text: therefore, it would be best for the Sub-Commission to listen to as many views as possible and then draw its own conclusions. That in fact was the gist of his statement and was why the members of the Sub-Commission were for the time being remaining silent. 86. Mr. CHERNICHENKO, said that he had been impressed by some of Mr. van Boven's ideas and saw no contradiction between them and what Mrs. Warzazi had said. He agreed that the best way for the Sub-Commission to proceed would be to listen to the non-governmental organizations and to Governments, to obtain as much information as possible, and then decide what to do. At the present time, the Sub-Commission must decide what to do about urgent cases, whether to act itself or whether to refer them to the Commission on Human Rights for action. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1990/SR.l4 page 17 87. He had listened to non-governmental organizations on numerous agenda items, some of them duplicating one another. In his opinion, it would facilitate the task of both the Sub-Commission and the non-governmental organizations if the debate on human rights could be concentrated under agenda item 6 -even if it meant spending more time on that item -so that the same information would not be given under different agenda items and duplication would be avoided. 88. The CHAIRMAN reminded observers that statements in exercise of the right of reply should not exceed five minutes. 89. Miss CHAALAN (Observer for the Syrian Arab Republic), speaking in exercise of the right of reply, referred to allegations against her country by Amnesty International and Pax Christi. The representative of Amnesty International had mentioned certain countries, including the Syrian Arab Republic, but had not mentioned the flagrant violations by the Israeli authorities against Palestinians in the occupied territories. Why should the 
analysis: The text appears to be discussing a meeting of a sub-commission, likely focused on human rights, where representatives are sharing their views and opinions on various issues. The language used is formal and diplomatic, suggesting that it is a formal meeting of a UN-related body.