A/HRC/32/26 rights among the staff of permanent missions to the United Nations in Geneva and New York. 38. Several participants called for the Expert Mechanism to be able to address countryspecific situations, including through interaction with ministries dealing with indigenous peoples’ rights at the country level and with national and regional human rights institutions and specialized bodies. One participant suggested that the Expert Mechanism could raise awareness of and promote the Declaration at the country level in cooperation with national human rights institutions as key partners, to address the capacity gap on indigenous peoples’ rights. He also proposed that a standing item on dialogue with national human rights institutions be included in the agenda of the Expert Mechanism’s sessions. 39. Two participants suggested holding regional forums on indigenous peoples’ rights, with members of the Expert Mechanism participating as resource persons in joint training and capacity-building programmes, which could lead to the gradual integration of the Declaration into relevant regional human rights mechanisms. One participant suggested having regional focal points within the Expert Mechanism to ensure better implementation of rights at the regional level. 40. The Expert Mechanism was also encouraged to provide technical assistance and support to indigenous peoples in effectively accessing human rights mechanisms, including the special procedure mandate holders, the treaty bodies and the universal periodic review, by interacting with the indigenous members of national parliaments and by providing training to indigenous peoples on their rights. The Expert Mechanism was also encouraged to provide technical support to the private sector. 41. A discussion was held on whether the Expert Mechanism should be able to conduct country visits. One delegate emphasized the importance for the Expert Mechanism to be able to do so, in particular if a referral system with the Special Rapporteur were to be established, while others stressed that country visits were best undertaken by the Special Rapporteur and that it was possible to provide technical assistance and facilitate dialogue without visiting a country. One participant said that countries should only be visited in response to a request, while other participants said that country visits carried out by the Expert Mechanism would differ from those of the Special Rapporteur, and suggested using the term “country-specific activity”. They also said that it would be difficult to facilitate dialogue, build capacity, provide technical assistance and collect best practices from Geneva. 42. Several participants encouraged the Expert Mechanism to look into specific issues, including the possibility of setting up a working group on the rights of indigenous persons with disabilities, focusing on indigenous peoples divided by borders and on business and human rights and facilitating dialogue between States and indigenous peoples on the issue of the international repatriation of ceremonial objects. VI. Modalities and methods of work 43. Participants discussed the modalities and methods of work of the Expert Mechanism, as well as the Mechanism’s composition. Several State representatives said that it was important for the experts to be independent. One delegate said that the qualifications of the experts should depend on the new mandate of the Expert Mechanism, while several State and indigenous peoples’ representatives underlined that the experts should have knowledge of international law and human rights, as well as of indigenous traditional legal systems. 8