A/HRC/4/WG.2/TF/2 page 14 58. The initial pilot application of the criteria to these partnership arrangements and the constructive dialogue with representatives of the institutions monitoring the partnerships demonstrated the utility of the criteria and the willingness of the institutions involved to consider ways in which their work might be enhanced by giving greater attention to considerations based on the right to development. 59. The task force stresses that this exercise was intended to be on a pilot basis, and has therefore yielded only tentative assessments as to the conformity of the partnerships considered with the criteria. However preliminary these initial findings may be, the task force is of the view that useful lessons can be drawn with respect to each of the partnerships reviewed. Accordingly, the task force drew the following preliminary conclusions regarding the partnerships examined, based on the presentations during the meeting and background documentation provided. (a) African Peer Review Mechanism 60. The task force was encouraged by the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) as an internal and regional accountability mechanism widely supported in the African continent and in particular by its ownership and self-assessment dimensions. Notwithstanding the fact that its primary focus is not on global development partnerships as prioritized by the task force, the system offers an avenue for constructive dialogue among peers to rectify the identified shortcomings with assistance from participating States, donor Governments and agencies. 61. At first application of the criteria, the task force identified a number of issues which could be taken into consideration as a basis for an ongoing dialogue to enhance APRM’s contribution to realizing the right to development. First, notwithstanding the place of human rights in the NEPAD Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance, human rights, including the right to development, are not featured as much as they could be as an integral part of all APRM objectives. Secondly, the competence and independence of the Panel of Eminent Persons are critical factors that can enhance the quality of individual country reviews. Thirdly, the active and meaningful participation of a wide range of civil-society organizations, including those representing the poorest, is potentially one of the most positive right-to-development features of the mechanism. Finally, possible measures to be taken by peers in case of non-compliance by a country under review have not been made explicit. 62. Although APRM is faced with challenges at this early stage, it is one of the most promising African development initiatives to emerge for some time, and a valuable vehicle to advance NEPAD’s objective of socio-economic emancipation across the continent and globally. The ideas of ownership, independence peer-review and self-assessment enhance the potential of APRM’s effectiveness in bringing about change where the laws and practices of the countries concerned fall short of the standards reflected in the right to development criteria and the African Union’s own legal framework for human rights, in particular the African Charter of Human and Peoples’ Rights, the first international treaty to provide for the right to development. The task force therefore notes with appreciation that all participants at the meeting who were involved in the APRM process, both at the regional and at the national level, welcomed a continued dialogue on how the right-to-development criteria could be further encouraged within the APRM process.