A/HRC/33/26 39. Mr. Phuangketkeow shared the concern raised about politicization, but noted that politics would always be a part of the Council simply because it was composed of States. There were different views of human rights and, therefore, mutual respect and dialogue were essential in the Council. The conversations within the Council must also include nongovernmental organizations. There was also a need to follow-up on the resolutions and ensure their implementation on the ground. The number of armed conflicts had declined, but their severity and impact on civilians had increased. The Council would be addressing more and more human rights violations in the context of armed conflict. Therefore, it was important to consider the status of the Council, in view of human rights being one of the three pillars of the United Nations. The relationship with the Security Council was also important in that context; although it was a sensitive issue, it should be considered so that the Council could have an impact on the lives of people. 40. Mr. Rücker said that efficiency, effectiveness and New York-Geneva relations were among the solvable problems. Participants in the discussion had made it very clear that effectiveness with regard to the impact on the ground was the most important issue. The Council had tremendous assets in that regard, including the participation of civil society, which must be protected. The universal periodic review was another asset and the process needed to be strengthened and streamlined and to have indicators for the implementation of recommendations. The membership of the Council was a political issue, but civil society provided tools to track what States had promised and how they had performed in the Council, and that should play a role in elections of new Members to the Council. A number of initiatives for improving efficiency could be undertaken within the framework of the institution-building package, including measures to reduce the number of resolutions adopted by the Council. At the next review of the Council, Member States should consider placing the Council on an equal footing with the security and peace pillar and the development pillar by making the Human Rights Council a principal organ in the United Nations system. 41. Mr. Ndong Ella said that more needed to be done to strengthen synergies between Geneva and New York. In that context, issues that had already been addressed in Geneva, such as the issue of reprisals dealt with by the Council in its resolution 24/24, should not be seized by the Third Committee in New York. In that regard, it was particularly important to advance the proposal of making the Council a truly independent body. 42. Ms. de Albuquerque said that States must come forward and support the Office of the High Commissioner with more resources in order to respond to the needs expressed and deliver on human rights education and making the Council more accessible to the public. The Office should work more at the national level, including with national human rights institutions and civil society organizations. In addition, non-governmental organizations and special procedures should be involved in the process of the selection of new mandate holders. 43. Concluding the discussion, the moderator noted that the greatest gift of the Human Rights Council to the world was a Council that stood up unequivocally for the principles of human rights for all, without excluding anyone and for the benefit of all. 10