Ad hoc Working Group on Mandate Implementation Review - Informal Consultations, General Assembly, 80th session

A very warm good morning, and I mean that literally, to everyone as I call to order the meeting of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Mandate Implementation Review. On behalf of Ambassador Brattestedt, I warmly welcome all of you to today's consultations of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Mandate Implementation under the ongoing UNAT review. reform process. We have with us this morning Ms. Ayaka Suzuki, Director in the Office— the Executive Office of the Secretary-General and Head of the UNAIDS Secretariat, who will speak to us a little bit about the SG's report on reports, and later on will provide us with some updates from the Secretariat on the work of the Working Group with respect to implementation of Resolution 8251. The objective of today's meeting is threefold. First, to consider the Secretary-General's review of mandated reports as outlined in paragraph 16. By the end of July 2026 is what is required of us. Secondly, to hear an update from the Secretariat regarding implementation support under the resolution; and thirdly, to exchange some views on the Working Group's remaining deliverables under paragraphs 33 and , namely the development of criteria and modalities that will guide future mandate implementation reviews. Firstly, I would like to give the floor to Ms. Suzuki to further elaborate on the Secretary-General's review of mandated reports. And then we will move from there to take your reflections before we come back to Ms. Suzuki for the updates and then an exchange of views. Ms. Suzuki, the floor is yours.

Great.

Thank you, co-chairs. Good morning to all. So, to recap, since it's been a while, you would recall that in June, UST Ryder gave you an update on several requests arising from Resolution 80/251. And back then, we reported some practical steps that are being undertaken. First is that we established, and I think by now you're all familiar, mandates@un.org. This provides you with a reference point for existing mandates that is easily searchable. mandates@un.org has been now expanded— oh, sorry. The first one was the mandates@un.org, which is an email address that provided you with an entry point for asking any questions related to mandates, especially during the mandate creation phase. And then mandates.un.org, which is the mandates registry, as you are aware, that has been expanded now and now includes a contact list of the different technical secretariats supporting intergovernmental organs across the UN system. Secondly, we indicated— Guy did— that an action plan is being developed for a UN system-wide management for results mechanism, and an information brief is forthcoming. Thirdly, Guy mentioned that a note on possible mechanisms for collective mandate implementation reviews is underway, and we will summarize in that note how mandate implementation reviews are conducted in existing organs, such as the formal— former Ad Hoc Working Group on the Revitalization of the Work of the General Assembly and the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations. So today we have 2 further updates. First, in this segment of our meeting today, we will introduce the Note on the implementation of reporting mandates in accordance with paragraphs 8 and 16 of that resolution, which was submitted to you at the end of June. And then in the second segment following your respective statements, we will also update you on the underlying data for the mandate implementation review. So now on reporting, I think you said report of reports.

Yes.

We have 2 tracks. We have looked at the overall reporting portfolio. And we also looked at how we report. So we reviewed more than 600 report series published between 2023 and 2025. Now, I say series because, in fact, we looked at more than 600 reports. But the reason why I say series is that some reports are recurring. The same topic. So we didn't count when, for example, there are, I think, over 18 reports on financing UN peacekeeping operation in South Sudan. So they're not counted as individual reports. We cluster them all together as one report series. So when we say 600 report series, it includes such clustering of the same report. It's just updated on annual or whatever frequency basis. So, this review also was informed by input from more than 20 UN entities. The large majority of reports were found to remain appropriate in the current form. So, that's the first kind of a takeaway. But the review also indicated that there is an opportunity to improve how we provide information in the way we respond to our reporting mandates. So, for example, we will use concise update reports when there are no major changes. And by applying word limits and stronger drafting discipline, we hope to provide reports that improve readability. We will also make greater use of data, tables, and graphics, and we will use plain language, and clear cross-references. And taken together, we believe that these changes should make reports easier to read, easier to compare, and easier to use. These recommendations of the review are limited in scale perhaps, but very practical in effect. So, in less than 5% of the cases, we found an opportunity to combine content from several reports. The existing report— reporting mandates would obviously remain in place, but the content from several reports could be combined. And in about 10% of cases, we found an opportunity to adjust frequency or format. This could mean fewer formal issuances. It could also mean another way to share the same information. In both cases, the reporting mandate would remain in place. It's just the way how we respond or how we provide the information could be improved. The practical day-to-day improvements to reporting are also underway. And where a decision is to be made by member states, the Secretariat will present recommendations during the discussions on the related proposal in the respective organ. If these expected— well, if the expected benefits are fully realized, the reporting burden would decrease. And in practical terms, the preliminary estimate is a reduction of approximately 700,000 words this year. Now, this concludes our update as part of this first segment. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Suzuki, for those updates. Colleagues, I'll now open the floor for Working Group members to share your views on the Secretary-General's review of mandated Secretary-General's reports. You know the rules for engagement on this. We're trying to keep this meeting as brief as possible, so we're asking that you keep your interventions to 5 minutes for groups and 3 minutes for individual delegations. I give the floor first to Uruguay on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.

Excellencies, co-chairs, I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of the Group of 77 and China. The group wishes to reiterate its appreciation to the co-chairs, Ambassador Wallace and Ambassador Bradestedt, for convening this meeting and for their continued leadership of The UNAID work stream on mandate implementation review. We also appreciate the Secretariat's inputs just given. The group welcomes the opportunity to consider the Secretary-General's review on mandated reports prepared pursuant to paragraphs 16 and 13 and 33 of GA Resolution 80/251. We appreciate the timely submission of the note and the Secretariat's efforts to review portfolio comprising a portfolio comprising more than 600 report series published between '23 and '25. The Group views the document as a constructive and useful basis for further consideration by Member States. We welcome its pragmatic focus on identifying concrete opportunities to reduce overlap and repetition, improve periodicity and format, and make reports more timely, focused, accessible, and user-oriented, while preserving transparency and comprehensive coverage of important issues. The Group also notes that the review concluded that the vast majority of existing reports remain appropriate in their current form, while identifying a limited number of areas where adjustments could be considered. The proposed gradual and targeted approach is particularly important, as it avoids a one-size-fits-all methodology and recognizes the diversity of mandates, subject matters, and intergovernmental processes across the UN system. The group encourages further recommendations to continue to be supported by clear analytical evidence, objective criteria, and transparent methodology so that member states can make informed decisions on any proposed adjustments. We further acknowledge the emphasis placed on clear award limits, drafting discipline, structured formats, key information tables, focused summaries, stronger use of data and visuals, and precise cross-references to previous reports and continuously updated sources. The group takes positive note of the preliminary identification of opportunities to combine reports in fewer than 5% of cases and adjust periodicity— and to adjust periodicity or format in approximately 10% of cases. We also note the estimated potential reduction of around 700,000 words this year. Such efficiencies could be meaningful if they are pursued transparently, based on objective evidence, and without weakening mandates or limiting member states' access to information. Relatedly, the group appreciates the document's clear reaffirmation that decisions on mandates remain the exclusive prerogative of member states. Where an intergovernmental organ has specified the format, periodicity, or content of a report. Such guidance must continue to be respected. Any proposal requiring a decision by member states should therefore be presented to the competent intergovernmental body with a clear rationale and sufficient supporting information. The group also encourages the Secretariat to proceed, where appropriate and consistent with existing mandates, with reporting improvements that do not require intergovernmental decisions, including measures to enhance readability, accessibility, usability, and timeliness while keeping member states informed of progress and without compromising the substantive information required for effective oversight. In this regard, the group would welcome updates on the implementation of the proposed measures, further clarity on the next steps, and the basis for distinguishing between reporting improvements that can be implemented within existing mandates and those requiring a decision by member states. states, with a view to informing future improvements in reporting practices. Excellencies, co-chairs, the Group of 77 and China stands ready to engage constructively in the next phase of this work. Our shared objective should be to ensure that reporting mandates remain fit for purpose, avoid unnecessary duplication, enhance support for member states in the exercise of their oversight responsibilities and sovereign prerogatives, and that the integrity of mandates and the priorities of developing countries are fully preserved. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Uruguay on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, and now I give the floor to the European Union, who will be followed by Armenia and then Timor-Leste.

