A/HRC/9/17 page 7 17. Following the above presentation, the Working Group made comments on (a) the work of the task force on the four existing partnerships; (b) additional partnerships, including geographic and thematic expansion; (c) the evolution of the criteria; and (d) the time frame for implementation of the road map. Representatives of the African Group, the African Union, Algeria, Argentina, Bangladesh, Barbados, Brazil, Cuba (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement), Egypt, Ethiopia, France (on behalf of the European Union), India, Pakistan (on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference) and non-governmental organizations (3D and Friedrich Ebert Foundation) took the floor. 18. In relation to the task force’s review of the African Peer Review Mechanism, on which a number of delegations commented, Mr. Marks clarified that the references in the task force report to specific civil and political rights were included in order to reflect a wide range of issues raised in the discussions, but they must be seen in the broader context of the full examination of the Mechanism. On the broader issue of making judgements, Mr. Marks acknowledged that the mandate of the task force was ambiguous: it was assisting the Working Group in its mandate “to monitor and review progress (…) in promotion and implementation of the right to development” and developing criteria for “periodic evaluation with a view to improving the effectiveness of global partnerships”, which clearly involves evaluation, while at the same time its engagement with partnerships was not to be a basis for judging them. He recommended continuing assessments on the basis of dialogue and cooperation, not accusation, and welcomed suggestions that the task force should undertake consultations prior to any technical mission with the secretariat of the Mechanism or other partnerships in order to determine in advance how the mission could be of use to the partnership in question, while allowing the task force to test and improve the criteria. 19. Barbados commented that, with regard to the Cotonou Agreement, dialogue with the recipient countries would be useful to determine how the partnership was working, not only with regard to the human rights components of the agreement, but also whether issues such as access to technology, enhanced market access and the channelling of appropriate developmental support and assistance to countries and sectors, which may be affected by a loss of preferential access, were being addressed. It was suggested that the task force should liaise with the Caribbean Community secretariat or the Caribbean Regional Negotiating Machinery on this issue before any field visits. 20. During the discussion on thematic expansion referred to in paragraph 85 of the task force report, several speakers supported the proposals to expand thematically to other issues under Millennium Development Goal 8, such as access to affordable essential medicines, debt relief, trading and financial systems, the transfer of technology, and intellectual property. For thematic expansion, preference was expressed to evaluate global or north-south partnerships rather than regional, bilateral or south-south partnerships, as the former would allow the task force to examine the wider implications of thematic issues across the world. Comments were also made on the value of thematic evaluation of bilateral or regional partnerships as they also had thematic components. 21. At the request of the Working Group, two representatives from WHO briefed it on the work of the Intergovernmental Working Group on Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property and Millennium Development Goal target 8.E. It was acknowledged that target 8.E represented a complex thematic area in itself, as it included intellectual property, financial