A/HRC/26/41 VIII. Strengthening the global infrastructure for human rights cooperation A. Universal adherence to human rights texts and bodies 22. As the Advisory Committee noted in its first report on international cooperation in the field of human rights (A/HRC/19/74), a major priority of such international cooperation should be securing the universal application of international human rights instruments, in line with the objective established at the Vienna World Conference on Human Rights. Since the introduction and establishment of the universal periodic review process in 2006, the rate of human rights treaty ratification has been increasing exponentially.22 But ratification of all such treaties by every State has not yet been attained. In consciousnessraising activities, including the universal periodic review process itself, increased emphasis needs to be placed on the necessity for universal ratification and application. As the Committee also noted in its first report, the Human Rights Council should launch a “reservations dialogue” to persuade States to withdraw reservations that serve no purpose and to refrain from entering reservations that are contrary to the purposes and objectives of the treaty concerned (ibid. para.41). States should also be encouraged, where necessary, to enter declarations submitting themselves to scrutiny by bodies set up under such treaties. Additionally, international cooperation should focus on bringing together all States and actors to work for the promotion and protection of human rights. Every effort should be made to ensure the universal participation of States in such cooperation. B. Consolidating and synchronizing State reporting 23. Given that many States, including those surveyed by the Advisory Committee for the present report, have complained of excessive reporting obligations, it is increasingly being recognized that there is a need to find ways and means of consolidating and synchronizing State reporting to the various United Nations human rights bodies, so as to reduce the associated workload for States, relieve some of the great pressure that has been put on the rather scarce resources of very many developing and smaller countries, promote efficiency and enhance holistic reporting by target States.23 This is essential to support their ability to engage in international cooperation in the human rights field. One current proposal is to find a way to harmonize the periodicity of State reporting by ensuring that every State submits only one comprehensive report every set number of years to all the treaty bodies.24 For the avoidance of doubt, however, the universal periodic review reporting process would remain outside the treaty body reporting system. 22 23 24 10 Suzanne Egan, “Strengthening the United Nations human rights treaty body system” in Human Rights Law Review, vol. 13, No. 209 (2013), p. 211. See Felice D. Gaer, “A voice not an echo: universal periodic review and the UN treaty body system” in (2007) Human Rights Law Review, vol.7, No. 109 (2007), pp. 117–118; and statement of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights at the twelfth session of the Human Rights Council, 14 September 2009, available from www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/HRTD. Allehone Mulugeta Abebe, “Of shaming and bargaining: African States and the universal periodic review of the United Nations Human Rights Council” in 9 Human Rights Law Review, vol. 9, No.1, (2009), p. 8; and Felice D. Gaer, op.cit., p. 215.