Thank you, Chair, distinguished co-chairs, colleagues. I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member States. We thank the Secretary-General for the timely submission of the Note on Implementation of Reporting Mandates and the Secretariat for the considerable analytical work that enables us to enhance the implementation of reporting mandates. The European Union welcomes the overall approach taken by the Secretariat, the emphasis on producing reports that are more focused, user-oriented, and evidence-based. Based while preserving the integrity of mandates is fully consistent with the objectives set out in Resolution 80/251. We particularly support the proposed improvements to reporting practices, including differentiated reporting formats, concise update reports where appropriate, greater use of data and visual presentation, standardized structures and clearer recommendations. These measures will improve accessibility and usability for Member States. At the same time, we welcome further clarification regarding the proposed next steps. In particular, we will be interested to hear from the Co-Chairs how the recommendations contained in this note can feed into the work of the main committees and other intergovernmental bodies. On what basis will individual committees consider these recommendations? How will consistency across the system be ensured while fully respecting the mandates and competencies of each intergovernmental body? More broadly, we reiterate the importance of strengthening the evidence base that should underpin this review process. In this regard, we consider it essential that the Secretariat provides Member States with a comprehensive overview of existing mandates, including reporting mandates, meetings, agenda items, and programme budget implications, accompanied by information on implementation and delivery of mandates to strengthen transparency and accountability. We appreciate the information just provided by the Secretariat on the analytical basis underpinning the estimates contained in the Secretary-General's note, including the references to reductions of, I quote, less than 5% and about 10%. Consistent with the principle of transparency and informed decision-making, we will appreciate if the Secretariat could provide additional details on the reporting series and mandates that were assessed, as well as the methodology used to arrive at these estimates. We will also welcome a list of reports that were identified for consideration or changes in reporting periodicity as per Article 16 of Resolution 80/251. In our view, the only concrete example provided regarding reports on major construction projects considered by the Fifth Committee does not sufficiently demonstrate the type of efficiencies envisaged. We would only instead welcome the identification of reporting areas where genuine overlaps or duplications exist, and where consolidation could therefore reduce reporting burdens, rather than simply combining related reports into a single document. All these informations are, in our view, crucial for Member States to better understand the proposals and engage constructively in identifying opportunities to achieve these efficiencies. We encourage the Secretariat to continue developing standardized reporting templates across reports mandated by intergovernmental resolutions. Greater consistency in structure and presentation facilitates comparison across reporting cycles, improves readability, and supports more informed decision-making by member states. Additionally, to conclude, allow me to recall 2 points from the European Union. The first one, to recall our position on the review process. As we have stated previously, we continue to see 2 complementary strands of work. The first concerns the criteria that should guide future decisions on creating or renewing mandates. The second concerns the modalities for reviewing the existing stock of mandates. Both strands should be guided by clear, objective, and evidence-based criteria. The second is regarding the interaction between this Working Group and the main committees. We continue to believe that the ad hoc Working Group has an important role to play as a coordinating and escalation mechanism. While the substantive review of mandates should naturally take place within the competent main committees and other intergovernmental bodies, this Working Group should provide a forum to take stock of progress, assess how reviews have been conducted across the system, identify cross-cutting lessons, promote coherence and transparency, and consider any issues that may require further collective reflection. And I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the European Union. I give the floor now to the distinguished representative of New Zealand on behalf of CANZ.

Thank you, Co-Chairs. I have the honour to speak on behalf of Canada, Australia, and my own delegation, New Zealand. CANZ welcomes the Secretary-General's review of more than 600 mandated reports pursuant to Resolution 80/251. The SG's report provides a practical, evidence-based foundation for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of UN reporting. Information shared in UN reports should be presented in an actionable format, clearly setting out the recommended changes, the entities responsible for implementation, and the expected implications for mandates, activities, and resources. Today, I would like to make 5 key points. First, we strongly welcome the SG's reporting enhancements and encourage the immediate implementation of those enhancements within his authority. Measures such as concise update reports, stronger drafting discipline, improved summaries, and greater use of data and visual presentation will make reports more accessible, analytical, and decision-oriented. We would appreciate insights on when member states can expect to see reports incorporating these enhancements. Second, we would welcome greater clarity on the specific recommendations to combine reports and change reporting periodicity of format. We would welcome circulation of a consolidated list of reports that comprise the less than 5% identified for possible combination, and the approximately 10% identified for changes in periodicity or format. Similarly, it would be helpful to see examples or ideas for new templates and differentiated formats that reports could take, in line with paragraph 8 of Resolution 80/251, along with a potential timeline for their rollout. For example, South Africa has already made a useful suggestion for the inclusion of an implementation status snapshot in future reporting. Such information will enable member states to assess the proposals in a transparent, evidence-based manner. Given the call in Resolution 80/251 to take a user-centered approach to reporting, we would also encourage ongoing engagement with member states through this working group and more broadly to gauge the user experience and guide changes to enhance this. Third, we see merit in this working group considering the recommendations on report consolidation and periodicity or format adjustments in a clustered approach, rather than individual mandating bodies considering the recommendations on a resolution-by-resolution basis. Fourth, a transparent and evidence-based approach remains essential to ensuring confidence in this review process and facilitating the timely consideration of practical reforms. As implementation proceeds, Member States would benefit from greater visibility of the analytical basis for recommendations and the methodologies used to develop them. We ask the Secretariat to consider this as they prepare future reports for this group. Interactive briefing sessions on the Secretariat's progress in actioning requests under Resolution 80/251 could contribute to a greater transparency and foster continued trust and collaboration. Fifth, and finally, sustaining these efficiency gains will require ongoing discipline from both Member States and the Secretariat. For Member States, implementation should not be limited to considering Secretariat recommendations. It also includes exercising discipline by deciding only to mandate the commissioning of reports required to achieve the stated objectives of the resolution or decision, as we agreed in Resolution 80/251. For its part, we encourage the Secretariat to continue identifying opportunities for report consolidation, periodicity adjustments, and reporting enhancements, and to consistently implement reporting improvements across the system. Identifying less than 5% of reports for combination and 10% for changes of periodicity or format is a start, but in CANZA's view, it's a slow start. With member state consultation, more is needed. Co-chairs, CANZ looks forward to working with member states and the Secretariat to bring these practical improvements to the UN reporting framework. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of New Zealand. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Armenia, to be followed by Timor-Leste and then Colombia.

