A/HRC/39/41 become increasingly severe in nature. They also stressed the need for a trends analysis and comprehensive assessment, and for strengthened coordination with other parts of the United Nations system, including the Assistant Secretary-General (see A/HRC/37/37, paras. 66–67).8 12. In a statement on 1 June 2018 to mark the twentieth anniversary of the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, experts reaffirmed that all individuals should be able to engage with the treaty bodies free from all forms of interference, intimidation, abuse, threat, violence, reprisal, or undue restriction.9 13. UNDP, OHCHR and the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions continue to support the implementation of their guidelines on reprisals and other acts of intimidation against national human rights institutions, their members and staff. That includes documenting cases and responding to them promptly, as well as collectively supporting targeted national human rights institutions. 14. To ensure the visibility and accessibility of the work on intimidation and reprisals and the activities of the United Nations human rights mechanisms, the website launched in June 2017 is being translated into the six official languages and informational materials, including an animated video and a one-page document for civil society on how to submit information, are available online.10 Special procedures mandate holders11 and some treaty bodies also have dedicated webpages. III. Information on policy and best practices 15. There were developments in the working methods and practices of the treaty bodies, including in the implementation of the Guidelines against Intimidation or Reprisals (the San José Guidelines, HRI/MC/2015/6) adopted at their meeting in 2015. During their thirtieth annual meeting, the Chairs of the treaty bodies encouraged rapporteurs or focal points of different committees to work together between sessions, as needed, to address cases, to make information available about reprisals on the website, and for the Secretariat to prepare a document for 2019 on the role of rapporteurs and focal points, including good practices (A/73/140). 16. At its ninety-fifth session, the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination started the practice of sending letters to States parties on alleged cases and of making them publicly available on its webpage. The Focal Point for Reprisals of the Committee was tasked with developing guidelines on reprisals. 17. In the development context, the World Bank Group has made progress in developing guidance on addressing reprisals reported in relation to complaints involving its projects. In October 2017, the Office of the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman published reprisals guidelines.12 These followed the publication in March 2016 of the World Bank Inspection Panel anti-retaliation guidelines, which were the first published by an independent accountability mechanism of an international financial institution. 13 Initial dialogue between the Assistant Secretary-General and those offices has been initiated to share information and best practices. 18. The UNDP public accountability mechanism, the Social and Environmental Compliance Unit of the Office of Audit and Investigations, reports cases of harassment, intimidation and violence against persons who seek to cooperate or have cooperated with UNDP-aided projects and is developing a “retaliation toolkit” for use by the international 8 9 10 11 12 13 See also www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=22828&LangID=E. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=23154&LangID=E. See www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Reprisals/Pages/ReprisalsIndex.aspx. See www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/SP/Pages/Actsofintimidationandreprisal.aspx. See Office of the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman, “CAO approach to responding to concerns of threats and incidents of reprisals in CAO operations”, available at www.caoombudsman.org/documents/CAO-Reprisals-web.pdf 2017. See World Bank, “Inspection panel guidelines to reduce retaliation risks and respond to retaliation during the panel process”. 5