Focus On Command And Superior Responsibility This is the principle that commanders, both military and civilian, can be responsible for the crimes committed by their forces if they were aware of the crimes and failed to prevent them. These commanders tend to be “remote commanders”, which simply means that they are likely from a location that is a safe distance away from the frontlines. To hold remote commanders accountable, lawyers must prove the commander: • Had “effective command and control” over the people he or she commands; • “Knew or should have known” that his or her forces were committing crimes; and • “Failed to act” to stop the commission of those crimes. Your video footage can help prove this. Make a Plan Filming “What” happened often occurs because you find yourself in the wrong place at the right time. What you capture will likely show the crime and the hands-on perpetrator. However, if you are filming in hopes of proving that a remote perpetrator is actually responsible for the commission of the crime, this takes a different level of commitment, planning and thinking outside the box because it’s not instinctual. Develop a Collection Plan. Value Almost anything a commander says during a conflict can be useful in a later investigation and prosecution. So even though filming and/or collecting speeches, interviews, statements and public declarations may seem like a futile undertaking, it is worthwhile, even if it is not clear in the moment why what the commander is saying is significant to the case. Include Context In addition to capturing visual content such as the examples described in this section, be sure to capture details that provide context such as time, date and location of the video. 135 VIDEO AS EVIDENCE: PROVING RESPONSIBILITY V 1.0 FILMING to be high-level commanders who do not go into the field, but instead control their people