Distinguished co-chairs, at the outset, I would like to thank you both for your continued leadership and inclusive approach in advancing the work of the ad hoc working group. We also thank Secretariat for comprehensive review of the Secretary-General's reporting portfolio pursuant to Resolution 80/251. We note with appreciation that the review has been conducted in accordance with the guiding principles set out in Resolution 80/251: the exclusive authority of Member States to establish mandates and respect for the diverse nature of mandates. We see value in the proposed measures to enhance the quality and reduce unnecessary duplication of reports, including the use of differentiated reporting formats, concise update reports where appropriate, clearer structure, greater use of data and improved accessibility through plain language. At the same time, efforts to improve format or presentation need to enhance rather than diminish the comprehensiveness, neutrality, and analytical value of reporting. SG's reports should continue to be factual, objective, evidence-based, and fully aligned with the mandate entrusted by Member States. We also welcome the recommendations' adjustment to reporting periodicity or format, where appropriate. We agree that any such measures should be considered on a case-by-case basis, be supported by clear rationale, preserve the underlying reporting mandates, and remain subject, where required, to the consideration and decision of the competent intergovernmental bodies. Finally, I wish to underline that effective mandate implementation begins with effective mandate creation. As recognized in Resolution 80251, Member States, in exercising their sovereign prerogatives, need to strive for enhanced clarity and brevity when establishing mandates. Efficiency should be reflected not only in the mandates we create, but also in the way we conduct our work. It can also be achieved through more coincide Secretariat documentation, more disciplined drafting by delegations, and negotiations focused on substantive issues rather than repetitive textual amendments. This is my painful experience of facilitating pandemic prevention declarations. This will contribute to a more coherent, efficient, and sustainable mandate architecture, enabling the Organization to devote more of its time and resources to implementing mandates and delivering results, rather than managing unnecessary procedural burdens. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Armenia, and our commiserations to you for your experience. I give the floor now to the distinguished representative of Timor-Leste, to be followed by Colombia.

Thank you, co-chair. Timor-Leste aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of the Group of 77 and China. We thank the co-chairs for convening this meeting and for you continuing new leadership of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Mandate Review. We also express our appreciation to the Secretary-General and Secretariat for timely preparation of the note submitted pursuant to General Assembly Resolution 80/251. Timor-Leste welcomes the comprehensive review of more than 600 Secretary-General report series and appreciates the careful, evidence-based approach reflected in the Secretary-General's note. We are encouraged that the review concludes that the vast majority of reporting mandates remain appropriate in their current form, while identifying a limited number of opportunities to improve efficiency through the consolidation of reporting, adjustments in reporting periodicity, and more user-oriented reporting formats. We support efforts to enhance the quality, accessibility, and usability of reports through clearer drafting focused summaries, structured presentation, and the appropriate use of data and visual tools. Such measures can strengthen the usefulness of reports for member states while preserving the transparency, comprehensiveness, and integrity of existing reporting mandates. For a small country like Timor-Leste with limited resources, it is challenging to engage effectively across an expanding range of reporting and intergovernmental processes. A more coherent and streamlined reporting framework can therefore contribute not only to institutional efficiency, but also to the ability of all member states to participate meaningfully in the work of the United Nations. Miss co-chairs, in this regard, allow me to highlight several issues that from the perspective of small, less developed countries such as Timor-Leste. First, we encourage the ad hoc working group to incorporate a mandate impact assessment that explicitly considers the administrative and operational burden placed on small delegations and United Nations country teams with limited capacity. Mandates should be assessed not only for their relevance and potential duplication, but also for their practical feasibility in resource-constrained contexts. Second, we recommend establishing predictable modalities for periodic mandate review. Including a structured cycle to assess the existing stock of General Assembly mandates. Such an approach would enable Member States, particularly LDCs like Timor-Leste, to engage more strategically while ensuring that mandates remain relevant, effective, and responsive to evolving global priorities. Third, Timor-Leste supports the development of a comprehensive digital mandate registry, as envisaged in the Secretary-General's report, to enhance transparency, accessibility, accessibility and coherence across the 3 pillars of the United Nations. For small delegations, such a platform would be transformative, facilitating real-time access to information on mandates, reporting obligations, implementation status, and institutional responsibilities. We commend your professionalism and dedication to the— of the ad hoc committee and encourage the continuation of inclusive consultations, particularly with the agencies and small states like Timor-Leste, and we remain committed to supporting this important process as the UN advances towards a more effective accountability and fit-for-purpose mandate architecture. I thank you, sir.

I thank the distinguished Permanent Representative of Timor-Leste and give the floor now to the distinguished Representative of Colombia, to be followed by Mexico and then the Russian Federation.

Thank you, Ambassador, co-facilitator, Excellencies, colleagues. Colombia aligns itself with the statement made by Uruguay on behalf of the G77 in China, and we wish to make a few additional observations in our national capacity. To begin, we welcome positively that the Secretary-General's report clearly expresses that decisions on mandates are the exclusive prerogative of member states. And that the role of the Secretariat is to present recommendations for the consideration of intergovernmental organs. What's more, we appreciate that the report recognizes that the formats and periodicity of the reports submitted to member states must still be respected. What's more, we note with interest the methodology used by the Secretariat, and we underscore the importance of any mandate review to be based on clear, objective criteria based on evidence. If I may, I wish to bring up the idea put forward in this meeting for there to be more information on the documents and documentations used for the 600 reports and what percentage, um, presented in real documents. We also welcome that the reports possess, that they seek to optimize mandates. This is an approach that's coherent with the UNAT initiative that strengthens efficacy and coherence in the UN system. Furthermore, we warmly welcome that the recommendations were focused on improving the quality, accessibility, and usefulness of the reports of the Secretary-General with more clear, comparable formats, taking account of the ideas of member states. It's relevant to ensure that the adjustments to the periodicity and format be done without invisibilizing the topics of intergovernmental negotiations and reduce the political considerations and issues that are priority for developing states. We underscored that all streamlining efforts should fully preserve the scope and relevance of the mandates agreed by member states. We believe that it's fundamental to take account of the needs of developing countries and middle-income countries so that these reports can constitute important follow-up tools, access to specialized information, and effective participation in intergovernmental processes. Colombia reiterates the fact that we stand ready to continue to participate constructively in this process. That any process that can strengthen mandates should also strengthen the ability to respond of the United Nations, preserving at the same time the balance between the 3 pillars of the organization. Thank you, Mr. Ambassador.

Thank the distinguished Deputy Permanent Representative of Colombia. I give the floor now to the distinguished representative of Mexico.

Muchas gracias.

