through joint meetings of committees of the General Assembly, while respecting the expert nature or specialized mandate of each, was encouraged.11 62. A variety of proposals were made to take forward regular institutional dialogue. It was noted that the GGE process since 2004 has been a form of regular dialogue. It was also suggested that the format of the OEWG, with its inclusive membership and transparent discussions, should become the standard for discussion and therefore the renewal of its mandate was called for. It was highlighted that there was value in having the sixth Group of Governmental Experts meeting in parallel to the OEWG, stressing their complementarity and the opportunity to capitalize on the unique features of each process. Looking beyond the mandates of the OEWG and sixth GGE, a further suggestion was that regular institutional dialogue could be the follow-up mechanism to a politically binding instrument.12 Another possibility raised was that an inter-governmental specialized agency could be established. 63. In addition to questions concerning the four characteristics—“regular”, “institutional”, “broad participation”, and “under UN auspices”—noted in the OEWG mandate,13 additional queries were raised concerning the duration of such dialogue, the timing of establishing a new mechanism for dialogue prior to the conclusion of the work of the sixth GGE, potential locations, and budgetary considerations. 64. The OEWG’s mandate provided for the possibility of holding intersessional consultative meetings with other stakeholders, including the private sector, non-governmental organizations and academia. The three-day informal consultative meeting of the OEWG held in December 2019 produced a rich exchange between States and other stakeholders. The OEWG also heard interventions from nongovernmental organizations during an informal multi-stakeholder segment at its first and second sessions. In order to further inform their engagement with the OEWG, some States noted that they have conducted domestic multi-stakeholder consultations or calls for submissions. 65. It was recalled that States hold primary responsibility for national security, public safety and rule of law. It was also noted that regular dialogue should be primarily intergovernmental in nature, and an appropriate mechanism to leverage the experience and knowledge of other stakeholder groups would need to be found. In their interventions, States acknowledged that building a more resilient and secure ICT environment necessitates multi-stakeholder cooperation and partnerships. While recognizing the unique role and responsibility of States in relation to security, there was growing appreciation that States may benefit from the expertise in non-governmental communities and that responsible behaviour of other actors makes an essential contribution to this environment. 11 See background paper issued by the Chair of the OEWG, “An Initial Overview of UN System Actors, Processes and Activities on ICT-related issues of Interest to the OEWG, By Theme”, December 2019, https://unodaweb.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/background-paper-on-existing-un-bodies-processesrelated-to-mandate.pdf. 12 Similar to the mechanisms established under the UN Programme of Action on Small Arms and Light Weapons, with biennial meetings of States to consider the national, regional and global implementation of the PoA, and a quinquennial review conference to review progress. See A/CONF.192/15 section IV.1.(a) and (b). 13 See background paper issued by the Chair of the OEWG, ”’Regular Institutional Dialogue’ in the Consensus Reports of the United Nations Groups of Governmental Experts and the Mandate of the OEWG”, December 2019, pp. 2-3. https://unoda-web.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/background-paper-on-regularinstitutional-dialogue.pdf. 12