A/HRC/21/59 9. The Chairperson-Rapporteur made an introductory statement at the 2nd meeting. He thanked participants for their understanding and cooperation and offered apologies on behalf of the former Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Ad Hoc Committee, Jerry Mathews Matjila, who had been unable to be present to chair the Ad Hoc Committee due to his reassignment as Director General of the Department of International Relations and Cooperation of the South African Government. He also regretted that in its capacity as Chair, South Africa had not been able to fulfil its pledge to consult with participants of the Ad hoc Committee on the identified topics prior to the session. 10. The Chairperson-Rapporteur noted that South Africa would still urge that a permanent Chairperson-Rapporteur for the Ad Hoc Committee be elected, whilst its work continued, since the country was inundated with other responsibilities elsewhere, and notwithstanding that racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance were important issues for South Africa. 11. The fourth session promised to be challenging and exciting in view of the experts and presenters participating. He thanked States and the Secretariat for their efforts to prepare the session. He hoped that the contributions and discussions of presenters would provide the Ad Hoc Committee with an opportunity to reflect on and understand the issues raised in the previous reports, together with the link between the Ad Hoc Committee‘s mandate and paragraph 199 of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. 12. He stated that South Africa had taken the responsibility, on behalf of the African Group, to chair the Ad Hoc Committee with the objective of ensuring that as partners, the Ad Hoc Committee worked together to address issues of concern. His objective was to ensure that the Ad Hoc Committee continued working on the three topics, with the understanding that the other topics would still be discussed in the future. He looked forward to working with participants during the forthcoming two weeks. 13. During the 2nd meeting, and following the adoption of the programme of work, Cuba, in its national capacity, expressed its obligation to make public reference to the atmosphere surrounding the preparation and adoption of the programme of work, referring to efforts by certain regional groups and delegations to ―boycott and lengthen‖ the work of the Ad Hoc Committee. 14. The European Union stated that the delay was attributable to ―ill preparation and lack of transparency‖ and the fact that the draft programme of work, in its view, did not reflect the understandings reached at the resumed third session. It reaffirmed its commitment to the fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and, noting that it was the International Day of Reflection on the 1994 Genocide in Rwanda, suggested that a minute‘s silence be observed by the Ad Hoc Committee. 15. Switzerland (on behalf of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Japan, Mexico, Republic of Korea and Uruguay) underscored its flexibility on topics to be discussed and noted its satisfaction with the programme of work of the session, which had been adopted by consensus. It stated that these delegations had always supported substantive input to the Ad Hoc Committee, in the form of experts and presenters, research and data, as this was the best approach for carrying out its work. It regretted the ―bad preparation‖ of the session and that the former Chair‘s proposals and promises had not been met, particularly since the dates of the session had been postponed from November to the present. 16. Senegal, on behalf of the African Group, renewed its Group‘s commitment to participate in the Ad Hoc Committee, stating that the programme of work had been adopted, despite the delay imposed by other regional groups. It looked forward to commencing the work of the Ad Hoc Committee, as set out in Human Rights Council decision 3/103, especially since the meeting was taking place in the year following the tenth 4