A/HRC/24/55 upon mandate holders not to let the victims of violations down or allow the perpetrators to act with impunity. 19. She noted the challenges that special procedures and other international human rights mechanisms continued to face, including the patchy implementation of their recommendations. She recalled that the universal periodic review (UPR) could serve as a tool for periodic follow-up. She stressed the fact that special procedures were well placed to hold States to account in respect of their human rights obligations and recommendations accepted during the UPR. Real change at the national level required all parts of the United Nations to work together. She welcomed the use of the collective voice of the special procedures including their demands that concrete measures to reduce inequality be included in the post-2015 agenda. 20. She drew attention to reprisals against persons who had collaborated with United Nations human rights mechanisms and the need to tackle the factors which created legislative and regulative environments conducive to reprisals and suppression of civil society. She noted that the panel on reprisals convened at the twenty-second session of the Human Rights Council on 13 September 2012 had put forward several recommendations, including observation of trials of human rights defenders; the establishment of a central registry of reprisals to ensure proper follow-up; strengthening steps to assist victims; and the establishment of national witness protection programmes. The High Commissioner told mandate holders that she was aware of disparaging personal remarks and verbal attacks against mandate holders, in the Council and in other contexts. She assured participants of her full support for them, in particular their independence. 21. In terms of planning for the future, the High Commissioner reminded mandate holders that, as part of the new OHCHR four-year planning cycle, she had solicited views from special procedures, among others. The inputs received formed the basis of the thematic priorities currently being defined by OHCHR. Strengthening human rights mechanisms would remain prominent as a tool for achieving progress in substantive areas, and as a substantive area for the Office. She mentioned that resources had become more scarce, both in terms of regular and extrabudgetary funds, and that the Office was actively exploring new funding sources. She said that OHCHR had sponsored a meeting with information technology companies, which indicated their desire to assist OHCHR to make better use of new technologies in human rights work. Steps had also been taken to improve the user-friendliness of the website. 22. Mandate holders who took the floor thanked the High Commissioner for the support provided by her and her Office and drew attention to their shrinking resources. In this regard, they noted that mandate holders should receive financial and human resources support on an equitable and transparent basis and underlined the importance of continuity in staffing. They raised the possibility of their proactive participation in the UPR mechanism. Several expressed concern that negative traditional and cultural attitudes might affect the implementation of international human rights, while others inquired about her views on the proposal for a world court on human rights. They asked her to prioritize a revamp of the OHCHR website and to ensure that opportunities offered by new technologies were actively pursued to facilitate access by victims to human rights mechanisms, especially special procedures. They also called on her to take measures to enhance the visibility of special procedures and that of OHCHR. V. Human Rights Council and the special procedures system 23. Participants exchanged views with the President of the Human Rights Council, Remigiusz Achilles Henczel, Permanent Representative of Poland to the United Nations 7