A/HRC/24/37 28. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) said it was committed to the promotion and implementation of the right to development and supported the work of the Working Group. As the focal point for consideration of trade and development and interrelated issues, UNCTAD placed development at the centre of its work. 29. Centre Europe – Tiers Monde said that the world today was marked by inadequate development, poverty and inequality, which demonstrated the failure of neoliberal policies. Concepts such as growth and competition should be ruled out from the criteria. Instead, focus should be given to respecting the right of peoples to self-determination, State sovereignty, democracy at the national and international levels, and the responsibility of international institutions. The ONG Hope International said that prevailing issues concerning food security, health and other human rights situations on the ground should be given priority by the Working Group. A legally binding instrument might not be an effective way to address these problems. It called for a day devoted to development efforts at the Human Rights Council or a development periodic review, which would create an environment favourable to the realization of the right to development. 30. Caritas Internationalis, on behalf of the Working Group of Catholic Organizations on the Right to Development and International Solidarity, said that it preferred the term “parameters” to “criteria”. It called for a periodic review of progress towards these parameters, which should allow flexibility for States to develop their own specific subparameters. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung said that States could not ignore human rights obligations when entering international agreements in other fields. The Indian Council of South America said that the right to self-determination of indigenous peoples must be recognized and expressed concern about the lack of participation of indigenous peoples in the development of international instruments. B. Review of progress in the implementation of the right to development including consideration, revision and refinement of the right to development criteria and operational subcriteria 31. At its 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th meetings, from 13 to 15 May, the Working Group considered and revised the draft operational right to development subcriteria listed in the annex of addendum 2 to the report of the High-Level Task Force on the implementation of the right to development on its sixth session (A/HRC/15/WG.2/TF/2/Add.2) under attribute 1, “Comprehensive and human-centred development policy” as well as proposals for additional subcriteria under new criteria proposed at the last session of the Working Group. 32. Prior to the substantive review of the subcriteria, the Chairperson-Rapporteur presented to the Working Group two conference room papers 4 which contained submissions received since the last session of the Working Group from Governments, groups of Governments and regional groups, as well as inputs from non-governmental organizations. Providing a brief overview and highlighting the suggestions relevant to the discussion of the current session, the Chairperson-Rapporteur stated that the submissions varied significantly in their approach, ranging from detailed proposals to more general assessment or comments. One submission noted that the draft criteria and operational subcriteria provided a well-constructed and comprehensive framework to measure the essential features of the right to development. Another submission, while generally supportive of the methodology and approach, commented that there was inconsistency in the manner in 4 All submissions received in 2012 and 2013 are available at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Development/Pages/HighLevelTaskForceWrittenContributions.aspx 9