A/HRC/27/63 the draft declaration. Non-governmental organizations delivered a joint statement in that regard. They hoped the draft of the Advisory Committee would not be entirely discarded. C. Article 2 76. Much of the discussion concerning article 2 focused on the proposal by one delegation to include a reference to terrorism as a serious threat to peace, which was acceptable to some delegations. One delegation was flexible with regard to the inclusion of a reference to terrorism, particularly as regards the strengthening of international cooperation thereon. It was also suggested that a reference be included to new threats to peace, such as financial and economic crises, where terrorism could also be listed, whereas other delegations were unwilling to enter into a listing exercise given the numerous other existing threats to peace, including transnational organized crime and natural disasters. Some delegations recalled that maintaining peace was in the purview of the Security Council rather than the Human Rights Council. One delegation cautioned against the working group losing sight of the focus on human rights and peace in that discussion. 77. Several delegations suggested adding a focus on development in relation to the enhancement of the rule of law by States, in order to reach a more balanced reflection of the three pillars of peace and security, development and human rights. That was seen by other delegations as potentially narrowing the scope of the article. 78. As during the first reading, non-governmental organizations and other stakeholders considered that article 2 should be expanded in the light of the draft of the Advisory Committee to include references to issues such as the suppression of war propaganda and the arms trade, commitment to disarmament and the promotion of peace and human rights education. D. Article 3 79. During the discussion on article 3, several delegations expressed their wish to reformulate the article and to make it more precise. Suggestions for alternative wording were made, drawing on article 9 of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities and on article 38 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (General Assembly resolution 61/295 of 13 September 2007). 80. One delegation reiterated that the use of the word “implementation” was problematic, as it seemed to indicate possible legal implications. 81. Non-governmental organizations and other stakeholders stated that an appropriate monitoring mechanism should be set up to monitor full compliance with the future United Nations declaration on the right to peace. They also considered it useful to set up a framework for coordinating the development of programmes to foster capacities for peace. In that sense, one non-governmental organization pointed to agreed language in existing texts, such as the Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace and the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action. E. Article 4 82. During the second reading of article 4, one delegation suggested the use of alternative wording which could be found in article 8, paragraph 4, of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities. 13