restrictions on international cooperation and technology transfer, nor hinder innovation for peaceful purposes and the economic development of States in a fair and non-discriminatory environment. States also stressed the interlinkages between i n t e r n a t i o n a l l a w , norms, confidence-building and capacity-building, and underscored the need for gender perspectives to be mainstreamed into norm implementation. 50. During discussion, proposals were made for the further elaboration of existing norms. States reiterated the importance of the protection of critical infrastructure, which should include medical and healthcare facilities. They also drew attention to the importance of cooperating to protect critical infrastructure that crosses borders or jurisdictions, as well as the importance of ensuring the general availability and integrity of the Internet. States recalled General Assembly resolution 64/211 entitled “Creation of a global culture of cybersecurity and the protection of critical information infrastructures”. 6 In addition, S o m e States also proposed further ensuring the integrity of the ICT supply chain, expressing concern over the creation of harmful hidden functions in ICT products, and the responsibility to notify users when significant vulnerabilities are identified. Commented [A16]: Transfer para 50 to conclusions section if discussion sections are deleted 51. Further to the above paragraph, a list of written proposals made by some States at the OEWG on the elaboration of existing norms, guidance on implementation as well as new norms were compiled in a non-paper and will be made available online.7 Commented [A17]: Transfer para 51 to conclusions section if discussion sections are deleted 52. Some States also noted the proposal for an international code of conduct for information security tabled in 2015.8 Commented [A18]: Transfer para 50 to conclusions section if discussion sections are deleted 53. States recognized the need to encourage and support further regional efforts as well as partnerships with other stakeholders such as the private sector and the technical community on the implementation of norms. Such partnerships could be built, for example, to ensure sustainable capacity-building efforts to address differences in implementation capacities. States could be called on to take the necessary outreach and cooperative steps to ensure that various stakeholders, including the public and private sectors and civil society, uphold their responsibilities in the use of ICTs. Commented [A19]: Transfer para 51 to conclusions section if discussion sections are deleted Conclusions and Recommendations 54. States agreed that norms do not replace or alter States’ obligations under international law, which are binding, but rather provide additional specific guidance on what constitutes responsible State behaviour in the use of ICTs. 55. States agreed that the COVID-19 pandemic accentuated the importance of protecting all critical infrastructure from ICT threats. S t a t e s u n d e r s c o r e d t h a t healthcare infrastructure including medical services and facilities are considered critical infrastructure for the purposes of the as part of the norms addressing critical infrastructure endorsed in A/Res/70/237 . 56. States agreed on the importance of supporting and furthering efforts to implement norms at the global, regional and national levels. 57. Given the unique attributes of ICTs, States reaffirmed that, taking into account the proposals on norms made at the OEWG, additional norms could continue to be developed over time. States 6 7 8 Annexed to this resolution is a Voluntary self-assessment tool for national efforts to protect critical information infrastructures. https://www.un.org/disarmament/open-ended-working-group/ A/69/723, referenced in A/70/174, para 12. 10 Commented [A20]: Reflecting concerns raised by Africa Group at the virtual meeting 18 Feb. Commented [A21]: Reflecting Health Infrastructure proposal