COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 6.11.2009 
COM(2009)618 final 
  
 
Annex to  
Proposal for a 
COUNCIL DECISION 
establishing the position to be adopted on beha lf of the Community concerning a mechanism for 
the review of implementation of the United Nations Convention against Corruption, to be 
adopted in the 3rd session of the Conference of  the State Parties to the United Nations 
Convention against Corruption (Doha / Qatar, 9 – 13 November 2009) 
  
ENGLISH VERSION ONLY
 
United Nations  CAC/COSP/WG.1/2008/7/Rev.2  
тш  
 Conference of the States Parties   Distr.: General 
to the United Nations  26 May 2009
 
Convention against Corruption   Original: English  
Draft in progress  
as at 02 September 2009  
Open-ended Intergovernmental Working Group 
on Review of the Implementation of the United 
Nations Convention against Corruption  
Vienna, 25 August-2 September 2009 
Item 2 of the provisional agenda* 
Consideration of the draft terms of reference of the 
mechanism for the review of  implementation of the 
United Nations Convention against Corruption  
Draft terms of reference of the  mechanism for the review of 
implementation of the United  Nations Convention against 
Corruption: rolling text** 
Working paper prepared by the Secretariat  
Contents  
Page 
I.   Definition [Introduction] 
II.    [Guiding] principles an d [characteristics] [purposes] .................................................................. ....... 3 
III. Relationship of the Review Mechanism with the Conference of th e States Parties ...........................  4 
IV. Review Pr ocess ................................................................................................................ ..................  5 
A. Goals ...................................................................................................................... ...................  5 
B. Conduct of the review ...................................................................................................... .........  5 
C. Outcome of the review process .............................................................................................. ... 9 
D. Follow-up procedures ....................................................................................................... .........  11 
 
 
 
 CAC/COSP/WG.1/2009/4.  
The present text reflects the progress achieved by the Open-ended Intergovernmental Working 
Group on Review of the Implementa tion of the United Nations Convention against Corruption at its 
meeting on 15-17 December 2008, in informal consultations held on 26 and 27 February 2009 and at 
its meeting on 11-13 May 2009.  
V.09-83809 (E)   080609   090609 
*0983809*  
CAC/COSPAVG. l/2008/7/Rev.2  
V.    Implementation Review Group ............................................................................................. .............  11 
VI.    Secretariat ............................................................................................................ ...............................         13 
VII.    Fundi ng ............................................................................................................... ................................         13 
2 
CAC/COSP/WG. 1/2008/7/Rev.2  
Preamble  
Pursuant to article 4, paragraph 1, of the United Nations Convention against 
Corruption1 which states that States parties sha ll carry out their obligations under the 
Convention in a manner consistent with the principles of sovereign equality and territorial 
integrity of States and non-intervention in the domestic affairs of other States, the 
Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption [is 
invited to endorse] [established] the following mechanism to review implementation of the 
Convention. 
I.   Definition [Introduction]  
Option 1 
1. [The Review Mechanism for the Implementation of the United Nations 
Convention against Corruption (hereinafter “the Mechanism”) shall be composed of 
the review process and the Implementation Review Group.] [The review process 
shall be guided by the principles contained in sections II and III and be carried out in 
accordance with the pr ovisions contained in sec tion IV. The composition and 
functions of the Implementation Review Group are set out in section V. ] 
Option 2 
1. The Review Mechanism for the Implementation of the United Nations Convention 
against Corruption (hereinafter “the Mech anism”) includes a review process that 
shall be guided by the principles contained in sections II and III and be carried out in 
accordance with the provisions containe d in section IV. The Mechanism also 
includes an Implementation Review Group as set out in section V. The Mechanism 
shall be supported by a secretariat as set out in section VI and be financed in 
accordance with section VII. 
II.   [Guiding] principles and [characteristics] [purposes]  
2.     The Mechanism shall: 
(a) Be transparent, efficient, non-in trusive, inclusive and impartial; 
(b) Not produce any form of ranking; 
(c) Provide opportunities to share go od practices and challenges; 
(d) Assist States parties in the effective implementation of the Convention; 
(e) Take into account a balanced geographical approach; 
(f) Be non-adversarial and non-punitive and shall promote universal adherence to 
the Convention; 
(g) Base its work on clear, established gu idelines for the compilation, production 
and dissemination of information, including addressing issues of 
 
