A/HRC/4/43 page 10 39. It was highlighted that the Human Rights Council would have to address not only each individual mandate but also the nature, structure and functioning of the system. It was argued that the Council should not embark on the review of mandates until it had established sound objective criteria on the basis of which such a review should be undertaken. 40. Concerning the numerous and complex issues to be addressed in the context of the review, representatives of civil society would be presenting concrete proposals to the Council and share already existing documents with mandate-holders. It was stressed that mandate-holders should also have a collective position with regard to these fundamental issues and embark in a dialogue with the Council with a view to strongly defending the fundamental principles that have successfully guided the special procedures system. In this context the role of the Coordination Committee was emphasized by many participants. Mandate-holders were in particular invited to think about ways in which they would like the Human Rights Council to consider their reports, and the type of interaction which would be desirable during the Council’s sessions; the periodicity of reports; and the type of outcome of the discussions of the latter. It was reiterated that in the context of the review of mandates it was crucial to consider the issue of follow-up and implementation, in particular it had to be considered how special procedures could assist the Council in follow-up and vice versa. 41. The importance of ensuring the integration of special procedures’ findings and recommendations into the work of the Human Rights Council was repeatedly raised. The work of special procedures should in particular not only be integrated in UPR, but also into the other activities of the Council, including when it addresses gross human rights violations or, provides emergency responses and technical cooperation. For special procedures’ work to be able to feed into the work of the Human Rights Council there was, on the one hand, a need to ensure cooperation from Member States in allowing special procedures’ visits and responding promptly to their communications and, on the other, a need for special procedures to adjust their methods of work so as to be able to provide regularly qualitative and quantitative assessment of cooperation on communications and on visit requests, as well as to formulate strategic and precise recommendations indicating a time frame for implementation. It was suggested that, in order to ensure that the wealth of information produced by mandate-holders is properly utilized by all stakeholders, there should be a compilation of communications submitted by special procedures by country. 42. A representative of a national human rights institution (NHRIs) stressed how beneficial the cooperation between special procedures and NHRIs is for both actors and provided concrete examples of such cooperation. In particular they emphasized the role that NHRIs can have in ensuring outreach during and after country visits and in providing follow-up to special procedures’ recommendations. 43. The following issues were stressed by various representatives of the civil society as deserving specific attention from special procedures: human rights violations based on sexual orientation and gender identity; gender equality; the rights of indigenous peoples; and women in prison and children of imprisoned mothers. 44. Numerous mandate-holders intervened to express deep appreciation for the support received in the performance of their duties by the civil society and to thank NGOs for their partnership for human rights protection and assistance in granting access to those affected.