs. Yeah, has made a really great excellent job when I say like in introducing us to what are the broader needs of the victims and the ways they can relate to memorialization. And what I did just recently for the European Commission within the radicalization awareness network. I engaged in a series of consultations with victims and victims associations to go a bit further, more in depth into understanding what are the memorial needs. So what are the needs of the victims in relation to memorialization. I came up with six points, six, six broad needs that I identified that I wish to discuss with you in this part of the session. So the first need is actually the need to make sense of their experiences. So this is something that the victims and victims associations have voiced all across the European Union. They were actually saying that every victims experience and the personal path to recovery is completely different, the way also they deal with the consequences of trauma. And memorialization actually has this kind of dual kind of potential, it has potential also to support the personal healing and delivery the trauma, but also sometimes can set up the victims back in their process. To healing and usually the organization of the first commemoration the first commemorative event after tragedy, it can have this kind of potential of setting back the victims in their path to recovery because for most of the victims this is the first time they're actually going back to the place of crime the place of their own suffering. And this need also to make sense of their experiences. It's, it can also be seen in the ways that the victims narrate their own stories. For instance, many of the victims write books, write memoirs that they are using the written word actually to narrate their experiences and have this kind of transformative effect making sense of what happened to them and making it also public for the other people to understand what are the real consequences of these cultures of violence, what are the real consequences of terrorism. It's unfortunate the Philip Vance de Kiste is not here today and I say hi to him like if he's watching us. But he said something very, very important during this consultation he said that what actually for the victims means not to be forgotten. And he said like not forgotten means to be seen, which means the victims are getting recognition for the experience and such recognition that it stores a sense of self. So this leads me to the second need that I identified what victims need in terms of memorization. They also use memorization as a way of getting empathy. And this kind of empathy they wish to receive, they want to receive is something also that Leah mentioned earlier, is this safe space they have before, during and after commemoration for instance. I have been working since 2017 on the organization of the EU commemoration for the victims of terrorism, and creating these kind of safe places for victims to bond and exchange their experiences has been something really, really important for the, for our working community to organize this commemoration, because we have seen that over time, victims actually prefer that to have the kind of safe, safe place where they can interact with other victims and when they can change exchange their own experiences building this kind of meaningful connections with other people with other victims from other countries from other terrorist attacks it's really, really important for the victims. The third need that I identified is actually the need that some of the victims have the need to testify to be seen and to be heard. This particular reflects in the use of testimonies, because some of the victims, some of the victims organizations they know this well that the victims, they want to take charge of the process of memorization, and they want the experiences to be shared with the broader public, not only among the community that is bound by victimhood, they also wanted society, here's the story they want to be seen and they want to be heard. So sometimes these kind of testimonies, they are used in, let's say state led efforts or so European led efforts at preventing and countering violent extremism. So for instance, in certain commemorations, we see that victims want to testify about what had happened to them, and they want to share their personal story as a sign of positive resilience as a sign of healing. For instance, last year in the EU commemoration of the victims of terrorism, there was one victim from Flanders, from Belgium, who was telling her personal story about losing her son during the Brussels attacks. And this kind of testimony had really had these strong elements of sending example of this kind of positive resilience and example actually can be also supportive of prevention of future cultures of violence. The third, let's say need that the victims have in relation to memorization is the need to be respected. And this need to be respected actually translates in a number of ways. And I'm just going to use the example that Bas had with his memorial, which is by the way perceived by the victims as an important place as an important therapeutic outlet and always used as a positive example of how memorials should be. The victims can use this kind of space in particular way that is beneficial for them as Bas said. So what actually means the need to be respected. I'm going to bring another example that is contrary to the Bas positive example of memorization practices. This example is actually the official memorial that is made in memory of the victims of the Brussels attacks that is made in the European European Court, and practically the experience that the victims and victims Association have that monument is not as positive as the mass made, because they feel completely eliminated from the process of making the monument they were not involved in the in the consultations about the aesthetics of the memorial about the location of the memorial. So they cannot identify with such memorial so in a certain way that kind of memorial was rejected by the victims by the survivors by the family members. And practically in terms of uses of those places of memory of that memorial. I think that like we cannot talk about actual use of the memorial. So for some of the victims that I interviewed in this