1 United Nations, Treaty Series , vol. 2349, No. 42146.  
3 
CAC/COSP/WG. 1/2008/7/Rev.2  
confidentiality and the submission of the out come to the Conference, which is the 
competent body to take action on such outcome; 
(h) Identify, at the earliest stage possible, di fficulties encountered by States parties in 
the fulfilment of their obligations under the Convention and good practices adopted in 
efforts by States parties to implement the Convention; 
(i) Be of a technical nature and promote constructive collaboration, inter alia, in 
preventive measures, asset recovery and international cooperation; 
(j) Complement existing international and regional review mechanisms in order that 
the Conference may, as appropriate, co operate with those mechanisms and avoid 
duplication of effort. 
3. The Mechanism shall be an intergovernmental process. 
4. In conformity with article 4 of the Conven tion, the Mechanism shall not serve as an 
instrument for interfering in the domestic affairs of States parties but shall respect the 
principles of equality and sovereignty of Stat es parties, and the review process shall be 
conducted in a non-political and non-selective manner. 
5. The Mechanism shall promote the implementation of the Convention by States 
parties, as well as cooperation among States parties. 
Option 1 
6. The Mechanism shall [promote [transpa rency and] participation and] provide 
opportunities [[for [intergovernmental] experts2] [for the States parties involved] [for 
States parties and experts involved]] to meet and exchange views and ideas, [thus 
contributing to strengthening cooperation among States parties in preventing and 
fighting corruption.] 
Option 2 
6. The Mechanism shall promote the principles set out in paragraph 2 and shall 
provide opportunities to exchange views, ideas and best practices, thus contributing 
to strengthening cooperation among States parties in preventing and fighting 
corruption. 
7. The Mechanism shall take into account the levels of development of States parties, 
as well as diversities in judicial, legal, political, economic and social systems and 
differences in legal traditions. 
8. The review of implementation of the Convention is an ongoing and gradual process. 
Consequently, the Mechanism shall endeavour to adopt a progressive and comprehensive 
approach. 
III.   Relationship of the Revi ew Mechanism with the Conference 
of the States Parties  
9. The review of implementation of the Convention and the Mechanism shall be 
under the authority of the Conference in accordance with article 63 of the 
Convention. 
 
2 This concept may require further clarification.  
4 
CAC/COSP/WG. 1/2008/7/Rev.2  
10. The Conference shall be responsible for establishing policies and priorities 
related to the review process, [as we ll as processes for approval of reports 
emanating from the review process] [and be responsible for considering the [outputs 
of the review process] [review of implementation reports]]. [Following the 
completion of each review cycle,] the Conf erence will assess the performance of the 
Mechanism and its terms of reference. 
IV.   Review process  
A. Goals  
11. Consistent with UNCAC particularly article 63, the purpose of the review 
process shall be to assist States Parties in their implementation of UNCAC. In this 
regard, the review process shall inter alia: 
(a) To promote the purposes of UNCAC as set-out in its article 1; 
(b) To promote [and review] the implementation of the Convention including 
international cooperation by States parties; 
(b bis) To provide the CoSP with the info rmation on the measures taken by States 
Parties in implementing UNCAC and the difficulties encountered by them in doing so; 
(c) To help States parties to identify and substantiate specific needs for technical 
assistance and to promote and facilitate the provision of technical assistance; 
(d) To promote and facilitate international cooperation in the prevention of and the 
fight against corruption, including  in the area of asset recovery; 
(e) To identify successes and challenges of States parties in implementing and 
using the Convention; 
Or (e) To provide the CoSP with information on successes and challenges of States 
parties in implementing and using the Convention; 
(f) To promote and facilitate the exchange of information, practices and 
experiences gained in the impl ementation of the Convention. 
B. Conduct of the review  
5 
CAC/COSPAVG. l/2008/7/Rev.2  
12. The Mechanism shall be applicable to all States parties. It shall gradually cover the 
implementation of the entire Convention. [T he review mechanism shall be open to 
participation of signatory states on a voluntar y basis].[Signatory states can participate as a 
reviewed state in the review mechanism on a voluntary basis and shall bear the costs 
associated with such participation.] The phases and cycles of the review process, as well as 
the scope, thematic sequence and details of such review, shall be established by the 
Conference.3 The Conference shall also determine the duration of each review cycle and 
decide on the number of States parties that sh all participate in each year of the review 
cycle. 
13. The review of all States that are parties at the start of a review cycle should be 
completed before a new review cycle begi ns. In exceptional cases , the Conference may 
decide to launch a new review cycle before the completion of all reviews of the previous 
cycle. No State party shall undergo a review  twice in the same review cycle, without 
prejudice to the right of a State party to provide new information. 
13 bis: Insert a definition of review cycle : [The countries that are undergoing a review 
cycle will be divided over multiple years/ three years] (Or) [The length of the review cycle 
will be determined taking into account the number  of States Parties to be reviewed as well 
as the scope applicab le in the cycle.] 
14. The selection of States parties participating in the review process in a given year of a 
review cycle shall be carried out by the drawing of lots within regional groups of the 
United Nations at the beginning of each review  cycle. The readiness and ability of each 
State party to participate in the review proce ss in a given year shall be taken into account. 
A State party selected for revi ew in a given year may defer participation to the following 
year of the review cycle [onc e/twice] [in exceptional circumstances]. The number of States 
parties from each regional group participating in the review process in a given year shall 
be proportionate to the size of that regional group and the number of its members that are 
States parties to the Convention. 
15. Each State party shall provide to the secr etariat the information required by the 
Conference on its compliance w ith and implementation of the Convention, using the self-
assessment checklist developed by the secretar iat and endorsed by the Conference as an 
initial step for that purpose. States parties shall provide complete, up-to-date, accurate and 
timely responses. 
16. Assistance in the preparation of the responses to the checklist shall be provided by 
the secretariat to States parties requesting such assistance. 
17. Each State party shall appoint focal poin ts to coordinate that State party’s 
participation in its review. Each State party shall endeavour to appoint focal points who 
possess the required substantive expertise on the provisions of the Convention under 
review. 
 
