The Committee,

1. Having examined Document ITH/11/6.COM/CONF.206/15,
2. Recalling Decisions 5.COM 7 and 5.COM 10.1,
3. Thanks Japan for its voluntary supplementary contribution to the Intangible Cultural Heritage Fund that made possible the meeting of the open ended intergovernmental working group on possible measures to improve the treatment of nominations to the Representative List by the Committee, the Subsidiary Body and the Secretariat;
4. Thanks the States Parties that responded to its invitation to send their points of view on the terms of reference of the Subsidiary Body and on possible revisions of the criteria for inscription on the Lists;
5. Notes that there was no consensus within the Committee on the report of the open ended intergovernmental working group;
6. Considers that any revision in the Operational Directives has significant implications and should be based upon consensus, to the greatest extent possible;
7. Recommends to the General Assembly to revise the Operational Directives for the implementation of the Convention, in order that:
   1. the examination of nominations to the Representative List be carried out by the Consultative Body foreseen in paragraph 26 of the Operational Directives, so that it examines all files submitted during a cycle (nominations to the Urgent Safeguarding List, nominations to the Representative List, proposals to the Register of Best Safeguarding Practices and requests for international assistance greater than US$25,000;
   2. the mandate of the members of the Consultative Body be extended to a maximum of four years, and its composition be renewed by one quarter each year;
   3. a maximum ceiling of files to be treated annually is determined at the previous session;
   4. the Committee considers on a priority basis multinational files, those files from States having no element inscribed on the Urgent Safeguarding List or the Representative List and no proposal selected or no international assistance request approved, then files submitted by countries having the fewest elements inscribed, proposals selected and international assistance requests approved in comparison to other submitting States during the same cycle, trying whenever possible to examine at least one nomination per submitting State, so as to be as inclusive as possible;
   5. submitting States Parties give priority to the Urgent Safeguarding List when indicating the order of priority in which they wish their files to be examined, in case they submit more than one file in the same cycle;
8. Decides that for the 2012 cycle it can evaluate a maximum of 62 files out of the 214 received (nominations to the Urgent Safeguarding List, nominations to the Representative List, proposals to the Register of Best Safeguarding Practices and requests for international assistance greater than US$25,000), giving priority to multinational nominations, to nominations submitted by States having no elements inscribed, Best Practices selected or international assistance approved, then those having the fewest, ensuring to the extent possible to examine at least one file per submitting State, so as to be as inclusive as possible;
9. Requests the submitting States to indicate to the Secretariat before 15 December 2011 the order of priority in which they wish their files to be examined, in case they submitted more than one file to any of the Convention’s mechanisms for the 2012 cycle;
10. Decides to convene an open ended intergovernmental working group, to be held at UNESCO Headquarters before the seventh session of the Committee, to discuss what the right scale or scope of an element should be; this meeting will be organized on condition that voluntary supplementary contributions to the Intangible Cultural Heritage Fund are received in due course in order to cover all of the costs of organizing the meeting and the costs of the participation of representatives of developing countries that are parties to the Convention, whether or not members of the Committee, but only for persons who are experts in intangible cultural heritage.