A/HRC/39/56 level, working with people living in extreme poverty in both developing and developed countries. This included a range of projects in Italy in its implementation of the national sustainable development strategy, social cooperatives, the anti-trafficking programme and the civil peace corps. It also had projects in Zambia, Bangladesh and Brazil, dealing with orphans, the right to education and violence against children and young women. 69. The representative from the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons stated that civil society had been a fundamental actor in advancing the issues of disarmament and human rights. Conventional weapons had a negative impact on development, as recalled in article 7 of the Declaration on the Right to Development and in Strategic Development Goal 16. The representative called on all countries to ratify agreements that prohibited conventional weapons causing humanitarian impact and to achieve complete disarmament, with special reference to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons so that countries could release resources for global development. E. Draft right to development criteria and the corresponding operational subcriteria 70. The Working Group continued its consideration of the draft right to development criteria and the corresponding operational subcriteria prepared by the high-level task force (see A/HRC/15/WG.2/TF/2/Add.2, annex). Speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, the representative of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela recalled Human Rights Council resolution 36/9, in which the Council decided that the Working Group should finalize the document on criteria and subcriteria no later than the nineteenth session. The representative observed that there were still no real results of that work and expressed the wish to move forward. The representative noted that, in each session during discussion of the document, new points of view appeared, hindering the adoption of the document, and that it was now the right time to take effective measures regarding criteria and subcriteria. The European Union reiterated that there was no way forward other than a consensus and that consensus had been undermined when it was insisted that a legally binding document was the only possible outcome of the discussions. 71. Representatives from Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Brazil, South Africa, Japan and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela took the floor to present their views on the agenda item and the way forward with contributions by Associazione Comunità Papa Giovanni XXIII, speaking on behalf of the Forum of Catholic-inspired Non-governmental Organizations, the Centre Europe-tiers monde and the Indian Council of South America. The Chair-Rapporteur summarized the exchange of views and said that it was clear that consideration of the criteria and subcriteria was an issue on which there was no common ground and that existing divergent views would continue to persist. As an alternative, he proposed that the Secretariat could “clean up” the text and remove redundancies, while retaining existing language, with proposals from delegations reflected as they were. Additionally, the Secretariat could provide alternate language from the relevant existing consensus documents and submit it for consideration by the Working Group at its following session in such a way as to open up the possibility for agreement. This proposal was aimed at bridging the existing gap and moving forward in a favourable direction. Delegates’ feedback to the proposal was mixed and the representative of the NonAligned Movement suggested working on the existing text for the remainder of the meeting, which some delegates from the Movement supported. The delegate of the European Union stated that, in the present circumstances, he could not make any specific comments on the provisions of the document and would both retain existing reservations in the text and place reservations on any new proposals or modifications. The delegate of Japan also reserved all criteria and subcriteria that Japan had previously reserved and was not ready to discuss any new proposals, in addition reiterating that Japan did not support the adoption of a legally binding document. The Working Group completed a reading of criterion 1 (a) to criterion 1 (e) alt 1 during the meeting. 15