process that memorial is actually an insult. It is perceived as an insult because the victims are not included in that kind of process. But this need to be respected is also manifesting in different kind of ways. For instance, now in Manchester and I see that also researchers from Manchester online in Manchester there was another vegetal monument that has been just unveiled in December and official commemoration should be now between January of February if I'm not mistaken the official unveiling before the final the final commemorative day. So for instance in Manchester what happened they were like immediately in the first two weeks of the existence of this vegetal memorial. There were a number of attempts at vandalizing memorial. So when I interviewed the victims across Europe and I asked them, give me a practical example of how your need to be respected is actually manifested. They said that disrespect and tainting of their personal experiences and tragedies is shown with poor maintenance of the memorials misuse of memorials for instance you have memorials that have been used as stretching a bench for runners. Vandalization of public memorials, stealing of memorabilia, that is something that has also been identified as a disrespectful behavior at the places of monuments and memorials. But above all, it is the lack of inclusion that is actually going against their need to be respected. I'm going to go a bit faster and I'm going to go to the last two points what are other needs of the victims. The one is a need also to maintain the ownership of experiences and this is also something that I have mentioned the policy brief, and Lea has been talking about it and so buses mentioned the role that this consultation process has. And this also reflects not only memorials and monuments it also reflects in the way that the victims and survivors are included in the all of the year memorialization efforts. So, they have to be victims and survivors they need to be interlocutors of this process and not simply recipients of state led efforts. So, this actually means that when there is a commemoration as well so graphically quite illustrated is that, for instance, we see one person representative of the state giving a speech and victims silently sitting and listening to the speech without their own actual intervention in commemoration. This is also something that is seen as the lack of having that kind of ownership of experiences and narratives that are projected on to a memorization. Finally, I think I will just mention the last need that I identified and I think I'm going to stop there, and maybe we can take some of the questions. There is the need to preserve and honor the memory. So this is one of the basic needs that the victims have so this in the scholar literature and also in practice, often is referred as symbolic recognition. The symbolic recognition on of one zone experiences in harm suffered. It is central for the victims understanding of a realization process, but it's not the only need that the victims have as I mentioned mentioned so far. So this kind of public acknowledgement is fundamental for the victims to feel that they are again part of the society. This is also something that I wish that we had Philip today to discuss with us, because it is quite interesting to see that how the victims organizations actually are trying to get that kind of symbolic recognition, not only around celebrations and anniversaries but also during the whole year because a number of memorial initiatives are organized throughout the year. We the help or support the victims organizations or victims and survivors were also not part of any particular association. It's interesting to see how these memorial initiatives work together, and also to see that there are different kind of ways in which victims can get that public recognition and support. One final note, I just want to come back to what has been said saying about the role of media, because I think that the role of media is very very important in addressing all these memorial needs of the victims, because media still have to find a different kind of approach to talking and narrating the experiences of the victims, because what victims actually believe is that the media should send this kind of a positive image of the victims. This kind of resilient image of the victims and not only using their trauma to gain more clicks in the news, but this is something we can maybe discuss further on. So I'll stop here, David, and I would be interested to see if there are any questions so far before Jody join us. Okay, thank you all for your interventions. Sure, I have some questions marked. We will start with with Bas Med since he will be leading as soon so people is interested in getting deeper into one point that you already marked, which is this relationship between the place with between this monument between this connection that you make, and then the citizenship around so you marked also that the victims specifically pointed that we want a place for us, which is quite a strong sentence, but you have also show us good examples on how this space has a good connection with with with people around it so we would like to know more about this. Have there been any, any difficulties, have you had any cases of vandalism maybe as Anna just told or could you go deeper into this thanks. Also, there was indeed an interesting question to have something that is a bit secret, but at the same time it cannot be secret, it needs to be public. So, so, for example, for the commemoration at the demand of the victims, there was no political speeches. There was no press invited it was only for the victims and their families and that I thought was quite special that the commemoration itself on the 21st of March, no press, no, no speeches only a cellist playing in the middle of the circle, and the victims and their families, invited to go and lay down a wide rose on the, the, the, the bench. So so and then only the day after the press was allowed to, to speak about it so that I thought was was very much in respect to the wishes of the victims. How we designed it is of course we needed full accessibility for elderly people but also for wheelchair so so we had to find a place that that is accessible by public pathways, but we placed it not too close to a