A/HRC/31/74 treaty body reports and follow up to establishing recommendations from treaty bodies and special procedures. 84. Mr. Walker clarified that although it varies from committee to committee, CERD has set the criteria for opening the simplified reporting procedure to those States Parties which are ten or more years overdue in their reporting. As a progressive introduction of the procedure, the next stage will open this procedure to States parties that are five years overdue in terms of reporting. In comparison, CESCR offers the possibility of the simplified reporting procedure to State Parties which are more or less on time with their reports to allow the Committee to test the use of this reporting procedure. He added that all the committees at this stage apply the procedure to periodic but not to initial reports. 85. The representative of Belgium was interested to learn that there had been some reporting developments in the Office and inquired whether the OHCHR could make a presentation on this specific aspect of capacity development during the current Ad Hoc Committee session. 86. The Chair-Rapporteur agreed and requested the Secretariat to follow up on the possibility of such a briefing during the 7th session. 87. At the 8th meeting on 16 July, and following the earlier request of the Ad Hoc Committee, Paolo David, from the Treaty Bodies Division of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights gave a briefing on national reporting and follow up mechanisms. Mr. David explained the history of the treaty body strengthening process. He referred to General Assembly resolution 68/268 that contained various measures that should strengthen the treaty body system, including the assistance to States to develop and reinforce their institutional capacity. The Office had commenced a study to follow up on this initiative and was in the process of finalising the study. The presentation of the results of the study would also be linked to a practical guide. 88. One of the conclusions of the study was that in a number of States parties, temporary reporting mechanisms were evolving into permanent mechanisms. The objective was to facilitate the preparations of reports and cooperate with special procedures and follow-up on recommendations from international and regional mechanisms. The study concluded that mechanisms were more effective if they also dealt with regional mechanisms. Those national mechanisms needed to have the capacity and power to coordinate response and follow-up action. They also needed to be able to consult with a variety of stakeholders, such as national human rights institutions and civil society. The capacity to draft reports and responses (or facilitate the drafting of responses) under individual communications procedures of the treaty bodies and special procedures was also a useful capacity. And finally, the national mechanisms should have more efficient knowledge management capacities and political ownership. 89. Pakistan on behalf of OIC inquired whether OHCHR was aware of the number of States with such permanent mechanisms. Mr. David said that while there were no solid figures available, he estimated that approximately thirty States had a permanent mechanism, and added that several countries were lately moving from ad-hoc to standing mechanisms for the purpose of treaty body reporting. 90. The representative of Belgium said that reporting was an essential step towards implementation, and asked what assistance the new treaty body capacity building program of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights was ready to provide to countries. Mr. David said that the Office had recently trained staff of such a mechanism at country level, and that experts and consultants were also ready to visit countries to provide expert advice and guidance to interested States parties. The representative also asked if there was a best practice example for a permanent national mechanism. The study, Mr. David noted, clearly concluded that the ad hoc format was not optimal. There were three 36