A/HRC/22/34 50. Some participants more specifically pointed out that the Human Rights Council should also carefully guarantee the implementation of existing norms with regard to defenders, in particular the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. 51. In the view of many speakers, whenever a credible allegation was made, the Human Rights Council must demand that States ensure prompt, impartial, transparent and effective investigation of any alleged reprisal and that perpetrators are held to account. Any Government concerned must report to the Council in plenary session on measures taken to investigate, the outcome of investigations and any prosecution and provision of reparation to victims, in line accordance with Council resolution 12/2. 52. The Human Rights Council should also support efforts by United Nations bodies, including its own mechanisms, to prevent and address instances of reprisal or intimidation, in accordance with Council resolution 12/2. 53. Many delegations stressed that the issue of intimidation and reprisals should be discussed on a regular and timely basis by the Human Rights Council. The report of the Secretary-General on reprisals should be presented in an annual dedicated discussion by the Council. This would give States concerned the opportunity to provide feedback on the steps that they have taken to investigate and take appropriate action in response to allegations. In that context, the Council should explore the possibility of using the general debate under item 5 to address cases of reprisal. 54. It was also proposed that, when a State was responsible for committing a pattern of intimidation and reprisals, reconsideration of the State’s membership in the Human Rights Council should be automatically triggered, and that such information should inform future elections for Council membership. 55. Many delegations praised the firm stance taken by the President of the Human Rights Council. In that connection, it was stressed that all future Presidents should speak against reprisals at every Council session, and in particular at the sessions of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, on the basis of the examples set by the last two Council Presidents. 56. Many participants in their interventions addressed the particular role of the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner. Their firm stance and engagement against reprisals was fully supported and seen as an important contribution to creating awareness of the extent of the problem, in particular by means of annual reports on this issue. In this connection, speakers underlined the fact that States should look carefully at the report of the Secretary-General and follow up on the allegations it contained. 57. The report of the Secretary-General was praised as an important tool in the prevention of and fight against reprisals. Some delegations welcomed in particular the inclusion of a section focused on the follow-up to previous cases. Delegations emphasized that the report should receive appropriate attention and follow-up from States and the Human Rights Council. 58. Some delegations noted that facts relating to acts of reprisal and intimidation should be established on the basis of objective and reliable information from credible sources that were duly cross-checked to the greatest extent possible. In this connection, States concerned should be consulted when an allegation of reprisal was made. It should be ensured that information from all sides was gathered and analysed, thereby avoiding a unilateral approach. Sources of information should be varied, and not only based on media reports. Some other States raised concern at some of the information contained in the report of the Secretary-General, which they saw as unconfirmed and unsubstantiated. They also 12