A/HRC/26/41 C. Strengthening the subsidiary bodies and special procedures of the Human Rights Council 24. As confirmed by the responses of many States to the survey administered by the Advisory Committee, there is widespread realization that the financial and human resources available to assist the subsidiary bodies and special procedures of the Human Rights Council in undertaking their work is at best limited.25 Against this background, the Council, in its resolution 16/21, requested the Secretary-General to ensure the availability of adequate resources within the regular OHCHR budget to support the full implementation by special procedures of their mandates (para. 32). Further, the Council recognized the need for extra funding to support the work of the special procedures and welcomed further voluntary contributions by Member States, emphasizing that those contributions, to the extent possible, should be unearmarked (para. 33). The Council should step up its commendable efforts to ensure that its subsidiary bodies and special procedures are resourced adequately. Note should also be taken of the fact that there is a particularly urgent need to better resource the Advisory Committee, which is not even resourced at the inadequate special procedure level and whose members currently have to rely to a significant degree on resources from outside the United Nations system to undertake their work in an effective manner. 25. Another kind of challenge that is faced particularly by the special procedures is the reluctance of all too many States to cooperate with them, especially in the area of issuing standing invitations to them to visit their countries.26 This is so despite the Council’s regular reaffirmation of the need for States to cooperate with the special procedures (see Council resolution 16/21, para. 23). Thus far, fewer than 40 per cent of Member States have issued such standing invitations. Yet standing invitations represent an opportunity for States to make a cooperative gesture by inviting special procedure mandate holders to perform their work. While maintaining the voluntary character of the issuance of standing invitations, the Council should consider establishing an opt-out system in which States that do not wish to issue them must take active steps to opt out, and are taken to have consented to issue standing invitations if they do not opt out of doing so before an agreed date. 26. There is also a need for greater coordination between the Council’s subsidiary bodies and its special procedures, as well as within each of those categories. There is of course a Special Procedures Coordination Committee, established in 2005, whose main function is to facilitate coordination among the special procedures, and between them and OHCHR, civil society and the broader United Nations human rights system.27 However, more could be done in this regard. For example, special procedure mandate holder visits to a particular country could be coordinated and conducted jointly to reduce the amount of resources and time host States spend cooperating with them, thereby increasing the willingness and ability of States to extend such cooperation and ultimately enhancing this aspect of international cooperation in the field of human rights. Special procedures and the Advisory Committee should also interact regularly, at least annually, to exchange ideas and share knowledge. 25 26 27 Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, “Being a special rapporteur: a delicate balancing act” in The International Journal of Human Rights, vol.15 (2011), pp. 162-171. Ted Piccone, “Catalysts for rights” Brookings Institute (2010), p. 9, available from www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/reports/2010/10/human%20rights%20piccone/10_human_ rights_piccone.pdf; and Surya P. Subedi, “Protection of human rights through the mechanism of UN special rapporteurs” in Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 33, No. 201 (2011), p. 211. Ted Piccone, op.cit., p. 35. 11