big road, not too close to a parking place, so the fact that you have to walk at least 10 minutes from either the bus station, the tram station or the parking place to arrive there, it brings you in this mood of going to a bit more sacred place and I thought that was the way we dealt with it, making something that's not that easy to visit but if you want to visit of course you can, you can perfectly get there but you cannot just park your car next to it. That for me was was very important. And then the the since it has been received quite well people have been looking for it. So we have added one or two little signposts but very small like a very very subtle. So your and it is on Google so if you want to look for it and you can find it which of course is good but so it has been this kind of equilibrium between something that you can find if you look for it, but that keeps it's kind of intimacy. That's what I would call it so you can go there on your own, and spend the moment there. So, yeah, so, but again, and I cannot stress that enough it is really came about as the result of the discussions we had with the victim groups that really the to find this equilibrium between something that's made for them that can be visited by other people that keeps this kind of a privacy intimacy and, and we were worried about vandalism because it isn't a forest that's accessible 24 hours per day. But so far and we're now 25 years later. Luckily, everybody has respected the place. That's best for your for your answer. And of course, we would like to thank you for for being here with us and for for sharing your expertise as a landscape actor, specializing in monuments or memorials. Thank you on behalf of the Europe and behalf of the whole team of this project. Thank you so much and thank you so much for organizing this I think it's really important to have this discussion going on to make this new type of memorials because people are in need of them so I was very happy to contribute. Thank you. Bye bye. Oh, I think there's a question from the audience here written at the chat. Are you able to read it Leah or do you want me to read it for you because it's a question for me. Oh, sorry, I was muted. I was saying that I can't see the question. Then I will read it for you. It says, do governments, local, regional or national from places that were targeted by terrorist attacks approach your organization to proceed with memorization properly. So I think the question is more related with how they approach to you. And if they approach in a proper manner. Thanks for the question. I'm actually not aware of any of governments that have approached us in this sense, not specifically on on memorials and on that topic but definitely now with the, the this EU project that I was mentioning the EU CVT. We have been in contact with national local government in all 2026 without Denmark EU member states and different discussion have been going on on on a range of topics. Memorials and commemoration was part of the this EU handbook that we have also produced. We can find all the information there. But I think that if if they would come to us, one of the first thing that we would do is put them in contact with our national members that are really working on the ground and that are in contact with the victims. That's, that's our main priority I would say. Okay, thanks, Leah. I think we have another question for you coming from the audience. Let me check it. Yeah, it has to be with with your role as a victim association. Let's say that you can find sometimes in the middle of this would say struggle in between what what is the victim needs and what is a strategy of the public policies. So how is to be as a, you know, in the middle of this type of struggle in the process of memorization. I know that you are of course in the site of victims, but how is to manage this relationship. So as victims support Europe we, we are seen and I hope as as more as this neutral organization. We are seen as the experts at the European level on on victims right victim needs. We developed, we developed recommendation policies paid policy papers, etc. We do not work directly with victims. This is quite also important to to mention so we, we do so through our member organization that will provide direct support to victims, and we work with them on a daily basis. We have some also direct contact with with some victims and survivor, Philip who was supposed to be here today is one of our close partners as well the Europe is part of victim support Europe. But in the document that we produced we mentioned this also balance that needs to be fine found between the needs of the victims and the the the political needs as well because the government in a sense still needs to be the leader of this organization of organizing these events. Also in terms of funding, for example, I think that's quite an important element also to mention that it shouldn't be on the shoulders of the victim association or the survivors themselves to find any of these that's that's on the shoulders of the victims of the government sorry. That's where we would also come in to remind this kind of important elements. Okay, thanks Leah. I've also a question for Dr Milosevic right now. Since you have been working in this project in many cases and you have the capacity of comparison. This is related with, of course, within your perspective, which is subjective but as a social scientist. And what do you think is the place where these victims needs have been more respectfully approach, since, of course, you have already commented that some of them in some cases have even felt insulted in some of the examples I don't want you to put in a problematic position but could you get deeper into this please. Yeah, well, it is really ungrateful to compare experiences that victims and survivors have because I cannot put myself in their own position and I'm not certainly somebody who is representative of Dave voice I am just a researcher. But what can I say, for instance, is the something about maybe the experiences of victims association across Europe because I have been working with victims associations from whole of the European Union and also victims of not so recent terrorist attacks. I have been working with victims associations in Italy that have suffered terrorist