A/HRC/34/33 underlined the importance of engaging and consulting with rights-holders, especially vulnerable groups. Furthermore, recalling that “you can’t manage what you can’t measure”, he underlined the importance of pursuing the development of indicators at the national level. Solid and credible statistics were fundamental for taking any sound political decision: they allowed questions to be raised and answers to be found. Mr. di Robilant made a call for more concrete proposals of a technical nature, suggesting, for instance, the creation of an international human rights information system, a kind of hub bringing together highquality data and indicators from the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and other relevant European Union institutions, including Eurostat, the Schengen evaluation system, the European Ombudsman and other regional bodies. Such a system would strengthen civil society engagement, help to raise public awareness of international standards and monitoring mechanisms, and also help practitioners to make informed decisions and assessments. 14. Mr. di Robilant further underlined the need to pay attention to the practical implementation of legal and political human rights commitments. He explained that putting human rights at the centre of the stage was also an operational question, and that many lawmakers, judges, lawyers and officials nonetheless remained unaware of the obligations arising from international treaties and conventions and the momentum they created in order to expand human rights for all. This was problematic, especially when justice is delivered by actors at different levels of governance. For that, simple and practical tools were needed to ensure that fundamental rights standards are upheld, aiming them at legal practitioners in particular. Universities and professional accreditation bodies, for example, could offer human rights training as a compulsory module for obtaining a professional qualification. 15. At the executive and legislative levels, Mr. di Robilant proposed the introduction in all States that were parties to international conventions an ex ante compliance check vis-àvis their international human rights obligations, to be carried out by a specifically appointed administrative branch, which would review all draft laws or decrees before their adoption by the relevant authority and their subsequent implementation. This would resemble the environmental impact assessments many States already carry out before adopting and implementing key policies and laws. 16. Mr. di Robilant underlined the need to create a “smart mix” by increasing systemic cooperation among key actors, including national human rights institutions, equality bodies, national courts, ombuds institutions and civil society organizations. Non-governmental organizations should be heard in the context of assessment and evaluation of impact, or when the implementation of existing legislation is reviewed. To that end, it would be beneficial to set up at the national level a body with convening powers allowing key civil society actors to meet, exchange experiences and best practices, as well as to formulate proposals for the improvement and implementation of policies. As an example, Mr. di Robilant referred to the experience of the Agency for Fundamental Rights with its Fundamental Rights Platform. The establishment of similar platforms at national level should be considered where comparable tools did not yet exist, thus fostering national human rights communities. Mr. di Robilant recalled that the shaping of policies on fundamental rights through the participation of various segments of society was a key concern of the principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (the Paris Principles). 17. As a final point, Mr. di Robilant emphasized that global challenges such as migration, poverty, cultural diversity, climate change and governance could not be tackled without the direct involvement of cities. Urbanization had always been a fundamental vector of change in shaping social development, including social equality. The voice of cities was, however, rarely heard in debates on global issues. A way to allow local 5