A/HRC/22/34/ capacity as President, her task was to ensure that the Council proceeds with the appropriate level of dignity and respect in its work to promote and protect human right. This implied that Members of the Council and all observers, including non-governmental organizations, had to be able to contribute freely to the Council’s work. Unfortunately, incidents of harassment of civil society representatives had been brought to the attention of the President and to which she had to react, including through public statements, meetings and exchange of letters with the delegations concerned. Such actions were consistent with the outcome of the review of the Council3 and necessary to preserve its credibility. 12. The President emphasized that the fact that the Human Rights Council as a whole tackled this issue now more concretely through the present panel and reacted to unacceptable acts of reprisals or intimidation was an achievement in itself. The Council should remain a place where all voices, even dissenting ones, may be heard, and it had the responsibility to ensure that all individuals participating in its meetings and cooperating with it remained secure. The President recalled that the Council had called upon all States to desist from intimidation or reprisals directed at individuals or organizations participating in Council sessions, and expressed the hope that dialogue would constitute the preferred tool to address problems when divergent views arose. D. Chair of the Board of the International Service for Human Rights 13. The Chairperson of the Board of the International Service for Human Rights, Mehr Khan Williams, moderated the panel. In her introductory remarks, she thanked the Human Rights Council for convening such an important discussion. She also thanked Member States who had played a key role in pushing for action against reprisals. She emphasized the fact that increasing cross-regional awareness and concern about reprisals was very encouraging, and that civil society organizations were particularly grateful for the personal attention paid to the issue by the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner. 14. Ms. Williams identified three issues at stake. First and foremost, the safety of those that cooperate, or seek to cooperate, with the United Nations human rights system had to be confident that the United Nations and concerned States would do all they could to afford swift protection to them when they engaged with the United Nations. Second, Member States had the greatest responsibility to ensure the protection of human rights defenders; States who committed or tolerated such acts showed contempt for the work of the Organization, and could be in breach of their obligations under the Charter of the United Nations. Third, the United Nations had a special ethical responsibility to ensure adequate protection to those who engaged with its representatives; when people were afraid to speak up because of fear of reprisal, the work of the United Nations was undermined. 15. Ms. Williams underlined the encouraging efforts made by the Human Rights Council to address reprisals, in particular the preventive measures taken by the President by drawing States' attention to situations that might constitute a threat to individuals cooperating with the Council and its mechanisms. The proactive role of the President should be standard protection practice for future Presidents. 16. Nonetheless, Ms. Williams regretted the fact that some States continued to use reprisals to silence the voice of non-governmental organizations, another form of which being to exclude them from cooperating with the United Nations because the NGO Committee of the Economic and Social Council delayed or applied criteria selectively for assessing and renewing applications submitted by non-governmental organizations. 3 A/HRC/RES/16/21, para.30 5