attacks in the 70s and 60s even in the 80s. So, what actually is a successful example. Maybe successful example is the one in, in Norway, in relation to the Oslo attacks, because on 22nd of July. Actually the first terrorist attack happened in front of the governmental building and then subsequently in Toya so there was a car bomb explosion in Toya. So at the place of that particular terror site attack. And now today there is a memorial and also nearby very nearby. There is a small museum. Well, it is not that small anymore it is like becoming bigger and they have more space now. That kind of kind of approach I think state led approach is very positive one, because on the one hand side of course you have a memorial that is made on the site of the tragedy and that memorial is visited quite a lot by just ordinary citizens also tourists, because it is in this kind of very open public space and people daily interact with this memorial. For instance, when I was doing field work there and I was taking pictures that are some of them are also in the online exhibition that we have. I could notice that it may be half an hour, maybe 50 people pass by that monument and they just did not glance the monument they stopped there, they were taking pictures they were reading the names of the victims. And I think this is also showing that the way that this terrorist attack, not only resonated with the society with the population. But also, it is a positive example of how the victims are remembered because victims and victims association, they often voice this need to be respected, also in terms of seeing the names of the people who have died on a monument. And this has been a major issue in a number of memorials, for instance in Barcelona, you have just a monument that is in the pavement. We're in Rambla where the track was driven and the people and the people got killed, but there are no names of the victims and Brussels memorials also official memorial, you don't see the names of the victims. In Oslo, that is different, in Utoya it is also different, also the private memorial that was made by the victims and survivors, their family members, also bears names. So for those who are left behind, it is quite important to have the names of their loved ones on a monument. So this is a positive example and a positive example is as well this, how to say museum or info point, let's say it's not even the info point, it's a place for discussion about what are the meanings of the 22nd July for the Norwegian society. So 10 years have been gone since the terrorist attacks in Norway, and this kind of space that acts like a memorial space, but it also acts as educational center is quite important for this kind of negotiation of narratives, experiences, meanings that this attack had in the past, and what kind of meanings it will have for the future so I would say that this is definitely a positive example. But if you, for instance, speak to victims association in France, they will say that the national having a national day, French National Day for the victims of terrorism has been a game changer. It has been something very, very important because when this day was elevated to the status of a national holiday. So everything stops nothing, nothing is open on that day it just a day for commemoration of the victims of past terrorist attacks, all sorts of terrorist attacks. So there is this sense of getting recognition that is more than just symbolic recognition for the victims and victims associations, because every little city, every school, everybody has the opportunity to use remembrance in order to raise awareness on the victims of terrorism that day. So for some victims association, for instance, that day is quite important because they get to send the victims willing to speak, for instance, because not every victims willing to speak. They get to send these victims to the schools to give testimonies about their own personal experiences. They also relate these kind of initiatives, memorial initiatives in service of the prevention of radicalization, especially in working in prisons, etc, etc. So if you ask French victims associations, they will tell you that this day, having this day national day for the victims of terrorism is quite, quite important. And this is not the case in all the countries that have suffered terrorist attacks. The recent terrorist attacks over the last 10 years, because also if you look at the EU level where we have the European Day of Remembrance for the victims of terrorism, you can see that only a handful of countries actually honors directly that day and participates in commemoration. Because what is really the case with the European commemoration of the victims of terrorism but also other kind of commemorative events that the European Union organizes. It is made in the name of everybody, all 28 member states, but is effectively used only by the states who have the shared experiences. So what this means that the EU Remembrance Day was initially made in memory of the victims of the Madrid attacks in 2004, and then it started to have this kind of European dimension only when other countries' separate terrorist attacks, namely France, but then later on also Germany and other countries. So it is this kind of, you know, competition between two memory frames that is also quite, quite important because on the one hand side you have the European Day of Remembrance, on the other hand side you have the national day, like in French case. This kind of first French National Day for the Remembrance of Victims of Terrorism is actually on the same date as the European, but the national has primacy over European although the European came first. And then there is the third completely neglected level that I hope to explore in the future, which is the local level. So what actually happens in the local level with the neighborhoods that were directly affected by terrorism, they also can bring these kind of positive examples of how memorialization should be used because the neighborhoods where the terrorist attacks happen are also victims of terrorism. So some of these kind of local initiatives have been completely rejected or neglected by the media, by the state, but also sometimes by the victims' associations. So there is a lot of discussion ongoing on what could be possibly, you