3 Proposals related to these matters are contained in the note by the Secretariat on the draft elements for the 
terms of reference of a mechanism for reviewing the implementation of the United Nations Convention against 
Corruption (CAC/COSP/WG.1/2008/6, paras. 69-84). The s ecretariat believes that such matters may be more 
appropriately addressed in the reso lution by which the Conference will es tablish the Mechanism and adopt its 
terms of reference. Their inclusion in the terms of re ference was not considered appropriate because it would 
entail including a level of detail that would require  periodic revisions of the terms of reference.  
6 
CAC/COSPAVG. l/2008/7/Rev.2  
[(i): The country review]  
Option 1 
18. Each State party shall be reviewed by two other States parties. The review process 
shall actively involve the State Party under review. The composition of the review team 
shall be [subject to the consent of the St ate Party under review] / [determined through 
consultations with the State Party under review]. 
18 bis One of the two reviewing States parties shall if possible be from a legal system 
similar to that of the State party under review, and from the same [geographical] region as 
the State party under review. The selection of the reviewing States parties shall be carried 
out by the drawing of lots at the beginning of each cycle on the understanding that States 
parties shall not undertake mutual reviews. The State party under review may request, a 
maximum of two times, that the drawing of lots be repeated. 
18 ter A State party under review may defer serving as a reviewing State party in the same 
year. Mutatis mutandis the same shall apply for the reviewing State party. Within a review 
cycle each State party must have undergone its own review and performed a minimum of 
one and maximum of three reviews. 
18 quater: Each State Party shall appoint go vernmental experts for the purpose of the 
review process. [The Secretariat shall compile  and circulate a list of such governmental 
experts, which will include information on their expertise and qualifications.] [The 
Secretariat shall request Stat es Parties to submit to it the names and information on 
expertise and qualifications of such expert s. The Secretariat shall compile and make 
available on request the information received at  the beginning of each review cycle.] States 
parties shall endeavour to keep the list up-to-date. 
18 quinquies: The review team shall be composed of governmental experts from the 
reviewing States Parties, [shall actively involve] the reviewed State Party and shall be 
supported by the secretariat. 
Option 2 
18. The secretariat shall conduct the reviews. 
Option 1 
19. The review team shall carry out, in accordance with the uniform guidelines, a 
desk review of the self-assessment check list response of the State party under 
review. [Such desk review shall entail a [preliminary] analysis of the response 
focused on measures taken to implemen t the Convention, and successes in and 
challenges of such implementation.] 
Option 2 
19. The secretariat shall carry out a desk review of the checklist response of the 
State party under review. Such desk review  shall entail a [preliminary] analysis of 
the response focused on the identification of normative gaps, as well as technical 
assistance and capacity-building needs. 
Option 1 
7 
CAC/COSPAVG. l/2008/7/Rev.2  
20. In accordance with the guiding principl es and in conformity with the uniform 
guidelines, the review team, supported by the secretariat, may request the State 
Party under review to provide clarifications or additional information or address 
supplementary questions related to the review. The ensuing constructive dialogue 
may be carried out by, inter alia, way of  conference calls, video-conferences or 
email exchanges, as appropriate. 
Option 2 
20. In accordance with the guiding pr inciples, the Secretariat may, where 
necessary and appropriate, en ter into a constructive dialogue with the focal points 
of the State party under review, inter alia, by way of conference calls, 
videoconferences and e-mail exchanges, as  required, and request the State party 
under review to provide, in a timely manner, clarifications or additional 
information or address supplementar y questions related to the review. 
Option 1 
21. The schedule and requirements of each review shall be established 
by the secretariat in consultation with th e review team and the State Party under 
review and shall address all issues relevant to the review. 
Option 2 
21. The schedule for each review shall be  established by the secretariat in 
consultation with the focal points of the State party under review and shall allocate 
sufficient time and capacity to address all issues relevant to the review. Consistent 
with paragraph 12, reviews should ideally be designed to take no longer than six 
months. 
23. Reviews shall be conducted using a set of uniform guidelines to be developed 
by the secretariat in consultation with States parties [and endorsed by the 
Conference]. 
23 bis. The report shall be prepared based on a blueprint to be developed by the secretariat 
in consultation with the States parties [and endorsed by the Conference] to ensure 
consistency. 
24. The desk review shall lead to the elaboration of a [draft] country report. 
Option 1 
25. If [agreed] / [requested] by the Stat e party under review, the review team, in 
consultation with the secretariat, may deci de, on the basis of the draft report, to 
complement the desk review with further means of direct dialogue such as a country 
visit using a set of uniform guidelines. 
Option 2 
25. If agreed by the State party under review , the secretariat may decide, on the basis 
of the draft report, to complement the desk review with further means of direct 
dialogue [such as a country visit using a set of uniform guidelines]. 
8 
CAC/COSPAVG. l/2008/7/Rev.2  
Option 3 
Delete paragraph 25. 
Option 4: 
25. The review team, in consultation with the secretariat shall complement, on the 
basis of the draft report, the desk review with further means of direct dialogue such 
as a country visit using a set of uniform guidelines. 
Option 1 
26.    The desk review shall be carried out as follows: 
(a) In the conduct of the desk review, in addition to the information provided 
through the self-assessment checklist and any supplementary information provided by the 
State party under review, information available from other existing anticorruption review 
mechanisms in which the State party under review participates may be considered. 
(b) [The use of information from other sources  shall be subject to the agreement of 
the State party under review.] [In addition, the States parties may engage in a dialogue on 
the use of information from other sources.] 
Option 2 
26. The desk review shall be carried out as follows: 
(a) The desk review shall be based on the self-assessment checklist and any 
supplementary information provided by the State Party under review. 
(b) Where the state party under review is a member of an organization and/or a 
mechanism below, the review team may consider information relevant to the 
implementation of the UNCAC produced by: 
(i)   competent    international    organizations,    whose    mandates    cover 
anticorruption issues; and (ii) international and regional mechanisms for combating and 
preventing corruption. 
27. [The use of and weight given to additional information considered pursuant to 
paragraph 26 (b) above shall be subject to [the consent of the State party under 
review] [the provision to the State party under review of the opportunity to 
respond].]4 
Option 1 
28. The members of the review team and the secretariat shall ensure that all 
information obtained in the course of the review process is used only for the 
purposes of the review process. 
Option 2 
28. The secretariat shall ensure that all information obtained in the course of the 
review process is used only in pursuance of the principal goals of the review process 
as identified in paragraph 11. 
 
