- issues raised regarding the transition period, which would surely be resolved by the Secretariat. Nevertheless, these periodic reports would be an opportunity not only to share experiences but to build capacities with the idea of helping States better prepare their reports as a form of training. The delegation wondered whether this training would require International Assistance at the sub-regional level, which would be extremely important.
- 349. The delegation of Jordan thanked the Secretariat for the information regarding the periodic reports and their preparation. This new format and way of working would help States implement the Convention in a more effective way, both at the State and regional levels. It also welcomed moving from a national to a higher, regional level as this would lead to greater cooperation to help find new ways of strengthening the Convention. Moreover, States would benefit from mutual experiences at the regional level, which would have a positive impact on the quality of reporting, hence it welcomed this new method.
- 350. The delegation of Belgium urged meticulous drafting in the language of the Convention, as for instance, Article 29 did not contain the word ' national ' in reference to the periodic report, 7 which was also articulated in the plural form. The delegation remarked that a lot of attention would go into revising Form ICH-10 with the only exception being one element by the Russian Federation, a non-State Party of the Convention, that also had to report through Form ICH- 10. It therefore wondered whether it would be possible to change Operational Directive 168 to create a special form for that particular case, i.e. so as to not include it in Form ICH-10 where perhaps a number of points had to accommodate the special case of the Russian Federation, thus simplifying the form even further. It also wondered whether it was possible to decide on the order of the region today by drawing lots so as to clarify the language in Operational Directive 152, for example, on the order of rotation.
- 351. The Secretary apologized to Cuba regarding the language on the online reporting that came from an older version of the draft, when in fact the idea was to allow States Parties to report online when possible, but that States without sufficient online capacities could report by other means. With regard to the reports that were due, as mentioned by Lithuania, the Secretary explained that this was a consequence of the transition in that the Secretariat simply did not have the resources to treat incoming reports while at the same time developing the new system, not least because the new system involved elaborating the assessment guidelines and the twenty-six indicator guidelines for all eighty-three performance assessments, and developing the capacity-building material in order to roll it out in time for the first regional round. Perhaps a solution would be to accept the reports and to make them available online, but it would not be able to analyse them in the normal treatment of reports and then present them to Committee. Regarding the question by Belgium, on when the first region would be decided, the Secretary explained that this was the prerogative of the Committee and it was foreseen for its thirteenth session in Mauritius. Indeed, in the last session of the Committee there had been discussions about Electoral Groups I and II, but those issues required further discussion ahead of the session in Mauritius so that the Secretariat could prepare for it. With regard to the special case of the Russian Federation, the Secretary understood that the point was to avoid having to redo a new special form for one State that was not actually obliged to report on the implementation of the Convention in general, but on the status of elements initially inscribed on the Masterpieces programme and then automatically transferred to the Representative List. The Secretariat was thus trying to avoid duplicating work for one particular case, particularly as time was limited with a lot to accomplish. The aim was thus to move swiftly in order to implement the full cycle by 2023 and this extra work would only delay the process. The Secretary concurred with the understanding that the Convention referred to national reporting, as the Secretariat was not proposing regional reports. The intention of the new proposal was for States Parties to report on their own implementation of the Convention on a country-by-country basis but within a reporting cycle on a region-by-region basis.
- 352. The delegation of Austria fully welcomed the Secretariat's proposal of a new reporting