know, the good way to actually connect all these three levels of how memorialization should work. Okay, thanks, Anna, for your answer on the question. There is also another question coming from the audience. I don't know if you are able to read it, Dana, or do you want me to read it for you because it's a question for you? Yeah, I see. Regarding the spontaneous memorials, am I aware of examples that have been properly kept and archived after their removal from the public space? Yes. So in relation to these ad hoc memorials that are made in immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks, well, a number of researchers have documented the process of how these memorials have been organized, where the main actors in creating and maintaining these memorials, but also about how memorabilia, you know, the objects that are left in these kind of memorials, how this memorabilia was collected and documented and archived and then presented as well later on. So what is the use of this memorabilia later on? What is the afterlife of, let's say, memorabilia? So whether they were properly kept spontaneous memorials? Well, I would not know how to say whether they were maintained. Yes, there were, of course, security concerns at the places of spontaneous memorials because you have to think that this happens in the immediate aftermath. So there is still the pursuit or the perpetrators, there is security alert going on. So of course there are security concerns and the police and the law enforcement is usually involved in this public mass gathering, which is also a spontaneous memorialization. There are also a number of other practical issues because these memorials often are fire hazard. So there is, you know, like the daily, I think, maintenance of these memorials in most of the cases. And also the collection of memorabilia that are left in these kind of memorials, it's also a gradual process. And sometimes it is a process that is triggered by researchers themselves, such as for instance, in the case of the Paris attacks, one of my colleagues who is an expert in sociology of terrorism, he contacted the actually the authorities and suggested that like collecting some of these memorabilia might be might be interesting. The same thing happened actually in Brussels. Because when the attacks happened and people started gathering at the place of the spontaneous memorial. Some of the researchers also discussing we were discussing among ourselves whether it would be a good idea to have archives to go there and collect memorabilia but the archives are already thinking about it. Actually, when I interviewed the director of the Brussels archives, he told me that they wanted to do something but they didn't have the know how. So they were not ever confronted with this kind of situation of collecting memorabilia from a public space in remember some such a huge, huge event. So what they were doing they were going to Google and they were typing how to collect memorabilia from a spontaneous memorial. And then they were also going and contacting the other archives in other countries that had similar experience as just for instance the Paris archives, and exchanging this kind of informal know how. So there are many cases when these memorabilia are collected from spontaneous memorials, also in Manchester together archive. They have been the whole process has been very well documented on how we can go around these spontaneous memorials how can we use memorabilia and what is the afterlife of this, this objects. Okay, thanks Anna. I think there will be also interesting to hear Leah's opinion on this matter of spontaneous memorials. Yes, thank you. I joined what Anna just said I just wanted to mention what happened in Nice in the south of France at the promenade des Anglais on 14 July 2016, where did this truck run into the crowd. So, at that, on this location, many people different families but also the whole city came and put down flowers messages, things that we can see at, at all the location where there is a terrorist attack. The city of Nice in February so so only six months after the attack decided to collect it decided to collect the objects in boxes so they were everything was clean archived photographs as well and were kept in our kept in the city archive. But the victims of the association promenade des Anglais were not really happy about that. They thought it was too soon. And the process wasn't really victim centric. The same happened in in Manchester in for when there was the bombing in in May 2017. And they're the mayor of Manchester expresses conviction that the, the, the objects, the flowers, the different elements put down there should be left there as soon as long as as the families and the survivors wishes to. So they, they took more time to remove the objects. And, and then things were also kept in, in archive, but it's, I think it's also pose the questions to, to the policymakers and to the victim association when is a good time to to remove these objects. There is not a good time. And, and there needs to be this consultation process and discussion with the different actors involved. We can't find a perfect solution. It's difficult to make everyone's wishes happen. So there needs to be a consultative process in this sense. Okay, thanks Leah. We have one of the persons within the event cost us that wanted to pose a question cost us. Yes. Thank you, David and hi hi Anna. Thank you for the interesting event. Thank you very much for organizing that. So my question is to Anna and I think it's a truly as well. And I was struck by your the title of your present of your own exhibition when times stood still. Now was it really interested in this kind of notion of time and how, how time passes for for victims and victims groups. You mentioned in your recommendations that have response needs to be time sensitive. I'm just wondering if you can expand a little bit more on, on, on how exactly kind of time you know when it comes to memorial needs, how do we think about time. And you know what do we think, you know, five years on 10 years 15 20 years to 15 years on. How do we receive and kind of design policies or practices that respond to the changes of the needs of the victims and the memorial needs of victims over a longer period of time rather than on the first few years. Thank