A/HRC/17/36 44. Several delegations and non-governmental organizations supported the paragraph in the Chairperson’s revised proposal providing that “the Committee shall include in its rules of procedure safeguards to prevent the manipulation of children by those who represent them and to protect their rights under the present Protocol.” However, a number of delegations preferred deleting “and to protect their rights” to avoid the impression that the optional protocol creates new rights. Some delegations and UNICEF did not support the new paragraph because it would overload the Protocol. Others argued that the risk of manipulation could be better addressed by either requiring legal representation or by explicitly defining the legal representatives. A new compromise text replacing “the manipulation of children by those who represent them” by “the manipulation of the child by those acting on his/her behalf” and substituting “and to protect their rights under the present Protocol” by “and may decline to consider any communication where it appears to the Committee that the communication is not in the child’s best interest” was supported by many States. One State suggested inserting “the consideration of” before “the communication”. Another State criticized that “where it appears” was not sufficiently precise. Most delegations were in favour of moving the provision under the article on rules of procedure as a new paragraph 2. Others preferred keeping it in part II of the protocol dealing with communications. 45. The Chairperson-Rapporteur stated that the practical relevance of the question of legal representation was limited. He recalled that the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the rules of procedure of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities omitted specific provisions on legal representation despite the fact that persons with mental disabilities frequently required such representation. 46. In connection with the question of consent, a number of delegations, nongovernmental organizations and experts, including members of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, indicated that the right of the child to be heard, which is one of the leading principles of the Convention, should be referred to in the optional protocol, as well as the child’s status as a rights holder. H. Collective communications10 47. The Chairperson-Rapporteur recalled that none of the international human rights treaties provided for a collective communications procedure, although such procedure existed at the regional level, under the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the 10 12 Article 7 of the revised proposal: “1. Each State party may, at the time of signature or ratification of the present Protocol or accession thereto, declare that it recognizes the competence of the Committee to receive and consider collective communications as provided for in the present article in respect of the rights set forth in some or all of the instruments listed in paragraph 2. 2. National human rights institutions and ombudsman institutions as well as non-governmental organizations, fulfilling the criteria established in the Committee’s rules of procedure may submit collective communications alleging recurring violations affecting multiple individuals of any of the rights set forth in: (a) The Convention; (b) The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography; (c) The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the involvement of children in armed conflict. 3. Any State party having made a declaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of the present article may, at any time, withdraw this declaration by notification to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.”