A/HRC/31/74 Ambassador also mentioned that CERD took statements from non-governmental organizations at face value and that sometimes the Committee transcended its mandate. 53. The representative of Mexico also gave a briefing on the national experiences of the country with respect to issues, challenges and best practices pertaining to reporting under the ICERD Convention during this meeting. Mexico ratified ICERD in 1975 and in 2002 made the declaration concerning article 14 on individual communications. In 2011, Mexico presented to CERD, the Committee submitted its recommendations consequently. CERD emphasised interpretation services, rights of indigenous people and legal assistance in the case of Mexico. In 2012, a working group was established to follow-up on the CERD recommendations, comprised of fifteen government entities. 54. In September 2014, Mexico submitted a progress report, and the working group established a matrix on racism and the concomitant challenges in order to assist in addressing those challenges. The group also presented a work plan and a time table for its further work. In August 2014, another meeting would be held in cooperation with civil society on the implementation of the recommendations. 55. Issues, challenges and best practices pertaining to reporting under the ICERD Convention were also presented by the representative of Belgium during the 8 th meeting. He stated that ICERD was important for Belgium, that enhancing equality remained a priority for the country, and that all victims should be afforded the same attention. 56. CERD recommendations had assisted Belgium in building the necessary institutions and policies to fight racism at the national level. Belgium had recently presented its 16th to 19th report to the Committee. The simplified reporting procedure would further focus the dialogue and it should be available to all State parties as soon as possible. One challenge for Belgium was the coherent follow up to over 400 CERD recommendations. Every six months, Belgium undertook a coordination exercise consolidating all recommendations, including those from regional mechanisms. The catalogue of recommendations was shared with civil society in order to increase transparency. 57. The representative stated that Belgium was not late with any of its treaty body reports and its the national mechanism ensured adequate follow up. The advantage of presenting a periodic report was that the country had an opportunity to evaluate its own situation. The national dialogue also allowed for the involvement of civil society. Belgium appreciated the dialogue with CERD as a valuable expert advice and a tool to improve national policies. 58. A number of challenges were highlighted including the complexity of the federal state structure, the sheer number of recommendations and reports that needed to be submitted; and the complexity of materials and legislation that addressed racism in a modern state. All those challenges were exacerbated by the administrative challenge of following up on all the recommendations. Belgium recommended an holistic approach as many recommendations, stemming from different Conventions, would often overlap. Clustering of recommendations, as had been earlier suggested by Mr. David, was a useful approach. The enhancing of capacities was also important, and a standing mechanism, with a clearly defined mandate, was useful in this regard. The standing mechanism should also assist in guiding the implementation of recommendations. The representative added that another good practice was to uphold transparency and always cooperate and consult with civil society. Finally, the representative of Belgium noted that awareness-raising was important. 59. Belgium presented the following conclusions: the timing of reports needed to be considered; implementation remained essential; there was a reporting deficit; and only a small number of countries had accepted the individual communications procedure under 30