you. Yeah. Well, thank you, Costas for the question. Well, time is very important like in relation to what are the general needs of the victims and then in particular the memorial needs of the victims. So if we think broadly in terms of like time and needs of the victims. Of course we have the immediate aftermath of the terrorist event. The needs of the victims are physical emotional support psychological support access to medical services the sense of security, etc, etc. We think about the long term consequences of terrorist attacks and the needs of the victims. It is then when the memorial needs come into play, because in the immediate aftermath of the events victims have different kind of needs. They do not have particular memorial needs because it is a lived experience it is happening now it is part of the their own, they live in that that that timeline. So as the time goes by, and the memorial needs come to play, we have to be aware that memorial needs of the victims, they can shift, and they can evolve. And it's not a straight straight line process it goes back and forth back and forth they can shift and people are just also can be set back in their path to recovery which is something that I also mentioned. And not every victim has the same memorial needs. For instance, we have talked a lot today like the whole morning actually we have talked about memorial needs of the victims, the right to have memory right to be recognized right to be seen to be cured to be to receive empathy all sorts of needs that relate to the memorialization process, but there is also one me that is particularly maybe important for a category of victims that we haven't discussed today and that is the needs to have anonymity. So I kind of need to not be part of the memorialization efforts or not to be seen not to be heard to be invisible in this process this is also an important right and some of the victims have exercised that kind of right for instance, the I have mentioned the memorial that is made in memory of the toy attacks actually at the hospital tax in the downtown Oslo. For instance, when you go to the area that is reserved to the victims of the attacks you will see that there are no pictures of two victims, they are their names but their pictures are not. And since the victims families have been consulted in this process, the victims families clearly said that they do not want images of their loved ones to be exposed in a museum. Of course there is also this consideration that you know, giving the victims and survivors and the family members the right to opt out, not to be present, not to be visible in the whole process. I think this is also one of the memorial needs that maybe deserves a bit more attention that is usually getting because we often assume that the victims want to be part of the memorialization process, but sometimes the victims prefer oblivion over memory and this is also something that memory actors, organizers of the commemoration or memorials have to take seriously into account. This may also shift over time, this may also evolve over time. Some of the victims might also feel that they do not want their name or their image be present in the media, especially if for instance there is the woman, the Pakistani woman who was one of the survivors of the Brussels attacks. She has voiced concerns that you know her image with the bloody face and you know like her clothes torn after the attacks was all over the media and this is the image that she prefers not to be in the media in that. So, I don't know if this answers your question so far, but happy to discuss it further. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Kostas for the question, thank you Anna for the answer. There was another question coming from the audience that Leah already have already interacted with in the chat but Leah since we have viewers outside this platform that are on YouTube, could you please tell us about it. Yeah, so the question was about if Victim Support Europe is in touch with our victim organization from other region or part of the world. So the answer is yes. I wrote down in the chat, we have more than, so we have around 65 member organization in more than 30 countries. So we cover mostly the Council of Europe countries, but we also have members in other part of the world such as in in the USA. In the Netherlands, in Israel. And we are a few years ago we helped the creation of our sister organization Victim Support Asia, which also gathers different members in that region of the world. And a part of our member organization we are also working really closely with external partners so universities, such as the Leuven University in Belgium but also in other countries. And we are in contact as well with the FBI in the US, the different victims commissioner in different countries, on boots person as well. So we have a lot of contacts in a lot of different countries. Thank you, Leah. There's another question I'm picking up from the audience for Anna in this case. Since you are an expert in public memory policies in the European context. Asking us if there is any kind of a specific recommendations from a European sites centrally organized or how is the relationship between the European Commission and the state members in in what regards this memorization processes of terrorist attacks. Well, yeah, of course there is. In the European level. As I already mentioned, there was this European Parliament resolution, immediately in reaction to the terrorist attacks that happened in Madrid in Spain. So this kind of resolution gave, let's say, the legal starting point for introducing this kind of the whole European day remembers for the victims of terrorism. So it has been many, many years that the commemoration is organized on European level and the role that the European Parliament had was initially the one of, you know, giving this kind of initial impulse and then European Parliament is not that important now and it's not organized in this kind of a day because this responsibility has shifted entirely to European Commission heads of states of members of the European Union, who decide on the meanings and the purposes that are assigned to memorization every year and this is enabled also that the commission does with victims organizations and may say also successfully because