A/HRC/27/45 33. Venezuela aligned itself with NAM and reiterated the sentiments expressed by Cuba. It reaffirmed that the post-2015 development agenda must fully integrate the right to development, which was essential to human rights. Unilateral coercive measures against developing countries hampered economic development and set aside international solidarity. The international community must create an enabling environment for the full enjoyment of all human rights. The prevailing economic system promoted climate change, including through the activities of transnational corporations. Lack of transfer of technology also compromised development. 34. Aligning itself with NAM and OIC, Malaysia asserted that the Working Group was a pillar for upholding the right to development. Differences in viewpoints were natural because of divergent approaches to development, differences in the economic, social and cultural particularities of countries and diversity in perspectives. Participation by all was important for a holistic process. While responsibilities lay primarily with States, international cooperation was essential for realizing the right to development. It was important to complete the task at hand in a spirit of constructive engagement, and that the meeting duration be increased to two weeks. 35. Indonesia, aligning itself with NAM and OIC, pledged its full commitment to the right to development, which encompassed all human rights. While States had the primary responsibility for realizing the right to development, international cooperation for the creation of an enabling environment was crucial. The right to development must be mainstreamed in all development processes throughout the United Nations system. 36. Morocco aligned itself with NAM, the African Group and OIC, and highlighted the importance of the Declaration on the Right to Development. The right to development could not be disassociated from other rights. It was a right of human beings, as well as of nations, and called for greater political commitment, through development cooperation and assistance. It was a priority in overcoming vulnerabilities and required the sharing of national and international responsibilities. Morocco shared concerns about the slow pace of progress on the mandate of the Working Group and called on Member States to be led by wisdom and to adopt a humanistic and consensual approach. 37. Switzerland believed the right to development could bring human rights and development closer together and was yet another means to promote all human rights. Indeed, while the full implementation of human rights for all was the ultimate goal of development and human rights should thus be used to measure the outcomes of development, governance principles and the rule of law were also paramount for shaping the process of development at the national and international levels. In that context, Switzerland reaffirmed the universality, indivisibility, interrelatedness, interdependence and mutually reinforcing nature of all civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights, including the right to development; those human rights should be realized for all, without any discrimination. Concerning the post-2015 development agenda, respect for and the promotion of all human rights, including the right to development, and how to make them accountable and to whom were the key issue. Switzerland did not subscribe to the view that the Working Group should discuss the post-2015 development agenda at the current stage, since it did not want to prejudge the discussions going on in New York on that issue. But it would not oppose the Working Group discussing it at a later stage. Finally, the Working Group should complete at the current session the first reading of the draft right to development criteria and very operational subcriteria, in the absence of a meaningful discussion on the issue of indicators that was fundamental to Switzerland. 38. The United States of America asserted that the right to development must be unifying rather than divisive and expressed its willingness to engage constructively in the Working Group. It expressed the need for a shared consensus on the definition and nature of the right to development and welcomed the participation of experts, civil society and 9