A/HRC/8/WG.2/TF/2 page 16 B. Preliminary review of the Cotonou Partnership Agreement between European Union (EU) and African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries 61. Pursuant to the proposal of the presidency of the EU during the third session of the task force, the Working Group mandated the task force to give priority to the Cotonou Agreement.2 The cooperation under the agreement encompasses a wide range of policy fields, including human rights, good governance, environmental conservation and peacebuilding. 62. Although the assessment of this partnership is still at an early stage, the technical mission provided an opening for further dialogue on the implementation of the Cotonou Agreement, in light of its various pillars. Active and fruitful dialogue has also been initiated with various actors, such as the European Commission (EC), the ACP secretariat and civil society organizations. 63. The task force has identified a clear link between the Cotonou Agreement and the right-to-development framework and criteria. While the right to development is not explicitly referred to in the Cotonou Agreement, certain core elements are reflected in it.3 The right to development criteria relating to an enabling environment and explicit incorporation of human rights principles in the partnership reveal gaps in the agreement and highlight the value of impact assessments, especially as regards gender equality and marginalized groups. The task force believes more attention should be paid to the mutually-reinforcing obligations of the Cotonou Agreement and the right-to-development criteria. 64. The task force favours development monitoring benchmarks in the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs), currently in the process of being negotiated or concluded. Other concerns of the task force include ownership by the ACP countries of their development processes, the continued special and differential treatment of ACP countries in the EPAs, and the impact of the latter on the least developed countries and on vulnerable communities within ACP States. In the view of the task force, there should be adequate recognition of the need for country-specific adjustment compensation and for additional resources for trade capacity-building, and for independent monitoring and evaluation. Furthermore, the task force is concerned about non-tariff barriers to trade such as overly restrictive sanitary and phytosanitary measures, technical barriers to trade and rules of origin procedures. 65. During meetings at the EC and with the ACP secretariat, it became clear that more in-depth assessment of Country Strategy Papers (CSPs) as well as EPAs and their relationship to the human rights provisions in the Cotonou Agreement is required. Therefore, further dialogue should take place with relevant officials in the EC Directorate-General for Development, the Directorate-General for Trade, Europe Aid, and the ACP secretariat, as well as civil society organizations that have been identified as future contacts. 2 3 A/HRC/4/47, para. 56. See in particular article 8 on good governance and political dialogue, article 9 on democracy, rule of law and respect for human rights and article 96 on political consultation and the non-execution clause.