Proposal for a Council Decision establishing the position to be adopted on behalf 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 States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption (Doha / Qatar, 9 – 13 November 2009)
Date: 2009-11-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU relations, UN convention, corruption, ratification of an agreement

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 6.11.2009 
COM(2009)618 final 

Annex to  

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL DECISION 

establishing the position to be adopted on behalf 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 
26 May 2009
to the United Nations 
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 

I.   Definition [Introduction] 

II.    [Guiding] principles and [characteristics] [purposes] .........................................................................  

III.  Relationship of the Review Mechanism with the Conference of the States Parties ...........................  

IV.  Review Process  ..................................................................................................................................  

A.  Goals  .........................................................................................................................................  

B.  Conduct of the review  ...............................................................................................................  

C.  Outcome of the review process  .................................................................................................  

Page 

3 

4 

5 

5 

5 

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 Implementation 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.    Funding  ...............................................................................................................................................         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  shall  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  provisions  contained  in  section  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  Mechanism”)  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  contained  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-intrusive, inclusive and impartial; 

(b)  Not produce any form of ranking; 

(c)  Provide opportunities to share good 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 guidelines 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  outcome  to  the  Conference,  which  is  the 
competent body to take action on such outcome; 

(h) Identify, at the earliest stage possible, difficulties 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,  cooperate  with  those  mechanisms  and  avoid 
duplication of effort. 

3. 

The Mechanism shall be an intergovernmental process. 

4. 
In conformity with article 4 of the Convention, 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  States  parties,  and  the  review  process  shall  be 
conducted in a non-political and non-selective manner. 

The  Mechanism  shall  promote  the  implementation  of  the  Convention  by  States 

5. 
parties, as well as cooperation among States parties. 

Option 1 

6.  The  Mechanism  shall  [promote  [transparency  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 Review Mechanism with the Conference 

of the States Parties 

The review of implementation of the Convention and the Mechanism shall be 

9. 
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 well 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 Conference 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  information  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 implementation 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.  [The  review  mechanism  shall  be  open  to 
participation of signatory states on a voluntary 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  shall  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  begins.  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 applicable 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 process in a given year shall be taken into account. 
A State party selected for review in a given year may defer participation to the following 
year of the review cycle [once/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  secretariat  the  information  required  by  the 
Conference on its compliance with and implementation of the Convention, using the self-
assessment  checklist  developed  by  the  secretariat  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  points  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 secretariat believes that such matters may be more 
appropriately addressed in the resolution by which the Conference will establish the Mechanism and adopt its 
terms of reference. Their inclusion in the terms of reference 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  State  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  governmental  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  States  Parties  to  submit  to  it  the  names  and  information  on 
expertise  and  qualifications  of  such  experts.  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  checklist  response  of  the  State  party  under 
review.  [Such  desk  review  shall  entail  a  [preliminary]  analysis  of  the  response 
focused  on  measures  taken  to  implement  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 principles 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  principles,  the  Secretariat  may,  where 
necessary and appropriate, enter 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 supplementary questions related to the review. 

Option 1 

The schedule and requirements of each review shall be established 

21. 
by  the  secretariat  in  consultation  with  the  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  State  party  under  review,  the  review  team,  in 
consultation  with  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. 

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 
the 

information  relevant 

team  may  consider 

to 

mechanism  below, 
implementation of the UNCAC produced by: 

the  review 

(i)   competent    international    organizations,    whose    mandates    cover 

anticorruption issues; and (ii) international and regional mechanisms for combating and 

preventing corruption. 

[The use of and weight given to additional information considered pursuant to 

27. 
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 the 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 Party 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 sector 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  borne  by  the  Mechanism  in  accordance  with 
paragraph 47 below.5 

Option 2 

31. The costs associated with the participation 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 Mechanism in accordance 
with paragraph 47 below.6 

32. The secretariat shall organize periodic training 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 the [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  Secretariat.  The  report  shall  identify  successes,  good 
practices and challenges and make observations for the implementation of the Convention. 
Where appropriate the report shall include identification 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  secretariat  shall  compile  the  most  common  and  relevant  observations, 
conclusions  and  recommendations  contained  in  the  country  reports  and  include  them 
implementation  report  and  five  regional 
thematically 
in  an  [annual]  [periodic] 
the  [open-ended]  [intergovernmental] 
to 
supplementary  addenda  for  submission 
implementation review group, [taking into account 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 
following  paragraph  38.)  The  [open-ended]  [intergovernmental] 
paragraph 
Implementation  Review  Group  shall  submit  [analytical  reports  with]  [its] 
recommendations and conclusions to the Conference for its consideration, 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 secretariat 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  information  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  referred  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 identified 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  follow-up  to  conclusions  and  observations 
emerging  from  the  review  process  including  in  connection  with  [[the  provision  of] 
technical  assistance  identified  in  the  review  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, States 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  prepare  and  submit  to  the  secretariat  a  country 
progress report in connection with the observations 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 results of the [country review reports] [implementation report] 
with  a  view  to  identifying  and  recommending 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 parties 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 ensure 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 procedure of the Conference shall 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  reports  received  from  […]  and  prepare]  and 
submit  [summary]  [thematic]  [aggregate]  reports  on  the review of  implementation  to  the 
Conference for its consideration 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 support, 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  conducted  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 and 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  funding  of  the  Mechanism  enables  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  Conference  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