A/67/396 of allegations expressed with varying degrees of specificity, typically lacking any detailed explanation of the evidential basis on which the assertion is made. 26. Proposals for designation are adopted on a consensus basis by members of the Committee acting on instructions from their capitals. In practice, the Committee follows a “no objection” procedure, so that if no State has opposed a listing proposal (or has put it “on hold”) within 10 working days, the individual or entity will be added to the list. The designating State (which may or may not be a member of the Committee) is generally expected to have reviewed the underlying evidence. While some States have clear procedures for conducting such a review, others do not. Significantly, the Committee as a whole does not examine the evidence justifying a designation, and it may not have all the relevant information available to it. 45 Bilateral diplomatic negotiations and selective disclosure of intelligence sometimes takes place prior to a designation among States sympathetic to one another’s positions, and there is no duty on designating States to disclose exculpatory information to the Committee. 46 The political and diplomatic character of the listing process has raised concerns that the regime is open to misuse as a means of targeting individuals and entities in order to advance national political goals essentially unrelated to Al-Qaida, 47 or even that States might use listing “as a convenient means of crippling political opponents”. 48 C. Enhancing due process in the Al-Qaida sanctions regime 1. Mandate 27. On 17 December 2009, the Council adopted resolution 1904 (2009), which introduced an independent Ombudsperson for an initial period of 18 months to assist the Committee in its consideration of delisting requests. The first Ombudsperson, Kimberly Prost, a former ad litem judge of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991 with 20 years experience as a federal prosecutor in Canada, was appointed by the Secretary-General on 3 June 2010. Under resolution 1904 (2009), she was mandated to investigate delisting requests according to the procedure set out in annex II to the resolution and to prepare a “comprehensive report” for the Committee within a set time frame. She is also required to report to the Council twice a year on the operation of her mandate. 28. There were two major shortcomings to the procedure under resolution 1904 (2009). The first was that the Ombudsperson was given no formal power to make __________________ 45 46 47 48 12 The Security Council, in its resolution 1989 (2011), recognized this problem: see para. 18, which merely calls upon Member States to share with the Committee “any information they have available regarding a listing request, so that this information may help inform the Committee’s decision on designation”. See A/65/258, para. 54. See Security Council Cross-Cutting Report on the Rule of Law, No. 3 (28 October 2011), p. 35; and Anthony Aust, “The Role of Human Rights in Limiting the Enforcement Powers of the Security Council: A Practitioner’s View”, in Review of the Security Council by Member States, Erika de Wet and Andre Nollkaemper, eds., pp. 31-38. Her Majesty’s Treasury (Respondent) v. Mohammed Jabar Ahmed and others (FC) (Appellants) [2010] UKSC 2, [2010] 2 AC 534, para. 181. 12-52254