A/HRC/4/WG.2/TF/2 page 7 observers. The three days of public deliberations would be concluded with a discussion on the assessments of the aforementioned partnerships and on the methodology for the application of the criteria. The task force would then meet for two days in closed meetings to discuss and adopt its report, with conclusions and recommendations, to be presented to the Working Group on the Right to Development at its eighth session. 26. Stephen Marks, Chairperson of the task force, noted a common call in the opening statements for close collaboration on this subject and emphasized that this pilot project on right-to-development criteria was a first endeavour, aiming to achieve the ambitious objective of deciding on a strategy and defining a methodology, reflecting the interests of all involved. 27. He introduced the main theme of the session, namely to apply the criteria for periodic evaluation of global development partnerships from the perspective of the right to development to three partnerships: the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)-Development Assistance Committee (DAC) Mutual Review of Development Effectiveness in the context of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), and the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness. Among the reasons for selecting these partnerships were that they were raised during the task force’s second meeting, focusing on the elaboration of the criteria. They were flagged as interesting initiatives in terms of development partnerships with monitoring mechanisms for implementation. Some of the principles of the Mutual Review show close linkages with those underlying the right to development, such as mutual accountability and ownership. 28. The Paris Declaration was selected, as it had made significant and methodological advances to monitor international partnership commitments that partly overlap with those identified by the Working Group. Its implementation process could provide an important opportunity for integrating human rights and aid-effectiveness principles and for ensuring that, combined, these principles might enhance the objectives of the right to development. 29. Finally, APRM was selected as a good example of a South-South cooperation process entirely driven and owned by Africa and hailed by many as possessing considerable potential to influence the discourse on development in Africa. The Chairperson concluded by introducing APRM as the first partnership to be considered. A. The African Peer Review Mechanism 30. Chris Stals (South Africa), member of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) Panel of Eminent Persons, presented the achievements and objectives of APRM, of which the mandate is to ensure that the policies and practices of participating States conform to the agreed political, economic and corporate-governance values, codes and standards contained in the Declaration on Democracy, Economic and Corporate Governance of NEPAD. He described the various stages of the process, and focused on the key objectives of APRM divided into four focus areas: democracy and political governance; economic governance and management; corporate governance; and socio-economic development. The latter is of particular relevance to the right to development, including objectives such as: promotion of self-reliance and the