Thank you very much, President. Excellencies, Mexico appreciates the efforts made by the co-facilitators of Jamaica and Norway to make headway in the mandate review process of the General Assembly. In this regard, we take note with interest and with our thanks of the note of the Secretary-General on the review of the mandated reports with the announced goal to determine which ones work and/or to change the periodicity. Generally, we believe that the reports do not consist— the review does not consist of an editorial review. They require an in-depth review of the process to draft the more than 600 reports depending on their relevance, impact, and coherence. The Secretary's proposal on the reports lack the ambition required to present a true change to the culture of information, and this has been recognized this morning by the Secretariat. What we want is to go beyond the goal of providing usefulness and quality. We must take account of the new information methodologies and the challenges that knowledge society faces. The report that we are grateful for presents a raft of proposals that allows us to make a first step forward in the right direction. The first— in the first, the Secretariat proposes criteria to improve the quality, accessibility, and efficiency of the reports with a view to having more concise, less repetitive documents, especially when there are no substantial progress or changes compared to the previous report. We underscore the use of data and visual complements with clear conclusions, as well as better discipline to limit the word count. Second, the Secretariat has shown an interest in introducing additional improvements to the presentation of reports. And given that, we request that they provide more information on the new editorial modalities of the Secretariat. Third, the proposal to assess the viability of the reports, given the similarity of reports or changing periodicity, is based on the needs to avoid overlap, duplicity of information, changes to context or the level of substantive activity, and the possibility of using alternative modalities that are accessible, public, and transparent. To the accumulated problems of having a growing number of reports being presented by the Secretariat in a determined— any given session, In addition to that, there's the exception of the reports and the repetition of information in them. The Secretariat has established 2 goals in order to mitigate this problem. The first is 1 in every 20 reports presented be subject to a combination exercise given the similarity of the content. And the second is for 1 in every 10 reports to have changes in its periodicity, how regularly it's presented to the General Assembly. It's essential to know then what reports they plan to include in these 2 streamlining processes, the process to rationalize the work of the Secretariat and the presentation of the report. Achieving the goals proposed also involves rationalizing the working agenda of the General Assembly, which is the responsibility of member states. If we don't want this effort, this rationalization effort of the presentation of reports to be just a cosmetic exercise for Mexico, it's important to underscore that the UN80 initiative proposes also. a real change to the information model for member states. As the Secretary-General of the UN has underscored, the status quo is not sustainable, and therefore progress must be truly substantive. Thank you very much, Chair.

I thank the distinguished DPR of Mexico. I give the floor now to the Russian Federation, followed by United Kingdom and the United States.

Thank you very much, Mr. Co-chair. We would like to thank the Secretariat for the note that was drafted on the report. The Russian Federation on the whole supports the efforts which are geared towards enhancing access and the use and the quality of the use of the reports, as well as in order to eradicate unjustified duplication. At the same time, we think that changes should not affect the content of reports nor the volume of the information that member states receive. We believe that a reduction in the quantity of words in and of itself will not help to improve the quality of reports, which are determined by their comprehensiveness, objectivity, and the utility of information contained therein, not the volume. So the qualitative indicators for the reduction— quantitative indicators for reduction of the text in and of themselves cannot serve as an objective criterion for enhancing efficiency. In the document, it states— and this was already discussed by a number of delegations— the document states that less than 55% of the reports were determined as candidates for unification, approximately 10 for changing in periodicity or format. My delegation would also like to have a better understanding of how these indicators were received, to learn about the methodology for the assessment of the selection criteria, the specific calculations on the basis of which the Secretariat arrived at the above-mentioned conclusions, and Lastly, we would like to have a list of the reports that will become candidates in accordance with paragraph 16 of the resolution. Furthermore, we think that there is— it is necessary to closely consider the possible repercussions of objection of not including contextual information in the report. We would not like to have the proactive use of cross-cutting references and the replication of information from previous documents or external sources. We would not like this to ultimately complicate the quest by member states as they seek necessary information, which was established simply to reduce the volume of documentation. So we would like to— or rather, we would request a clarification vis-à-vis the pursuit of the process, whether we understand correctly that this document is exceptional in terms of informational content, or, or does this build upon or flesh out the ideas therein for the participation of— is it the plan for the participation of member states? It is important for us to understand how member states will be able to participate in consideration of the corresponding proposals prior to their practical implementation. And therefore, we would also request clarification about how, how there will be a consideration of the corresponding recommendations by intergovernmental bodies prior to the introduction of any amendments or changes in the practice of mandate implementation. Thank you for your attention.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation. I give the floor now to the United Kingdom. followed by the United States.

Thank you, co-chair, and to the Secretariat for this work. I think many of our thoughts have already been said, so I think a lot of our asks for some greater ambition and moving past status quo seems to be quite consistent across the membership here. I think, as others have said, we would love to see some of the some more specific detail on the current proposals, um, you know, what, what specific reports are suggested to be merged or changed periodicity or shortened, um, so we can understand that fully. Um, and, and like others have said, we'd also welcome some greater clarity on how reports will be made more concise or more visually engaging, um, examples of those formats And also whether updated guidance and templates would be provided to kind of drive that across the UN system. And I think we would also welcome some clarity on whether the proposed changes are suggested to apply to reports mandated across the different bodies, so GA, committees, ECOSOC, so the kind of breadth of how these changes would be implemented, and as others have asked for, also when those changes would be brought in from. I think we would probably encourage bringing in changes from as soon as possible. Yeah, as others have also noted, the sort of 5 to 10% proposed changes does feel limited to us. I'm not sure it does fully meet the ambition that member states have set. So we would like to see consideration of more. We think there is scope to do that. When we've been looking at the UN Digital Library, something that I think probably needs to be improved there is that there seems to be a lack of categorization or organization. So it makes it quite difficult to assess where there might be duplication. If we can improve that tool in some way so that reports can be presented clearer by theme or subject, I think that would help. Also, of course, a lot of subjects and themes sit across multiple UN entities, so I think we will need a greater focus on reviewing reports across departments. Maybe that's already been done, but just seeing where, you know, one report has multiple entities involved. So, you know, I don't think this is to impede the Secretariat moving ahead with these initial set of changes, and I think I would encourage these just being done, not necessarily coming back to member states to say, yes, go ahead, you know, just go ahead. But we would like to see further proposals for what else could be changed. I think we want to stay true to the level of ambition that we've set for this exercise. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the United Kingdom. I give the floor now to the United States and then the Republic of Korea.