over the time, there has been this effort to include victims more in the consultation process. And the victims are organizations have been quite voiceful in expressing their own expectations when it comes to memorization of terrorist attacks on European level. So it has served as an important platform for them to voice their needs. And actually, it has been used not only as a symbolic recognition but also as an attempt to exercise another set of rights that they lacked on transnational European level because if you remember, looking back from a legal perspective the victims rights on European level and Leah maybe can say more about it. They lack this kind of holistic approach that has been building over time. So the victims were also victims association using this kind of symbolic recognition as a way to amplify their own voices and exercise they won't write demand they won't use this kind of transnational European approach to victim victims rights. So of course there is this kind of European dimension of remembrance. But as I said, before it remains solely European by its name, because it is not exercised or practice or commemorated in all member states equally just the member states that had this kind of experience but if you think even other countries in Europe that have had experience with terrorism even in the 70s and 80s, they are not really that active in organizing the EU day or promoting the EU day of romance, which is, I think, quite unfortunate. Okay, thanks Anna for this intervention as well. We have to say that we have already with us Mr. Giorgi Ravasa, councilman from the city council of Barcelona, and I will briefly introduce him he's the councilman in charge of democratic memory in the city council of Barcelona. And he's going to talk us about more or less how this process of memorization of the terrorist attack in the Ramblas in 2017 was taken. And of course it's quite an interesting approach since we have already spoke from the victim side from the research side so we have the side of the public policies on it so. Jordi, thank you for joining us. The floor is yours. Okay, thank you. Perfect. Okay. So the first thank you for this invitation. And I'll go direct to what I want to tell you. On August 17, 2017, I was a technical advisor of Ciutadeira, that's the district one that the terrorist attack took place. I was walking on Ramblas 10 minutes before the attack. And considering that this week where it took place, I was there right directly involved in the whole municipal process of monitoring the attack. And I was to part of the municipal team who received psychological care as a result of the impact. And this is important to talk about because we don't we often don't talk about that and all the people who were involved in the, in the, in all the works for that attack. So we received to psychological care for months. Ramblas is the, it's the place where more common in the city of Barcelona, it's very, it's a very touristic place, but it's also a place very loved by the people of Barcelona. In June of 1987, after the terrorist attack on Ipercor, a big terrorist attack on Ipercor mall, a large part of the citizenship expressed their grief by spontaneously using the pavement of the Ramblas around the Ramblas at the Mosaic of Joan Miró for his name or various places of solidarity and through the events took place in Sant Andreu far from Ramblas. Fifty years later, citizens use the same place transformed into a spontaneous and ephemeral community memorial that people write in Ramblas use the trees bring a lot of objects, different objects to the Ramblas to the Ramblas and to a lot of candles. So the municipal quality was to maintain all that the spontaneous and the spontaneity of the people and what we do was make an archaeological work. So we take Ramblas as an archaeological place and we with an archaeological method, we make a plan of all the Ramblas and we put into that plan everything that was put by citizens in Ramblas candles, toys, phrases, etc. There were some that were objects and other that were right in the pavement. I'm not afraid was the cry that came spontaneously from people at August 26 demonstrations. We work on this motto with victims and relatives and we realize it did not actually respond to our emotional situation. We really were afraid so that I'm not afraid was not a good motto we think. We search into the messages found in the spontaneous memorials and we finally choose Barcelona city of peace. What we made was with the museum, with the archive of the city, we make a theological work. We take all the memorials and we decide one that involves all the emotional situation. All the documents left on Ramblas during the days following the attack have been carefully gathered, listed, listed and archived. The municipal archive of Barcelona participated together with other municipal services and technicians in the recovery of the elements, objects and documents that citizens decide on Ramblas as a sign of condolence. On Monday, August 28 in the evening, the attacks were the 17th, so in the 28th, the technicians of the archive gave it the written testimonies placed by citizens in memory of the victims. And at each offering points, more than 151, that the city history museum had previously identified and numbered as a corner district layout. Objects, writings and testimonies were protected in boxes, duly labeled and identified with the perspective collection point so as not to lose the context of each offering. The objects and documents were classified differently with in order to make the conservation possible. The chosen site to stop municipal intervention was the point located above the Joan Miro Mosaic in Blada Los where the largest offering were concentrated. Once emptied, all material from the rest of sites identified up to Canaleta spontaneous in the north, continued to be collected in an orderly manner and at the beginning of Ramblas a reminder point was kept together testimonies of citizens who have not yet been able to pay their respects. This site was also generally be collected in order to talk Ramblas back to the daily life. It was something that asked the relatives to we can maintain the condolence, but not forever. We need that the Ramblas return to have their life, the quotidian life, daily life. Among gathered