A/HRC/21/19 IV. Concluding remarks 35. After the adoption of the conclusions and recommendations (paras. 39 to 47 below), Egypt (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement) expressed its appreciation that work had started on the criteria, and for the positive spirit, despite some difficulties with regard to the conclusions and recommendations. It was stressed that extra meeting time was required to work on the criteria and operational sub-criteria and to fulfil the mandate provided by the Human Rights Council. The speaker recalled Human Rights Council resolution 19/34, in which the Council stressed that the criteria and corresponding operational sub-criteria, once endorsed, should be used, as appropriate, in the elaboration of a comprehensive and coherent set of standards for the implementation of the right to development. 36. Senegal (on behalf of the African Group) commented on lessons learned during the session, which were simple; the persistence of differences during the discussions illustrated, unfortunately, the divisive manner in which the right to development was addressed and implemented. But the African Group remained confident that with a constructive spirit, the differences could be overcome, noting the potential which emanated from the discussions. The speaker reiterated four points: the centrality of the Declaration on the Right to Development; the international and national dimensions of the implementation of that right; the fact that it contained collective and individual rights; and the comprehensive nature of such a right comprising civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. He stressed the need to bear in mind the billions of people in countries of both the South and the North, among the 7 billion comprising humanity, who were awaiting the right to development to improve their daily lives. The speaker concluded by stating that it was regrettable that no agreement could be reached on the non-substantive proposal to allocate an extra week to the Working Group, from its next session, to deal with the currently insufficient time for addressing the work on criteria and operational sub-criteria. 37. Bangladesh pointed out that while the Non-Aligned Movement had demonstrated full sincerity, this was not the same for other countries. There was a need to move the process forward and hope that in the future the Working Group would be able to fulfil its mandate in a positive spirit. Cuba expressed regret over the conclusions and recommendations, which in its view were weak. It called on partners to engage constructively in future sessions and noted that Cuba was open to consultations and to engage constructively during the next session. China shared the same views as the NonAligned Movement and the African Group, and added that more time was required to fulfil the mandate. Pakistan also noted the positive spirit at the Working Group, but also added that more time was required to move forward with the work, including during the intersessional period, but unfortunately there was no consensus on that point. Thailand similarly added that the Working Group had to be realistic about the time available for the consideration of the criteria and that there was a need for genuine dialogue. 38. The European Union stated that it would continue to engage actively and constructively as it did in the current session in support of progress in the work of the Working Group. V. Conclusions and recommendations 39. At the final meeting of its thirteenth session, on 11 May 2012, the Working Group on the Right to Development adopted, by consensus, its conclusions and recommendations, in accordance with its mandate established by Commission on Human Rights resolution 1998/72. 12