text: 59. Mr. DIECKMANN (Federal Republic of Ger­ many) said he agreed with previous speakers that the weak points of biennialization should be discussed and that the Secretariat should pinpoint the problems involved. 60. Mr. SEV AN (Secretary of the Council) said that the Secretariat could make suggestions regarding 4th meeting-7 February 1986 11 anomalies and provide informal papers. The Council deleted from the section entitled "International co- might want to hold informal discussions and have a operation and co-ordination within the United Na- review process. In fact, it had problems with its own tions system". biennialization. 6I. Mr. MALIK (India) said that he agreed with the proposal made by the representative of the Federal Republic of Germany. It was time to take a good look at the whole question of co-ordination and bienniali­ zation. He also thought that paragraph 6 should be amended by substituting the word "request" for "direct". Paragraph 6, as amended, was adopted. PARAGRAPH 7 62. Mr. DIECKMANN (Federal Republic of Ger­ many) suggested that the word "direct" should be replaced by the word "request", as in the case of paragraph 6. 63. Mr. FAREED (Pakistan) said that he agreed with the representative of the Federal Republic of Germany but wondered why the paragraph was necessary at all since the subsidiary bodies automati­ cally acted on resolutions when requested to do so by the Council. 64. Mr. SEV AN (Secretary of the Council) said that past practice had been to list all the relevant resolu­ tions which required a subsidiary body to take action and that paragraph 7 was, in effect, a compromise. He agreed that it was redundant because the relevant resolutions were mentioned in due course, in annota­ tions to provisional agendas of the bodies concerned. 65. Mr. FAREED (Pakistan) suggested that the 
analysis: This text appears to be a discussion about the functioning of the United Nations Council, specifically about biennialization and the coordination of subsidiary bodies. The language used is formal and bureaucratic, suggesting a focus on organizational processes rather than a specific policy area.