Thank you, Ambassador Wallace. 4 quick points, some of which echo what others have said in the room. First off, very much welcome efforts to strengthen the quality, accessibility, and efficiency of reports to better support member states. as we've requested in the resolution. On quality, I think, as New Zealand said, better summaries, better use of data, better data visualization would be extremely helpful. I've made this point before. I think the reports that we've been provided in the context of UNAIDS have been head and shoulder above the sort of typical quality of Secretary General reports that we receive in other bodies, if there was a way to sort of raise the floor so that the baseline was more towards what we've received in the course of this process, it would be very welcome. I would also say I think the two statistics of 5% and 10% are frankly a bit underwhelming and. Fall short of the level of ambition that we were hoping for. And it would be helpful to have a bit more clarity on what is included in both of those categories. And I think, given that changes to periodicity and changes to format are very different paths forward, if that 10% could actually broken down into which have been designated for reformatting versus which might be more appropriate for changes in periodicity. I think that would be helpful as well. We very much look forward to the note on a clustered approach. If there's any information on when we might expect that, and if there are highlights that the Secretariat could share at this point of what we might expect, that would we welcome. And then finally, very much in that vein, the resolution, of course, makes a number of other requests to the Secretariat to support member states. If there is information, really a timetable, I guess, of when we might expect some of what has been requested, that would be helpful. And I would be particularly interested if the resources that were allocated to this and in particular the staff that have been allocated to the ad hoc working group to assist in this, if— what the status of that is. Thanks so much.

I thank the distinguished representative of the United States. I give the floor now to the Republic of Korea, to be followed by Chile.

Thank you, co-chairs, and the Secretariat for your work. My delegation also welcomes the Secretary-General's proposals to improve the quality of reports and to rationalize reporting mandates. Reports are an essential and official channel through which the Secretariat communicates information and analysis back to member states. We therefore see this exercise as an opportunity to strengthen effectiveness of communication between member states and the Secretariat. Improving the quality of reports will enable member states to process vast amounts of information more effectively and efficiently. We encourage the Secretariat, where feasible, to enhance the quality, accessibility, and efficiency of its reports, and to keep this Working Group informed of its progress. In particular, we encourage using concise update reports where there have been no major changes, so the member states can focus on what is new, significant, and decision-relevant. With regard to the provision of evidence and data through online sources, we would appreciate receiving a comprehensive list of those online sources available for use by member states. We also encourage the Secretariat to ensure that access to these portals is granted systematically to all concerned delegates so that no delegation is disadvantaged by a lack of access. If deemed necessary, we would appreciate receiving training to help us identify and access the relevant information as you have done with the mandate registry. As regards the rationalization of reporting mandates, it is important that the Secretariat fully respect the specified guidance provided by the relevant intergovernmental bodies with regard to the format and periodicity of reports. On that basis, we look forward to receiving proposals on the possible consolidation of reports and adjustment to the periodicity or format so that the member states can consider and act on them. In closing, my delegation encourages the Secretariat, as an author of these reports, to continue to take proactive role by regularly reviewing its reporting products and identifying opportunities to improve their effectiveness. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Republic of Korea. I give the floor now to Chile, to be followed by China and then Japan.

Gracias.

Thank you, Ambassador, Ambassadors, for convening this meeting and Ms. Yakasuki for your presentation. We thank Uruguay for their statement on behalf of the G77 in China. The delegation of Chile Thank you for the circulation of the Secretary-General's note that represents a relevant contribution to the review of the portfolio of mandated reports, and thus to explore opportunities to improve the efficiency of the organization and simplify the work of our delegations. We take note of the outcomes of the study carried out by the Secretariat, according to which less than 5— in less than 5% of cases we can combine the content of reports into one report, and around 10% of cases it will be possible to adjust the frequency that they are presented or the format of the reports. We believe that these findings are positive and they show us that opportunities to rationalise mandates are specific and more than a generalized— and there's more than just a generalized phenomenon of duplication. We would be grateful for, um, more information on the criteria that explain these percentages. Furthermore, we understand that in the cases where we require intergovernmental approval, the Secretariat will present the corresponding recommendations during the discussions on the respective draft resolutions. To the relevant bodies. In this regard, we believe that it would be useful for our delegation to know in advance the status of the reports that could be subject to a reduction in frequency or a change in format or a combination of content so that we can participate duly in said discussions. We finally appreciate the emphasis placed In the note on opportunities to improve the utility, accessibility, and quality of reports, we believe that the success of this exercise should not be measured only in the reduction in the number or length of reports, but rather in their ability to provide member states with more clear, timely, and useful information. preserving at the same time the integrity of existing mandates. Thank you very much.

I thank the distinguished representative of Chile. I give the floor now to the distinguished representative of China, to be followed by Japan and then Iran.

Co-chairs, thank you for convening today's meeting. China aligns itself with a statement delivered by Uruguay on behalf of the Group of 77. China, China thanks the Secretary-General for submitting the review of the SDGs reporting mandate pursuant to GA Resolution 80/251 and thank the Secretariat for the extensive analytical work. The SDGs report clearly sets out 3 core guiding principles, in particular that decisions on reporting mandates are the exclusive prerogative of member states and that the diverse nature of mandates and governance structures should be respected. These are important principles established in Resolution 80/251, which China values and recognizes. China consistently supports a practical and efficient approach to continuously improve the quality and the value of UN reports. The Secretary-General proposes 6 key improvement measures, including focusing on new developments, applying clearer word limits, highlighting key information, improving the presentation of data, using more precise cross-references, and providing supporting visual materials. China looks forward to the early implementation of these measures so as to enhance the quality, value, and readability of reports. We also note the SG's assessment that fewer than 5% of the reports present opportunities for combination, and around 10% could have the format or periodicity adjusted, and that he has proposed a gradual approach. China looks forward to the Secretariat presenting concrete recommendations on the combination and adjustments of reports in line of the intergovernmental review process for the consideration and decision of member states so as to achieve practical results at an early date. Co-chairs, China also thanks you for advancing the discussions within the ad hoc working group on the standards and modalities for the review of mandate implementation. China hopes that the working group will take a practical, consensus-based approach and promptly develop a set of principled guiding standards and a framework for the GA's main committees and subsidiary bodies to refer to, adapt, and apply while advancing the relevant reviews in light of the SG's recommendations. China stands ready to continue working with the co-chairs and all parties to participate constructively in the discussions to help the ad hoc working group complete its mandate as scheduled and to steadily advance the mandate implementation review in the right direction. Thank you, co-chairs.

I thank the distinguished representative of China. I give the floor now to the distinguished representative of Japan and then Iran and South Africa.

Thank you, distinguished co-chairs. Japan expresses our sincere appreciation for Secretariat's comprehensive review and valuable report to this Working Group. We commend their diligent work in fulfilling the mandate of GA Resolution 80/251 on Mandate Implementation Review. On streamlining reports, Japan believes that significant progress towards concise and more user-oriented content can be achieved through the Secretariat's innovative approaches and expertise, even without changing existing mandates. Such efforts are essential for enhancing the sustainability of UN activities, particularly given the current constraints on resources. Japan is fully supportive of such efforts. Regarding the Secretariat's note, Japan would like to offer the following 4 observations for further consideration. First, we anticipated that this note would provide the outcome of a review under paragraph 16. of the resolution to identify candidates for combination or change and present them to member states for their consideration. However, it doesn't appear to include or present these identified candidates. Therefore, Japan would appreciate further clarification on when and how these candidates will be presented for member states' consideration. Second, the note The note indicates that the Secretary-General plans to proceed with improvements to reporting. For effective planning and follow-up, Japan would find it highly beneficial if the Secretariat could provide a more concrete timeline for these forthcoming initiatives. Third, the note anticipates a 700,000-word reduction in reporting. To fully grasp the magnitude and overall impact of this achievement, it would be helpful if the Secretariat could provide these figures in the context of entire volume of UN reports. Fourth, in case the Secretariat provides recommendations to relevant intergovernmental organs, Japan emphasizes such recommendations should be well balanced across the 3 pillars of the United Nations and firmly grounded in objective, data-driven evidence. Japan stands ready to engage constructively in this Working Group and looks forward to transparent and productive discussion. I thank you, co-chairs.

