Ñ Permanent Council 212. In Budapest in 1994, participating States decided to enhance the ODIHR by increasing its involvement in the work of the PC. This involvement goes beyond the regular reporting of the ODIHR to the PC and constitutes an element of the OSCE-wide effort to provide early warning, as well as to inform States about serious cases of non-implementation of human dimension commitments. An enhanced focus of the Permanent Council in the follow-up to the ODIHR’s election-related recommendations would also constitute another way of intensifying the ODIHR’s involvement there. 213. In order to improve the effectiveness of the human dimension dialogue taking place in the Permanent Council, the Panel of Eminent Persons recommended the establishment of a Human Dimension Committee as one of three pillars, each representing one of the three security dimensions developed by the OSCE.118 Such a Committee structure, subordinate to the Permanent Council, the Panel argued, would allow for more open exchanges, would focus the agenda of the PC, and would raise its profile as a forum for political dialogue and transparent decision-making.119 214. A Human Dimension Committee could indeed strengthen the effectiveness of reviewing the implementation of human dimension commitments, provided certain prerequisites were fulfilled. Based on the recognition of the importance of informing citizens about the range of OSCE activities, this Committee should be regularly opened to the public in order to allow effective participation of civil society organizations. 215. As rightly noted throughout the consultation process on the implementation of the first paragraph of Ministerial Council Decision 17/05, a Human Dimension Committee will not duplicate, weaken, or substitute any existing review mechanisms, bodies, or procedures. Regular sessions of a Human Dimension Committee in the framework of the Permanent Council could, for instance, not substitute for the high-profile mutual exposure of policy makers, diplomats, and civil society for which the HDIM and the SHDMs are widely known and appreciated. Rather, they should contribute to a more timely, focused, and comprehensive response of States, individually and collectively, to identified successes, shortcomings, and new challenges, and to a more focused and systematic follow-up to their recommendations. 216. It has also been suggested that, if a Human Dimension Committee were to be established, the HDIM could be reduced to a maximum of five days. Yet, if the OSCE wants to strengthen the effectiveness of its implementation of human dimension commitments and allow for thorough review of the progress of each country, shortening the time available for such a review appears counter-intuitive. If the HDIM is to provide a focused review, sufficient time must be devoted to it. If the HDIM were to be shortened to one week, for instance, governmental and non-governmental representatives alike may limit themselves to highlighting the most egregious cases of non-implementation, while time for a thorough discussion of the situation in all OSCE States would be lacking. Should such a Committee be established, the Human Dimension Implementation Meetings and the relevant modalities should 118  Id., at para 32. 119  Cf. Draft MC Decision on Improvement of the Consultative Process, CIO/GAL/172/06, 30 October 2006. Common Responsibility: Commitments and Implementation 71