4 Retention of this paragraph is contingent on th e decision of the wording of paragraph 26 (b).  
9 
CAC/COSP/WG. 1/2008/7/Rev.2  
Option 1 
29. Any information obtained in the course  of the review process shall be kept 
confidential. However, the review team and the secretariat may disclose some 
information when necessary if the State Pa rty under review gives its prior consent. 
Option 2 
29. The secretariat shall not disclose any information obtained in the course of, or 
used in, the review process [unless the State party under review gives its prior consent]. 
Option 1 
30.   [The State Party under review shall ensure the presentation of the views of civil 
society and the private s ector in the preparation of its country report.] 
Option 2 
30.   ( Proposal to move paragraph 30 to section V (“Implementation Review 
Group ”).) 
Option 1 
31. The costs associated with the participation of experts [from developing 
countries] in the review shall be bor ne by the Mechanism in accordance with 
paragraph 47 below.5 
Option 2 
31. The costs associated with the participa tion of experts from [the State party under 
review] [from a State party under review that is a developing country] in meetings of 
the Implementation Review Group shall be  borne by the Mech anism in accordance 
with paragraph 47 below.6 
32. The secretariat shall organize periodic trai ning courses for experts who participate in 
the review process, in order to familiarize them with the uniform guidelines and increase 
their capacity to participate in the review process. 
C.   [ii] Outcome of th e [country] review process  
33. The review team shall in accordance with the uniform guidelines and the blueprint 
prepare a country review report in close cooperation and coordination with the State party 
under review and assisted by the Secretaria t. The report shall identify successes, good 
practices and challenges and make observations for the implementation of the Convention. 
Where appropriate the report shall include id entification of technical assistance needs for 
the purposes of improving implementation of the convention. 
 