I thank the distinguished representative of Japan. I give the floor now to Iran and then South Africa.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Bismillahirrahmanirrahim. Thank you, co-chairs. Islamic Republic of Iran aligns itself with the statement delivered by Uruguay on behalf of the Group of 77 and China. We thank the Secretary-General for this review and appreciate the efforts undertaken to improve the effectiveness, accessibility, and usability of United Nations reports. We particularly welcome the reaffirmation that reporting mandate remains the exclusive prerogative of member states. Thank you. States that the diversity of mandates must be respected and that any adjustments should be gradual and should not alter underlying mandates. While we support efforts to make reports more focused and user-friendly, improvements in format should not come at the expense of substance or the oversight role entrusted to member states. Likewise, proposals concerning reporting pre-ODCD or the replacement of format— of formal reports, with information made available through websites or databases, should remain subject to intergovernmental guidance and decision. As noted by previous speakers, clarification is needed as to which reports are envisaged under the 5% and 10% categories. From the perspective of the Fifth Committee, many reports continue to lack the sufficient operational, financial, and implementation details, resulting in repeated requests and questions from member states for more clarification. We would therefore appreciate clarification from the Secretariat as to whether this review has considered the information that member states consistently request during deliberations. Improving quality should not simply mean reducing the length of reports. Should also mean ensuring that reports better support informed decision-making. We also thank the Secretariat for introducing the UN Transcript Platform. While new technologies may facilitate access to information, they do not constitute official reports and cannot substitute for the accuracy, context, and precision required in multilateral deliberations. Their use should therefore all remain subject to unhindered access, appropriate human oversight, and quality assurance. In this regard, we would welcome greater clarity regarding the relationship between the platform and the organization's official summary and verbatim records. We also encourage exploring whether these technologies could assist the Secretariat in expediting the preparation of official records, while ensuring that responsibility for their accuracy authority and integrity remains firmly with the Secretariat. Thank you very much.

I thank the distinguished representative of Iran. I give the floor now to the distinguished representative of South Africa, followed by Pakistan, Indonesia, and Liechtenstein will be the last speaker in this segment.

Thank you, Co-Chair, and thank you to both our Co-Chairs for leading us in this endeavor and also again for the information provided to us. I also want to express appreciation to the Secretary-General for the report and for Mr. Suzuki for walking us through the report that was presented. First and foremost, my delegation aligns with the G77, so I won't repeat what they have said and just want to add one or two elements in our national capacity. Looking at the report which we received from the Secretary-General, mention is made, and I think which is appropriate for us to also consider, paragraph 8 of Resolution 80251, which for my delegation gets more to the heart of what we're trying to do. That paragraph indicates that this effort by the SG in terms of reporting is looking how to assist us as member states to better consider how how mandates are implemented. So this is part of the mandate implementation review. So it's not just reviewing mandates, it's looking at the implementation. And I did see in the report that one of the questions that was considered by the Secretariat is whether alternative implementation of the reporting mandate is suitable or available, for example, by changing format, publishing information on the webpage, etc. So from that perspective, I thought we would also see a response to that consideration, but I didn't really see anything related to that. And the point we're getting to is if there is an indication what the status of the implementation of the specific mandate is. So if you are reporting on a resolution, is it being implemented? So if we get that sense, we can actually, as member states, make an assessment: is this something useful? Is this something which has stagnated? Is there a good reason why we're not implementing it? Maybe it's not useful anymore, or maybe, you know, there aren't resources. So if we have maybe a paragraph in reports that could indicate to us to say, this is the status, and it doesn't have to be anything extensive because— and I like what the US delegate has also said— the reports we've received on UNAID is actually purpose-built for our work here, and it's so easy to read. Now, not all reports will be exactly the same. It depends, and paragraph 8 of Resolution 80/251 indicates that the change in reports will depend on the purpose, on the nature of the information being provided, obviously the context. So different reports will look differently, but we got used to the same reports looking the same way we got from the Secretary, and I understand that that makes sense and it's easy, but I think the request to have horses for courses documents for specific purposes, and then just to simplify it in a sense that we as member states can easily sense, is this being implemented, is this mandate still relevant? And I think that's overall what we're trying to get to. So if that could help, that would be a request from our delegation. Thank you very much.

I thank the distinguished representative of South Africa. You could have been in a room we were in yesterday. I give the floor now to the distinguished representative of Pakistan, to be followed by Indonesia.

Thank you, co-chairs, for convening this meeting. On the Secretary-General's report, Pakistan aligns itself with the statement delivered by Uruguay on behalf of the G77 and China. We welcome the note as a constructive basis for further consideration. We wish to underscore one point in particular, as the note itself reaffirmed, Decisions on mandates remain the exclusive prerogative of member states, and where an intergovernmental organ has specified the format or periodicity of a report, that guidance must continue to be followed. For us, this means any proposed adjustment should ultimately be considered and decided by the specific intergovernmental body to which that mandate belongs. We would welcome further clarity from the Secretariat on how recommendations requiring intergovernmental decisions will be channeled back to the relevant committees and bodies. We would also welcome greater insight on how the 5% and 10% figures were arrived at, which are referenced in the note, including to ascertain consistency of approach in, in formulating those figures. Moreover, we stress the need for timely information sharing by the Secretariat before proceeding to undertake improvements on reporting which do not require intergovernmental decision-making. On next steps, we reiterate the points we made during the hybrid workshop in May. The working group should function primarily as a learning platform, developing a voluntary checklist of criteria for proponents to apply to their own mandates and building an evidence base, including a database of activity-generating mandates, rather than initiating a compulsory top-down review exercise. In this regard, we wish to elaborate again on the scope test we had proposed to check whether a GA resolution whenever adopted, continues to generate ongoing activity. Applying this test and then excluding OP25 GA mandates from this would give us an initial pool of active mandates, but the value of this pool would depend on how it is built. So we believe the Secretariat has an essential role here, not simply to list mandate titles, but to map each operative paragraph of a resolution to the specific ongoing activity it generates and to the department or entity responsible for implementing it, because not all OPs in a resolution generate activity in the Secretariat. This mapping would give the Working Group an evidence-based picture of what each mandate actually produces and would let proponents themselves assess against the voluntary criteria whether an activity remains time-bound, well-resourced, or substantively considered by the requesting body, or can we make adjustments to it? We believe without this mapping discussion of scope and criteria, we would have an exercise which would risk resting on assumptions rather than evidence, and we would welcome an indication from the Secretariat of how this mapping exercise could be undertaken and with what timeline. As we also noted at the last workshop, retirement or adjustment of a mandate should be a last resort based on transparent evidence-based criteria and pursued voluntarily by proponents. The working group should continue to serve as a learning platform, drawing on lessons from the main committee chair's own rationalization efforts in order to avoid duplication. We also caution against replicating the 2006 exercise. and we believe that the Working Group's work should conclude within its agreed timeframe. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Pakistan. I give the floor now to Indonesia and then Liechtenstein.