documentation, letters, posters, photographs, postcards, cardboards, a wide variety of writing media, different languages and from people of all ages are found. So some of the samples are even personally addressed and sent. 22 boxes of documents of different formats were gathered in total, which have been provisionally deposited at the Contemporary Municipal Archive, where it is planned to start their kaival treatment of cleaning and conservation. So we clean it and we concept all the thousands of objects, documents, etc. We have a website where we can see all the objects, absolutely all the objects. There is a digital archive of the condolence and then there is to a condolence book. And for us it's important that all the people can go to that website, they can see all the messages. We have to say that there were two offensive and racism objects and messages and texts, and we also achieved all of them. And then we made work with the relatives of the victims to choose in all of the thousands of documents to choose a model to represent them too. And they decide, we all in common work decide Barcelona city of peace. And we also decide that the memorial don't have to be, the memorial must have to be a memorial who that hello their daily life in Ramblas. So the memorial don't have to be an object that make very visible the attack. So it has to be something visible, but we have to allow the walking for Ramblas. So we decide a little piece, a piece in different languages. And the motto is just Barcelona city of peace without the names of the deaths and only with that message Barcelona city of peace and you can walk over the the memorial because it's something that is put in the ground in the same level that. All the ground off of Ramblas. This is our, that's our memorial, and we make a little ceremony without the speeches, only with the music and with flowers. Every 17 of us. Okay, thank you, Jordi for for this interesting intervention on on the experience of the memorialization of terrorist attacks in Barcelona back in 2017. We really appreciate you being here. Before we leave, since we are already on time, since I see Anna quite focused on taking notes, she will probably post any comments to Jordi Ravassa before we leave, am I right? Yeah, absolutely. But I have questions always on everything. Please, please, please be short. It's a lunchtime I know I understand. Okay, so I have only maybe one question for Jordi like first of all thank you for taking the time to participate in today's discussion. We're glad to have you today here with us. And my question is actually more about this, this censorship that you mentioned about the racist messages. But also in cases of other terrorist attacks, when people leave messages in the immediate aftermath of the attacks. We see that there is grief, there is pain, there is this kind of a morning that is expressed through messages, prayers, peace. As I mentioned, but there are also these expressions of anger. As you said also quite racist in Brussels, for instance, people were writing with chalk messages on the buildings and saying things about immigrants about Muslims about Islam in general that were really full of anger and hatred and also calling kind of like a aggressive response to what were the terrorist attacks in Europe. So, can you tell us maybe something more about this censorship kind of process like in what ways. What was the your approach in creating this kind of documentation of what were the all emotions that were expressed and spontaneous memorial. Can we talk about censorship or can we talk about, can you tell us more about your experience with that kind of messages. Thanks. Thanks. The racist expressions were very few. The people, the citizens of Barcelona took the places and took the streets as an expression of condolence and also with absolutely community, communion with all communities. So, one of the things more interesting that were after the attack was how the Muslims, how the Christians, how the Protestants were all together. And the expressions in the street were expressions of community that is true that there were some text messages racist. So, we traded like objects, like objects that we have to achieve. And those objects are too in the municipal archives, but they are not in the website because in the website when there are attacks like that, we think that we don't have to achieve it in the website. There are in the archives, but they are not public because we have compromise of course with a diversity, a city that's open, a city where everywhere talk and think and have the relation that he wants. But those documents, those texts, those postcards, they are not in the website, but you can see them if you go to the municipal archive. But it were really very few because they were, I don't have the numbers now, but if we said that there are 20,000 documents and maybe there are more. We have all documented and like an archaeological site, you know. Thank you. Okay, thanks Jordi. Okay, well, so since we are quite already on time. I would like to ask maybe Anna or Leah if you have any final remarks before closing the session. I think just maybe one final word is, and we mentioned it already quite a lot, but is to listen to the victims, their families, the survivors and the victim association for us is the crucial point to remember. Thank you, Leah, very much. Well, if Anna has nothing else to add, then it's my job here to close the session. And we would like from the European Observatory to thank all the persons involved in this event, especially Anna Milosevic, as well for all the great job that she has done during all this two years project. Thank you, of course, Mr. Jordi Ravasa from attending, for attending the event and for having for sharing your, your experience in the, in the policies in Barcelona with us. And thank you Leah Mandra for being also here, sharing your expertise from the Victim's Association. And also to, to expand my thanks to the Open Society Foundations, which has been co-founder on this project and we have been getting their support during the whole process. So it's quite fair to say and we are really grateful. And that should be it. Thank you all for coming here. And yeah, personally speaking, it's been a pleasure to be here and to sharing knowledge with, with all of you.