5 Discussions on funding will be related to chapter VII  
10 
CAC/COSPAVG. l/2008/7/Rev.2  
33 bis The country review report shall be finalized upon agreement between the review 
team and the State party under review. 
[33 ter. [To complement individual country review reports,] [Consistent with paragraph 33 
above,] the secretaria t shall compile the most common and relevant observations, 
conclusions and recommendations contained in the country reports and include them 
thematically in an [annual] [periodic] implementation report and five regional 
supplementary addenda for submission to the [open-ended] [intergovernmental] 
implementation review group, [taking into acco unt that the State party under review shall 
be the addressee of the country report and the confidential nature of the country report.] [In 
consultation with the State party concerned, the supplementary addenda may include, only 
for information or reference purposes, the complete country report.]] 
Option 1 
34. The [draft] country review [[review outcome] [summary] [aggregate]] reports 
shall be submitted to the [Implementation Review Group] for its consideration [and 
approval]. The [Implementation Review Group] shall submit to the Conference 
[summary reports] [the approved reports] focusing on achievements and gaps in 
implementation as well as on ways and means to address such gaps and technical 
assistance requirements for that purpose. 
Option 2 
34. The review outcome reports shall be submitted to the Conference for its 
consideration. Only the Conference shall be competent to approve and issue 
implementation review reports. 
Option 3 
34. ( This text would replace paragraphs 34-36; there is a proposal to insert this 
paragraph following paragraph 38 .) The [open-ended] [intergovernmental] 
Implementation Review Group shall s ubmit [analytical reports with] [its] 
recommendations and conclusions to the Co nference for its consid eration, focusing 
on the achievements and gaps in the implementation of the Convention, [as well as 
on ways and means to address such gaps and the technical assistance requirements 
for that purpose]. 
[35. ( Insert this paragraph after paragraph 33 .) The country review reports shall be made 
public [in all UN official languages] [unless the State party under review opposes such 
action] [on the condition that the State party under review agrees]. [The State party under 
review shall determine the means by which the country review report will be made public]. 
35bis [Only] the [approved] summary report [of the Implementation Review Group] shall 
be made public as an official document of the Conference.] The secr etariat shall compile 
the observations and conclusions contained in the country report and include them 
thematically in a review of implementation report that shall be made available as an 
official document of the Conference. 
11 
CAC/COSP/WG. 1/2008/7/Rev.2  
D.   [iii] Follow-up procedures  
Option 1 
36. ( Proposed replacement for paragraphs 36-38 .) States parties shall, in the 
following reporting cycle, submit inform ation on the progress achieved in the 
implementation of the observations and recommendations addressing gaps in the 
implementation of the Convention that were identified in the previous reporting 
cycle, and report on whether the technical assistance needs identified in the previous 
reporting cycle have been met. 
Option 2 
36. [The States parties shall design] [The Mechanism shall contain] follow-up 
procedures for each [of the reports refe rred to in paragraphs […]] [approved 
[outcome] [summary] [aggregate] report] [an implementation action plan]. 
Option 1 
37. States parties [shall] [may] submit periodic reports on the progress achieved in 
the implementation of their action plans addressing gaps in the implementation of 
the Convention, submitting the first periodic progress report two years or less after 
the completion of the review, at the request of the reviewed State party. Each report 
shall be reviewed by the review team, which shall make recommendations to the 
Implementation Review Group. 
Option 2 
37. States parties shall report, at their subsequent implementation reviews, on the 
progress achieved in the implementation of their action plans addressing gaps in the 
implementation of the Convention. 
38. The follow-up procedure of the Mechanism shall be [designed to further the goals set 
out in paragraph 11 above. The procedure may include reviewing] [used to review] 
whether the technical assistance priorities iden tified in the outcome reports have received 
adequate attention from the international cooperation community.] 
[(New options to replace paras 36 – 38)  
Option 1  
36. The [conference][implementation review group] shall determine procedures and 
requirements for providing appropriate fo llow-up to conclusions and observations 
