A/HRC/21/19 development. It called upon the Working Group to allow for peoples to enjoy fair, open and equal participation in the debate and an equal voice in the process. 28. Centre Europe-Tiers Monde referred to three major obstacles to the realization of the right to development: the lack of realization of the right of peoples to self-determination; unbalanced macroeconomic policies; and the lack of coordination within the United Nations system. In its view, the criteria and operational sub-criteria contained very interesting elements, however, they overlooked the failure of the market economy, which was unable to eradicate hunger and poverty and exacerbated instability. Subjected to structural adjustment programmes, many people had no say as regards their future. At their best, the criteria and operational sub-criteria were dead letters unless there was genuine change in finance and the markets. B. Review of progress in the implementation of the right to development: consideration, revision and refinement of the right-to-development criteria and operational sub-criteria 29. At its second, third, fourth, fifth, seventh and eighth meetings, from 7 to 10 May, the Working Group considered and revised the right-to-development criteria. 30. Prior to the substantive review of the criteria, the Chairperson-Rapporteur reported on the outcome of the informal consultations that she had held with Governments, groups of Governments, regional groups and other relevant stakeholders, including United Nations agencies, funds and programmes and institutions, as well as civil society and nongovernmental organizations, pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution 19/34. The consultations focused on the way forward and the methodology to be adopted by the Working Group for its consideration, revision and refinement of the right-to-development criteria and operational sub-criteria. During the informal consultations with Member States, the two main divisive points concerned the methodology to be followed in the revision of the criteria and operational sub-criteria, and whether or not indicators should be addressed and to what extent. During the consultations with United Nations agencies, clarity and guidance was requested of Member States on the role expected of them. It was suggested that a mechanism be established for their structured and effective engagement. During consultations with non-governmental organizations, it was expressed that the criteria and sub-criteria lacked accurate human rights language and that they should reflect the multidimensional character of the right to development, and not be reduced to economic, social and cultural rights alone. It was also expressed that there was a lack of emphasis on international solidarity. The methodology for formulating criteria and sub-criteria and the need to use the Declaration on the Right to Development as a basis were also stressed. Emphasis was also placed on giving due prominence to the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination in any work involving the implementation of the right to development. 31. In the ensuing discussion, Egypt, on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement and along with Cuba, reaffirmed the view that the Declaration on the Right to Development should be the basis against which the criteria and operational sub-criteria should be considered, revised and refined, and that there was no legal foundation for the elaboration of indicators. The European Union, Switzerland, the United States and Japan underlined that the criteria, sub-criteria and indicators elaborated by the task force should form the basis for future discussions, which should also involve expert input from relevant United Nations bodies and other international organizations, non-governmental and civil society organizations, academic and research institutions, and other stakeholders. 32. Thereafter, the Chairperson-Rapporteur presented a short summary of the submissions received from Governments, groups of Governments, regional groups and 10