A/HRC/38/18 C. Access to and modalities of participation in meetings 26. Without the experiences of real people being reflected in debates, their needs, views and ideas would remain hidden and not be conveyed to decision makers. Civil society’s participation in meetings was its primary channel of involvement with regional and international organizations, particularly in allowing invaluable access to State delegates.21 Other forums, such as working groups, task force meetings and expert panels, allowed for specific and regular contributions by civil society. While multilateral institutions generally held open and public meetings, most required consultative status with the respective accrediting body. Other entities premised access on invitations, approval of the Chair, and/or “requests” of the delegates. In other instances, attendance was decided on a case-bycase basis, depending on the type, format and modalities of the meetings, which might vary between different United Nations entities and regional organizations. Customarily, most intergovernmental informal consultations on draft resolutions or decisions that were held in parallel to the plenary meetings were closed, with the exception of the informal consultations of the Human Rights Council, which were generally not closed. 27. In terms of specific examples, UN-Habitat permitted accredited civil society to attend dialogue sessions on specific themes during meetings of its Governing Council and had created several multi-stakeholder issue-based networks as vehicles to include civil society in normative and operational activities and programmes. Substantive presentations followed by a dialogue or discussion with Member States were possible at the invitation of the President of the Governing Council and with the approval of the Council. UNEP ensured that regional perspectives informed its work through annual regional meetings of civil-society organizations. UNODC had launched two regional anti-corruption platforms to spur further dialogue. 28. Despite the fact that the review mechanisms of the United Nations Convention against Corruption and the Mechanism for Follow-up on the Implementation of the InterAmerican Convention against Corruption explicitly recognized the importance of civil society participation, representatives of civil society were excluded from their international meetings.22 The involvement of civil society in the working methods of the Peacebuilding Commission was a welcome development, following the adoption in 2016 by the Security Council of its resolution 2282 (2016) and by the General Assembly of its resolution 70/262 on the review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture. Civil society participation was common practice at the Peacebuilding Commission’s country-specific configuration meetings. The review mechanism of the Istanbul Action Plan of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Anti-Corruption Network allowed civil society to attend its plenary meetings as active participants rather than observers. The Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (the Aarhus Convention) permitted civil society participation in the meetings of parties, unless one-third of the parties objected. Several contributors called upon States to hold more open informal meetings that allowed civil society participation, including at the Security Council. 29. Contributors observed that the presence of civil society organizations was often most essential at those meetings where they could highlight the human rights, security and other issues within their home countries, and that those meetings, such as the universal periodic review, were also the very ones in which they were unable to participate. 23 In particular, the need to maintain access for civil society to global and regional policy development, planning and decision-making spaces applied to those entities working on issues related to women’s rights24 and the gender-responsive realization of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The Department of Economic and Social Affairs noted that striking a balance between the requests of Member States and the legal requirements of resolutions with the 21 22 23 24 See P. Willetts (ed.), The Conscience of the World: The Influence of Non-Governmental Organizations in the UN System (Brookings Institution Press, 1996), p. 43. Transparency International. Government of the United States. Similar concerns were raised by many NGOs in their submissions. Equality Now, MADRE. 9