A/HRC/DEC/19/119 41. As such, a letter of request would need to be addressed to the secretariat of the Human Rights Council, with the following requirements: (a) Letter submitted on official letterhead; (b) Indication of the session of the Human Rights Council concerned, agenda item and specific segment of the programme of work in which the oral statement through video messaging is to be made; (c) Indication of full name (surname, first name) and functional title of the person delivering the statement (the person’s name person must appear exactly as it appears in the person’s passport or formal identity document) as a designated representative; (d) Colour copy of the person’s passport or formal identity document; (e) Letter to be signed by the head of the delegation/organization authorized to designate a representative to make an oral statement on behalf of the delegation/organization: (i) For non-resident States: Minister for Foreign Affairs or head of delegation (such as the Permanent Representative in New York or Chargé d’affaires a.i.); (ii) United Nations specialized agencies and other intergovernmental organizations: Head of agency/organization (for example the Director General or Secretary-General); (iii) National human rights institutions compliant with the Paris Principles; Head of the institution (for example, Commissioner) or Secretary-General; (iv) Non-governmental organizations in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council: President, Chief Executive Officer or Main Representative of the United Nations Office at Geneva (if the person is authorized to accredit representatives to the United Nations Office at Geneva). 42. The task force emphasized its preference for the use of videoconferencing, given its interactive nature, over video messaging. 43. The task force was informed that, owing to current technical limitations and financial implications, videoconferencing would not be feasible in the near future. The secretariat was nonetheless examining ways and means to effectively address these limitations and implications. Meanwhile, the task force acknowledged that the Human Rights Council may have to rely on video messaging for the time being until videoconferencing became feasible. 44. It was stressed that interventions by video messaging would not in any way change the rules of procedure of the Human Rights Council or the practices relating to the participation of Member and observer States in the work of the Council. The secretariat recalled that, in fact, only the method of delivery of statements would change. 45. The task force thoroughly discussed the procedure for the use of video messaging by national human rights institutions and non-governmental organizations compliant with the Paris Principles and in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council. It was emphasized again that their contributions, as observers, should fully comply with the rules of procedure of the Human Rights Council and rules concerning accreditation. As such, the task force considered the practical steps described below. (2) Recommendations 46. In the case of national human rights institutions compliant with the Paris Principles: (a) Video messages may be pre-recorded in order to enhance participation in the plenary debates of the Human Rights Council, in particular in accordance with the provisions described in the annex to Council resolution 16/21, paragraph 13 (national 10