A/HRC/22/34 According to the Secretary-General, criteria for consultative status must be applied in a “transparent and fair manner”. 17. The moderator expressed the hope that the panel would identify the distinct yet complementary roles of different actors in the system – the United Nations, States, the Human Rights Council and its President, the special procedures, the treaty bodies, national human rights institutions and civil society itself – and formulate clear expectations in relation to each of them. E. Deputy State Secretary for Global Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Hungary 18. The Deputy State Secretary for Global Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Hungary, Szabolcs Takács, observed that the present discussion was timely, since the number of cases of reprisal or intimidation against individuals and groups cooperating with the United Nations seemed to be on the rise. Hungary had always taken a strong stand against threats and reprisals against those who cooperated with the United Nations. In the past 22 years, Hungary had sponsored or initiated resolutions and decisions adopted by the Human Rights Council4, and previously by the Commission of Human Rights, on this issue. He highlighted in particular Council decision 18/118, in which it strongly rejected any act of intimidation and reprisal in line with the outcome of the review of the Council. The main thrust of the decision was to provide the Council with an opportunity under agenda item 5 to address a sensitive yet crucially important issue, decided to convene the present panel discussion. 19. Mr. Takács welcomed the firm engagement of the Secretary-General, the High Commissioner and the President of the Human Rights Council, and added that the credibility and everyday functioning of the entire United Nations system was at stake. In that context, he referred to cases of intimidation and reprisal for cooperating with the Secretary-General, the Security Council, United Nations peacekeeping missions, OHCHR, the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Populations, the Human Rights Council, the Commission on the Status of Women, the special procedures, the treaty bodies and the universal periodic review mechanism, as contained in the most recent report of the Secretary-General5. 20. Mr. Takács stressed that it was now up to Member States to address the abovementioned phenomenon by addressing impunity and ensuring accountability. In conclusion, Mr. Takács expressed the hope that the panel discussion would highlight the importance of the issue at hand and provide innovative and future-oriented solutions with the aim of stopping and preventing acts of intimidation or reprisal as a consequence of cooperation with the United Nations in the field of human rights. F. Chairperson of the Coordination Committee of Special Procedures 21. The Chairperson of the Coordination Committee of Special Procedures, Michel Forst, underscored the fact that acts of intimidation and reprisal were constant subjects of concern and discussion for the special procedures. It had been discussed in depth at the most recent annual meeting of special procedures, including during meetings with the President of the Human Rights Council, States, non-governmental organizations and 4 5 6 See in particular resolution A/HRC/RES/12/2. A/HRC/21/18.