Joint meeting of the Subsidiary Body and Consultative Body for the 2013 cycle

1. Joint meeting of the Subsidiary Body and Consultative Body for the 2013 cycle 4 and 5 April 2013 Room XI, 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.

2. Timetable in the ODs Inscription decision

3. Effective timetable for 2013 cycle

4. Division of labour

5. Division of labour

6. Registers and uploads the nomination files, proposals and requests (original and revised versions) Assesses the technical requirements, particularly as provided in Decisions 7.COM 11 and 7.COM 20.2 Establishes a password-protected dedicated website and on-line evaluation system Prepares a report and draft recommendations Functions of the Secretariat

7. The Secretariat assesses the technical requirements established by ODs, forms and instructions, and Committee decisions. Decision 7.COM 11, paragraph 18: ‘…nominations that do not comply strictly with the following technical requirements will be considered incomplete and cannot consequently be transmitted by the Secretariat for evaluation and examination but will be returned to the submitting States that may complete them for a subsequent cycle…: What is technical assessment?

8. Decision 7.COM 11 paragraph 18, continued (paraphrased): A response is provided in each and every section; Maximum word counts are respected; Evidence of free, prior and informed consent in English or French, as well as the language of the community; Evidence of inclusion in an inventory (may be a functioning hyperlink); Edited video of not more than ten minutes is provided, subtitled in English or French. What is technical assessment?

9. Decision 7.COM 20.2 cross-references decisions 7.COM 7, 7.COM 8 & 7.COM 11, making each binding on all processes Requirements had already been reflected in forms and instructions, as well as in initial treatment by Secretariat for 2013 files Since 2013 was first cycle to apply these decisions, States Parties were informed of technical deficiencies and provided seven days to correct them What is technical assessment?

10. 7.COM and previous Committeesalso adopted several instructions to States that are not technically disqualifying but are subject to the assessment of CB or SB, e.g.: Avoid inappropriate language Demonstrate mutual respect Avoid copy-and-paste Provide information in proper place Describe nature, characteristics of inventory Etc. See 7.COM INF.7 Rev. (transversal issues) for index to such instructions. What requirements are not part of technical assessment?

11. Working methods of the Secretariat • Registration of original files and technical assessment • First letter to submitting States requesting additional information • Registration of revised files; second technical assessment • Second chance in case of technically incomplete file (one week to complete) • Revised file and supporting documents uploaded on the interface

12. Functions of the evaluating bodies

13. Composition of the Subsidiary Body

14. Composition of the Consultative Body

15. Functions of the evaluating bodies • Evaluate whether criteria for inscription are satisfied, based on: • Nominations and supporting documentation • Recommendations (if any) from the former bodies • Previous decisions of the Committee (if any) • Draft recommendations to the Committee to inscribe, not to inscribe, or (for SB) to refer the nomination to submitting State for additional information

16. Referral option (SB only) Opportunity to State to correct problems of technical details lacking, without waiting four years to resubmit Important to: • Distinguish between NO and referral • Identify clearly where State must improve its nomination Decision 7.COM 11: SB should make ʻlimited and coherent use of referral so that it is only applied to cases concerning the lack of technical detailʼ

17. Working methods of the bodies • Individual evaluations through a password-protected, dedicated website • Two batches, since not all files available at the beginning • Individual evaluations collated by Secretariat • During June/July meeting, collective evaluation of each file resulting in a consensus recommendation

18. Challenges during evaluation Important to: • Maintain consistency from year to year, and from one State to another, but also • Evaluate files according to evolving standards and jurisprudence • Provide useful feedback to State (whether positive or negative), rather than generalities Credibility of the inscription process rests largely on your shoulders

19. The report of each body includes: an overview of files and working methods general observations on files evaluated and additional recommendations recurrent and transversal issues draft decisions Reports of the bodies to the Committee

20. Structure of draft decisions • Summary of the file (drafted by Secretariat) • Criteria (satisfied and/or not satisfied) • Draft decision (standard language to inscribe, not to inscribe, or to refer) • Additional considerations addressed to submitting State (CB only)

21. Based on the nominations and draft recommendations of the bodies, the Committee decides: to inscribe or not to inscribe (USL, RL, BSP), or to refer (RL only) to grant or not to grant international assistance Committee bases its decisions on the same information that was available to the bodies, although it may reach a different conclusion Functions of the Committee

22. During the Committee meeting • Rapporteurs present the working methods used, main results and transversal issues through their reports • Chairpersons present the files evaluated, the main points of the debate on each file and the draft decision • Members speak through reports, Chairpersons and Rapporteurs that present consensus views