Thank you, co-chairs. Indonesia aligns itself with the statement by Uruguay on behalf of the G77 and China, and we wish to add the following points in our national capacity. We welcome the Secretary-General's timely note and also to extend appreciation towards the work on the initial review of the reports. We highly appreciate the reassurance that decisions remain the exclusive prerogative of member states. It is vital that member states remain at the driving seat of this important process. Furthermore, we appreciate the ongoing efforts to streamline our reporting system, enhancing the quality, accessibility, and efficiency of these documents. Is indeed critical. More concise, practical, and meaningful reports will certainly help our daily work. We also appreciate the reader-oriented approaches to help us digest critical information quickly. Further, we would like to seek clarification on some points. First, on the period of assessment, the note mentioned that the current focus is on reports published between 2023 and 2025. Is this intended to test As a pilot project, will there be an opportunity to also explore broader range period of reports? Second, the review suggests that 5 to 10% of reports could have their frequency adjusted or format changed. To join other delegations before us, we would like to also seek clarification from the Secretary to share more details on the standards and criteria used to propose this approach. Our delegation looks forward to the next steps of the note.

Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Indonesia and give the floor now to Liechtenstein.

Thank you, co-chairs, for convening today's meeting, and thank you very much to the Secretariat for today's report, both of which we understand are carried out in line with Resolution AD/251. It's extremely important that we make efforts to streamline and reduce duplication in reporting, as much for reasons of financial efficiency as for ensuring that member states understand the scope of what the organization is doing as a result of our work. It's indeed good to know that the Secretariat— the Secretary-General sees the vast majority of reports as remaining appropriate in their current form. That being said, we do note some of the concerns we've heard in the room put forward by delegations this morning, Good morning, and in this respect, we wanted to highlight 2 aspects of paragraph 16 of Resolution 80/251, including that we request the Secretariat to, and I quote, review the full portfolio of mandated reports, end quote, and that we ask for the, quote, identification of candidates, end quote, for combination or change in periodicity for presentation to member states.

Thank you.

in line with paragraph 16, which we hope can help create an opening for a more in-depth conversation about how we approach the current stock of mandates, which indeed, of course, is one of the goals of this ad hoc working group. We look forward to further collaboration both with you, the co-chairs, and with the Secretariat in this respect as the work of the AHWG moves forward. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Liechtenstein. Before we move into the next segment, I'm going to offer the floor back to Ms. Suzuki for some reflections on what we have heard in the room.

Great.

Thank you so much for your comments and questions, and I think it would be helpful to recall how some of the determination had been achieved, because some of the questions were posed in that regard. So, as to recall, 20-plus entities, which are— vast majority of them are the ones that are producing reports, were asked to contribute to this assessment. And these entities were asked to assess whether 2 or more reports address issues that overlap substantially, whether a later report repeats information provided in an earlier report, whether there has been a change in a context or a level of substantive activity, or whether alternative implementation of the reporting mandate is suitable or available. So in accordance with Resolution AD/251, The specific recommendations that follow from this review will be provided at a time of consultation on the next draft resolution or draft decision, while the ad hoc working group will continue its work in parallel. So as guided by the co-chairs, we are at the disposal of member states to support you in any way that brings about the best result. And with regard to the question about how these— the improvements that I had mentioned earlier would be applied, so the improvements will apply to all reports prepared by the Secretary-General. And by the way, we did review the entire reporting portfolio. There was a question about why 2023 to 2025, and that is because not every report is annual. The 3-year period ensures that triannual reports and all of those reports that are not as frequent are captured. But the entirety of the reporting portfolio was part of this review and assessment. So, we expect that the first reports that are going to be submitted for editing and translation by September 1st will will adapt the new improvement guidance. And we have taken note on your feedback on the United Nations Digital Library. And we'll be discussing with our colleagues in Adapt Hammershield Library who maintain that library for improvement as well. So thank you for that. And with regard to the note on mandated implementation review, we are finalizing it, and we expect for it to be issued by the end of July. And in this note, it will outline existing mechanisms for collective mandated implementation reviews, such as the Ad Hoc Working Group on the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly or the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations. For example, we will explain how the bureau of these bodies or the Secretariat have reported on how mandates are implemented and what the status of their implementation is. And this could inform member states on their thinking, your thinking, for mandate implementation review. With regard to how to link implementation records in a mandate registry, actually, this is very much work in progress. And more information on this will follow in our next update, which I will provide shortly. And as the DPR of South Africa pointed out, various requests of Resolution 88/251 are very much related to this question at hand. But in short, we want to integrate the information that we provide today into a mandate registry, like many of you have requested. And it is important that this information is provided early on in the process, and as part of the next update, we will provide the necessary information. So what this means is that when our SGE reports report on the implementation of mandates, they are referenced in the mandate registry. So finally, on the issue of the transcripts, and how it relates to the official records of the organization. Their disclaimer is posted on the website that these transcripts are created using automatic speech recognition and are not part of the official record. So there is no relationship as such. So these are faster, an efficient reference, but should not be constituted as official or authoritative record. So, for the official record, please continue to refer to the organization's verbatim records and summary records. So, thank you for that.

Thank you very much, Ayako. I give the floor once again to the United States.

Thanks so much to the Secretary. Just a quick follow-up. First off, appreciate the update on the timing of the note with respect to the clustered approach. You had mentioned that the methodology was to survey on a kind of entity-by-entity basis and see what came back. And I was just— I was curious whether that approach captured potential similarities in reports across different entities and whether that was incorporated into the the statistics that are included in the note and were presented to us today?

Thanks.

Yes.

So, we relied on the relevant entities to provide the assessment on the, as I said, the duplicative nature reports. But obviously, there was also an overall assessment assessment of the reports by the UNAIDS Secretariat as well. But in terms of the recommendations, we very much needed to defer to those who are experts of the subject matter.

Okay, thank you so much, Ayaka. line with the sort of 3 parts of this meeting, I'm actually going to invite Ayaka to come back and give us the latest updates on what the Secretariat is working on in terms of more technical work for our benefit. So, you have the floor again, Ayaka.

