A/HRC/23/20 and the follow-up to their recommendations. Special procedures should not be used only as an early warning mechanism, but also be seen as capable of following up and ensuring the monitoring of implementation. 49. Looking back on the historical development of the international human rights system, a major weakness remained: that, in the drafting of the Charter, Chapter VII had not been endowed with the possibility of imposing sanctions for human rights violations, which would have allowed for greater protection. How cooperation could lead to the normative development necessary to address emerging challenges was illustrated by the examples of the work of the Advisory Committee on the rights of peasants and on children affected by noma. On the former, cooperation with Vía Campesina, a non-governmental organization networking with farmers, had laid the groundwork for the development of the study prepared by the Committee and a draft declaration, which was now being examined by an intergovernmental working group of the Human Rights Council and would allow peasants to address the issue of land seizure. In the second example, non-governmental organizations had raised the issue of children affected by noma and the relationship between severe malnutrition and childhood diseases, which had led to the preparation of the study and a set of guidelines by the Committee that had been adopted by the Council. As a follow-up to that study, an initiative had been taken to bring the case to the World Health Assembly, which would lead to the official recognition of noma as a disease and allow for work to start on its monitoring and prevention. The issue was also being taken up by the Committee on the Rights of the Child. These examples demonstrated the synergies that can result from international cooperation and the use of existing mechanisms to advance issues. 50. The universal periodic review process had opened broad perspectives for international cooperation, building bridges between special procedures, treaty bodies, the United Nations, non-governmental organizations and human rights defenders, and had facilitated dialogue between different stakeholders in the field of human rights by the sharing of best practices between and recommendations made by States. It had opened doors to a dialogue where the North spoke on economic, social and cultural rights, and the South on political and civil rights. Despite these advances, the universal periodic review mechanism still faced obstacles, including the large number of recommendations made (on average 150 for each State reviewed) and the lack of financial means to implement them and to provide States with the technical assistance necessary. The rejection of recommendations by States and non-cooperation were other challenges that had to be addressed. III. Conclusions 51. Experts and speakers from the floor stated that the seminar had brought to light the legal, political and moral dimensions of international cooperation, which was multidimensional, and not directed by hierarchical relationships. A number of positive elements had emerged from the constructive study prepared by the Advisory Committee, but new additional channels needed to be explored, based on the principles of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action. To date, the focus had been predominantly on North-South cooperation; in the continued discussions on this issue, however, more attention should also be paid to South-South cooperation. In addition, the concept of non-cooperation should be defined and framed. 52. Participants reaffirmed the importance of the universal periodic review process as a new, innovative tool of the Human Rights Council. The first review cycle had brought to light that cooperation should not be seen only as something vertical (North-South), and that all States had gaps in their human rights performance that international cooperation could help to overcome. Follow-up on implementation of 12