The Group, Chaired by Takao Shibata (Japan), resumed negotiation of the organization of scientific and technological cooperation as contained in document A/AC.241/47. Paragraph 2 (Functions) subparagraph (d) that deals with technology was accepted after deleting a number of words in subparagraph (ii) on exchange of information. Delegates debated a reference to evaluating "quality and feasibility" of research in subparagraph 2(e) (ii), with several suggesting that evaluating quality was not an appropriate task for the CST. It was amended to "relevance and feasibility" and adopted.
Paragraphs 3 and 4 addressing networking institutions, agencies and bodies were adopted after deleting the last sentence of paragraph 3 that refers to cooperation in the evaluation of existing networks.
Paragraph 5, which states that the CST shall be multidisciplinary and open-ended, was adopted. In paragraph 6, designation of experts, the discussion dealt with whether the number of Party representatives should be limited. Uzbekistan emphasized that the relevant issue is that each Party has one vote. The paragraph was deleted.
Paragraph 7 refers to the composition of the Bureau. Brazil said the GRULAC proposal from INCD-8 that the CST should be organized in sub-committees was not mentioned in the text. The four vice-chairmen, representing the four regional Annexes of the CCD, should be represented on the Bureau. The US supported the Secretariat language and said there was no need for more vice-chairs. Spain clarified that the paragraph has two facets: the number of vice-chairmen; and how they are elected and who they represent. The Bureau should be kept small. How the vice-chairmen are elected and who they represent is related to the rules of procedure and should be dealt with when the rules are discussed again. The paragraph remains bracketed.