Thank you very much, Ambassador. And I think the feedback from you reiterated the interlinkages of different component parts, right? I mean, when We talked about— when we talk about how to improve reporting, given that mandates are the exclusive property of the member states, we cannot do this without addressing other component parts of the mandate lifecycle. So, it's really all interlinked. So, let me now turn to the broader mandate implementation review because it is very much an integral part. So, I would like to highlight and to recall and refresh your memory on 2 paragraphs from Resolution 80/2.1. First, in paragraph 24, it— through that, the General Assembly asked the Secretary-General to identify mandates that may be inactive, duplicative, or fully implemented. The results will be presented to member states for their consideration. We're improving and expanding the mandate registry so that we can begin to deliver on this request. Secondly, paragraph 21, the General Assembly agreed to develop criteria to guide decisions on mandates while reaffirming that such decisions are to be informed by accurate data and impartial expertise and analysis. Some of you have referred to this as evidence-based space, we're now laying the foundation for such data and analysis to support you in taking decisions on mandates. So, to that end, we will soon launch the next update for the mandates.un.org. So, the mandate registry, as you may recall, had previously included only around 4,000 resolutions that were cited in the— actively cited in our budget documents. The new version will contain over 40,000 resolutions and decisions by the end of this month. And there you will be able to easily group resolutions that recur across sessions, see trends and patterns across different versions. And resolutions can also be filtered to show how those resolutions that— to show that those resolutions that have programs and subprograms in place and corresponding budget documents to implement them. So this is a first lens for mandate implementation review. In support of the General Assembly's work to make decisions on the renewal, adoption, merger, replacement and retirement of General Assembly mandates, we will make available data and analysis. And in the coming months, we will link the text of mandate to evidence of mandate implementation, budget allocated to the subprogram, and the related results framework. So an example is provided on the slide that should come up. So, take Resolution 76/183 as an example. In paragraph 9, the General Assembly requested UNODC to continue promoting specific sports-based interventions. Evidence of mandate implementation can be found in the mandated reports on sport as an enabler of sustainable development. The registry would link this report directly to the resolution. We will also enable a direct link from the resolution to the programs we have in place to support its implementation. So in this example, the resolution is cited by Subprogram 5 entitled Justice under Program 13 entitled Drugs and Crime, together with approximately 80 other mandates. that it covers. A total of $1.6 million was approved for 2025 in the related program budget for all these mandates. The results framework of the subprogram can be found in a program plan and performance information. The registry would link to all this directly, helping you to drill from mandates to programs resources, results, and reports in one place and in one transparent, user-friendly chain of links. The goal is better visibility across mandate landscape and lifecycle. We're working on digital tools for all of these, including new versions of mandates.un.org, open.un.org, and results.un.org. So your feedback will be very welcome on what data you need to make mandate implementation review a success. As you prepare for the 81st session, we will organize a technical briefing in September to provide further information on this. More information on this will be shared closer to that date. Thank you very much, co-chairs.

Thank you so much, Ayaka. And this is, of course, still very exciting work in progress, but— and we will come back to it. But I will just look out and see if— are there any sort of immediate questions on this part of the Secretariat's work, mindful that we will come back with technical briefings and showcasing this when it's finished? If not, I think I would like to start by thanking you for your reflections and and comments and careful considerations on the SG report, or note on reports. On our work on criteria and modalities, we have benefited from hybrid workshops, formal consultations, and written inputs in response to the non-paper circulated earlier. We are very grateful for the thoughtful and constructive engagement from delegations throughout this process. Throughout our consultations, we have heard broad support for a pragmatic and constructive implementation review focused on enhancing the clarity, coherence, and effectiveness of mandates. We heard strong support from many of the underlying principles that should inform mandate implementation review. At the same time, delegations expressed differing views regarding the sequencing of the remaining deliverables, particularly whether criteria and modalities should be finalized following receipt of the Secretary-General's report, or whether work should proceed in parallel. So, we wish to ensure you all that we have taken careful note of the valuable recommendations provided to the Working Group thus far. We reiterate that the importance of maintaining a collaborative and inclusive approach with the full engagement of all member states to ensure a process that is both effective and transparent. And with that, Brian, I'll give it over to you.

Thank you so much, Marietta, and thank you, colleagues, for that rich discussion. It's exactly what we need. I just wanted to, before I come back to the script, just to assure you that when we hear from you in the room like this, we take the messaging that we, we get from you into our more detailed discussions with the Secretariat, which we have weekly with them, to make sure that the work that is emanating from the Secretariat in, in pursuance of Resolution 8251 remains consistent with the views of the membership. So you can be assured that we have taken careful note of the suggestions, the questions, the comments that you've made, and we will do deep dives with the Secretariat to make sure that we are being responsive to the concerns that you have raised. But coming back now to the modalities and criteria, building on the previous interventions during the Working Group meeting on the 2nd of June and the hybrid workshops on the 16th and 18th of June, and the broad convergence around the Co-Chairs' non-paper on criteria and that it is. What we intend to do is to circulate in the coming weeks a report of the Working Group on Managed Implementation Review pursuant to paragraphs 33 and of the resolution. These 2 call for the development of clear and objective criteria to guide decisions on the renewal, adaptation, merger, replacement, or retirement retirement of GA mandates, and of modalities to guide the review of the existing stock of GA mandates. This is to be done by the end of August. We recognize that August is a challenging time for many of us here, and we want to ensure that the process continues to benefit from the full engagement of the broadest membership. So what we intend to do is to move a little bit ahead of that August deadline and to issue to you our report on the modalities and criteria by the end of this month. So you will have it as you're lying on the beach to review and read, and in the nights Perhaps when you're missing the General Assembly so much, you will have something to remind you of all the hard work that we do here. So it will be something that you can reflect on, and then we will come back to it with any tweaks, any recommendations that you have to strengthen, to raise the level of ambition, to adjust, when we meet again, perhaps in the first week of September. September. But for us to be able to satisfy the requirement that we develop these modalities and criteria by the end of August, we want to just get ahead of that so that we are satisfying the requirements and are true to the instructions that you gave to us in Resolution 8251. So we will define clear next steps as well, including timelines and plans for piloting selected modalities. We're taking full account of the, the views that we heard that this work cannot be completed until we have received the reports that we've mandated the Secretary-General to do, many of which will not come in before the end of August in any event. So we have to maintain a level of flexibility around this part of the process to take to be able to take account of those reports, so that we end up with something meaningful and worthwhile. So this approach will ensure coordinated implementation and facilitate informed, evidence-based recommendations for the Group's future work. This is not going to prejudge decisions by Member States, nor constitute implementation of any review mechanism prior to intergovernmental agreement. I just wanted to be clear on that. And with that, I hand the floor back to Marietta.

Thank you, Brian. Nearing the end here, but I think, I mean, this work is so much guided by both pragmatism, practicalities, but also principles. So the criteria and modalities that we are sort of putting together after all the inputs will, I think, be presented as guidance for member states, to be tools to be used and adapted by— to the mandate and to the body concerned. So on that note, let me underline also that these tools aim to collectively develop a framework that equips member states with a practical toolkit for stewarding mandates across their full lifecycle, from creation and implementation to impact and review. In approaching these deliverables, we wish to develop a toolkit that will strengthen transparency, coherence, accountability, and results, while fully preserving member states' prerogatives. And with that, I'm not sure if I have more to say. Do you want to add anything?

Just to say thank you for the reflections you've given today. I think they were extremely helpful for us as co-chairs, but also for the Secretariat. to hear from you in the room. And we, as I said, we will continue to have these deep dives with the Secretariat team to flesh out the responses to the concerns that you have raised.

And— Have a happy summer, all of you, and see you in September.