A/HRC/7/29 page 9 32. Questions were also raised concerning the procedure of selection of mandate-holders and the interpretation of the issue of the conflict of interest as criteria for ineligibility. Many participants echoed the need for mandate-holders themselves to establish a mechanism that would look into issues of accountability. The view was expressed that the ongoing review of mandates should use as a basis the framework of the mandates as they have evolved over the years in the Commission on Human Rights. 33. It was noted that country mandates had been maintained. Consensus showed that unilateral naming and shaming was not productive. At the same time, the door was left open for constructive discussions on country issues. 34. The former President indicated that contribution to UPR, the involvement of special procedures in the implementation of the Code of Conduct, and the need to build on synergies and avoid duplication were priority areas on which mandate-holders could focus their attention. C. Exchange with the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights 35. The High Commissioner expressed satisfaction at the final result of the institution-building process. UPR was a landmark achievement that would allow the Council to move towards the implementation phase. The High Commissioner stressed the important role that special procedures had played in the institution-building process and encouraged them to remain engaged in future related discussions. The High Commissioner also invited mandate-holders to reflect on future interactions with the new Advisory Committee. The High Commissioner furthermore welcomed the fact that the meeting was looking into the need to increase cooperation with United Nations country teams. Finally, the High Commissioner reiterated the great value that she attached to the work of special procedures and to their cooperation, which facilitated her work. 36. Participants thanked the High Commissioner for the central role she played in the institution-building process. Participants agreed that the challenge ahead was to be creative in envisaging how the special procedures system would evolve in the new framework and in relation to UPR. 37. The role of special procedures in the selection process as set out in Council resolution 5/1 on institution-building was welcomed. Mechanisms to ensure consultations in this regard were encouraged. 38. There was agreement that joint activities mandated by the Council as a follow-up to resolutions allowed for closer integration of special procedures into the broader work of the Council. The importance of an inclusive approach or methodology in shaping the tasks assigned to special procedures was highlighted. 39. Participants asked OHCHR to provide for institutional cooperation with regional human rights mechanisms. Participants also discussed the support received by OHCHR field presences during country visits. Reflection on the role of special procedures in the broader context of the United Nations system for enhanced implementation of human rights was desirable. With regard to country strategies, it was highlighted that it was important to maintain the independence of each component of the system while ensuring complementarity.