emerging from the review process including in connection with [[the provision of] 
technical assistance identified in the re view process.] [promoting and facilitating 
technical assistance]. 
Option 2  
36. Each States party shall, in the following review cycle, submit [to the 
secretariat][in addition to its responses to the self assessment checklist] [to the 
review mechanism/ review team/Implementation Review Group], information on 
progress achieved in connection with the observations contained in its country 
review report. As appropriate, St ates parties shall also provide 
12 
CAC/COSP/WG. 1/2008/7/Rev.2  
information on [the status of][whether] technical assistance needs identified in the 
respective country review reports [have been met]. 
36 bis. Each States party shall prepar e and submit to the secretariat a country 
progress report in connection with the obse rvations contained in the country review 
report. This report shall be made public subject to the conformity with the state 
party. 
V.  [B] Implementation Review Group  
39. The Implementation Review Group shall operate under the authority of, and report to, 
the Conference. The rules of procedure of the Conference shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to 
the Implementation Review Group. 
39 bis. The functions of the Implementation Review Group shall be to assist the 
Conference in analysing the resu lts of the [country review re ports] [implementation report] 
with a view to identifying and recommendi ng priorities and initiatives for enhancing the 
implementation of the Convention. 
Option 1 
40. (a) The Implementation Review Group shall be composed of [40] [60] 
[governmental] experts appointed by States parties on the basis of equitable 
geographical distribution. Each regional group shall be allotted a position on 
the Implementation Review Group [in proportion to its number of members 
and the number of States par ties in the regional group]. 
(b) [The members of the Implementation Review Group shall be elected by the 
Conference for [two-] [three-] [four-] year terms (for a maximum of two 
terms). The Conference shall establish an  appropriate rotation of the members 
of the Implementation Review Group to en sure that all States parties have an 
equal standing in the Mechanism.] 
Option 2 ( To replace paragraphs 39, 40 (a) and (b) ) 
40. The Implementation Review Group shall be an open-ended intergovernmental 
group of States parties. It shall operate under the authority of and report to the 
Conference. The rules of pro cedure of the Conference sha ll apply, mutatis mutandis, 
to the Implementation Review Group. 
42. The Implementation Review Group shall hold meetings at least once a year in 
Vienna. 
42.bis It shall [consider review outcome re ports received from […] and prepare] and 
submit [summary] [thematic] [aggregate] reports on the review of implementation to the 
Conference for its cons ideration and action. 
VI.   [V] Secretariat  
43. The secretariat of the Conference shall be the secretariat of the Mechanism and 
shall perform all tasks required for the efficient functioning of the Mechanism, 
13 
CAC/COSPAVG. l/2008/7/Rev.2  
including providing technical and substantive supp ort, upon request, to States parties in the 
course of the functioning of the Mechanism. 
[Chapter V[I] bis Languages]  
[46 bis. The review process [shall][can] be co nducted in [all] [any of the] UN official 
languages [as required] [if the language used by experts engaged in the review process 
makes it necessary.]] 
VII.   Funding  
Option 1 
47.   The requirements of the Mechanism a nd its secretariat shall be funded from the 
regular budget of the United Nations. 
Option 2 
47. The requirements of the Mechanism and its secretariat shall be funded by the 
[States parties] [States signatories] through assessed contributions to be determined 
on the basis of the United Nations scale of assessment. 
Option 3 
47. The requirements of the Mechanism and its secretariat shall be funded through 
voluntary contributions by [States parties] [Member States], which shall be free of 
conditions and influence. 
[48. Adequate financial and human resources must  be provided to the secretariat to enable 
it to perform the functions assigned to it in the terms of reference.] 
[49. The Conference shall determine the methods for financing the Mechanism. In doing 
so, the Conference shall ensure that the fundi ng of the Mechanism en ables its efficient, 
continued and impartial functioning.] 
[50. The secretariat shall be responsible for preparing a [biennial] annual proposed budget 
for the activities of the Mechanism. [The Co nference shall be responsible for reviewing 
and approving this proposed budget.] [The Implementation Review Group shall be 
responsible for reviewing and approving this proposed budget.]] 
14