Several delegations emphasized that the State party would identity of the author in order to reply to the complaint remedial action. Other delegations noted that if the aim the protection of the author, this could be achieved with contained in element 10, or with some other measure. The facts and findings upon conclusion was stressed. need to know the and to initiate of the provision was the provision need to publicize the 42. Some delegations spoke in favour of confidentiality along the lines of existing Charter-based procedures, such as the 1503 procedure, or the communications procedure of the Commission on the Status of Women. Others argued that in the light of the purpose of the protocol, the principles and practice of other human rights treaty bodies, such as the Human Rights Committee, should be used as models. Element 9 43. With regard to the admissibility criteria proposed in element 9, it was noted that, while the list proposed in the element is reflective of the present stage in other comparable procedures, the preparation of a new protocol offered an opportunity for progressive development and the reflection of current practice. 44. Element 9 (b): Support was expressed for this formulation. 45. Element 9 (c): While clarification was sought on the conceptual distinction between "alleged violation" and "alleged failure to give effect", it was also noted that the formulation simply reflected a comprehensive view of the provisions of the Convention. Some delegations identified a link between these criteria and the question of standing in element 7, as well as the question whether all the provisions of the Convention would be covered by the protocol. 46. Several delegations foresaw a potentially enormous number of communications under the second standard, and proposed the following formulation: "alleged failure to provide effective remedies to situations caused by violations of rights under the Convention". 47. Element 9 (d): Several delegations noted that such a criterion was absent from other comparable procedures. They found it to be counter to existing norms and agreed that an optional protocol should apply to acts that had occurred after the entry into force of the optional protocol in the State party. Support was expressed for an approach whereby the admissibility criterion would be the entry into force of the Convention, not of the optional protocol, in the State party. 48. Element 9 (f): With regard to the element on the exhaustion of domestic remedies, preference was expressed its for the formulation contained in the first Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Others stated their preference for language as contained in the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment or the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, which stated that the requirement of the exhaustion of domestic remedies should not be the rule where domestic remedies were unreasonably prolonged, or unlikely to bring effective relief. The language contained in the latter would also be in accordance with the practice of the Human Rights Committee, which interpreted its own provision to include the absence of effective domestic remedies, their lack of effectiveness, or denial of a remedy. It was suggested that more general -112-