Article 12 35. Some delegations were of the view that article 12 of the protocol was not required because States parties to the protocol would be obliged to ensure that its procedures were accessible and to cooperate with the Committee and because the texts of existing international procedures did not include a similar provision. 36. Many delegations were of the view that an article emphasizing States’ obligations in this regard was desirable, but that this article should be put in positive terms. Several delegations suggested that the State party should be called upon to cooperate in the effective exercise of the right to submit communications or information to the Committee. Others suggested that this right should be facilitated, promoted or supported. A number of delegations were of the view that it was undesirable to refer to the protocol as creating rights and it was preferable to provide that States parties would respect the procedure provided by the protocol. 37. Many delegations suggested that the protocol should provide that the State would cooperate with the Committee at all stages of its proceedings under the protocol, but noted that this obligation would be implied in the absence of such a provision. 38. Some delegations suggested that the protocol should explicitly provide that States parties would undertake to take appropriate steps to protect those using the protocol from interference and reprisal. Article 13 39. Delegations recalled that article 13 had been adopted ad referendum. Article 14 40. Many delegations stressed the importance of wide knowledge of and publicity for the protocol, its procedures and the conclusions of the Committee in this context. Several noted the importance of ensuring wide dissemination of the jurisprudence of the Committee. Several noted that provisions relating to knowledge of and publicity for treaties were not included in existing instruments providing communications procedures, while others noted that article 42 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child made such provision, as did the rules of procedure of the Human Rights Committee. 41. A number of delegations expressed the view that a simple formulation relating to publicity would be appropriate and that this should address the optional protocol and the Convention. Several expressed the view that this could be accommodated by mention of the protocol, which would be enough to make known its procedures. 42. Many delegations agreed that it was important for women to be aware of the Convention and the protocol, but cautioned against a provision that would involve onerous obligations, including of a financial nature, for States parties. Several delegations were of the view that a provision of this nature was unnecessary and inappropriate, and that States parties that had not been subject to the procedures set forth in the protocol should not have obligations with respect to publicizing proceedings. -92-