was emphasized that such a visit would only take place with the agreement of the State party. The question of the resource implication of such a provision was also raised. 69. With regard to the examination of the communication by the Committee, and in relation to suggestions made by some delegations under element 11 that the State party be present, several delegations emphasized that, in both cases the procedure should be of a written nature and without the presence of the State party. Some delegations stated that, while in principle this should be a written procedure, the Committee should have the power to conduct oral hearings with both parties. The possibility of oral testimony should also not be excluded. 70. It was stated that the use of the term "adopt" in this element was inappropriate. Element 13 71. Some delegations welcomed the addition of the element, especially with regard to reparations. Its inclusion would provide an opportunity, as was the case with certain other elements, for the progressive development and strengthening of international human rights law. Some delegations noted the consistency of the element with the practice of human rights treaty bodies. The well-established practice of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women to adopt recommendations at the conclusion of the consideration of States parties’ reports was noted. Reference was also made to General Assembly resolution 41/120, establishing the principle that new international human rights instruments must be consistent with the existing body of international human rights law and may not fall behind existing standards. Some delegations emphasized the importance of the Committee’s ability to make recommendations on steps necessary to implement the Convention. 72. Some delegations noted that there was no precedent for a provision on the recommendation of remedial measures in cases of non-compliance with treaty provisions in other human rights instruments. At the same time, delegations agreed that the Committee was not a judicial body, and thus its views were of a recommendatory, albeit authoritative, character. It was emphasized that the States parties to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women already had the legal responsibility to remedy any violations of the Convention. Some delegations stated that it should be left to the States parties to determine the appropriateness of the remedial measures. Others doubted that the Committee should have the power to order a State party to take specific remedial measures. 73. Some delegations noted that the intention of the element would be that the State party take the necessary steps to give effect to its obligations under the Convention, that is, that action be taken by the State party at the national level. Several delegations suggested that the element should be drafted in a way to suggest dialogue, rather than judgement. 74. Several delegations identified a lack of clarity in the use of the term "adequate reparation", including clarity as to who would make the determination. Some proposed the deletion of this term. Information on the understanding of the term "reparation" was provided based on a study conducted by an expert of the Subcommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities of the Commission on Human Rights. -116-