of the other objectives of paragraph 11 of the said resolution; (c) Continue consultations with the parties concerned regarding measures for the protection of the rights, property and interests of the refugees; It seems, however, that UNCCP’s own interpretation of such resolution reduced the scope of the agency’s activities from “general discussions,” such as the efforts toward a durable solution, to “practical measures.”179Thus, as of the mid-1950s, the Commission limited its activities primarily to property identification and documentation,180 and ceased to provide protection and to actively search for a durable solution.181 Funding of the UNCCP was brought into line with this limited mandate. Since 1964, the Commission’s annual reports to the General Assembly have noted a lack of progress on its aims, stating that it had hoped that the situation in the region would move towards the achievement of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, thus enabling it to carry forward its work in accordance with its mandate.182 As a result, the UNCCP became practically defunct some 50 years ago. Although, the UNCCP still has an office attached to the UNSG in New York, it does not play any meaningful protection role, its mandate and historical role are largely unknown. The UNCCP publishes an annual, one-page report stating “it has nothing new to report.”183 At the time of the drafting of the 1951 Refugee Convention, the UNCCP was already established and had begun its protection activities. The drafters of the Convention were familiar with the existence and the protection mandate of the UNCCP. This is illustrated by the specific language of Article 1D, such as the reference to more than one United Nations agency (“organs or agencies of the United Nations”) and the use of the term “protection” as a reference to UNCCP’s protection mandate as opposed to UNRWA’s assistance mandate. Strikingly, academic analysis 179 32 UNCCP, “Historical Survey of Efforts of the UNCCP,” para. 53: “the General Assembly resolution of 14 December 1950 marked a new phase in the Commission’s work, a phase in which it must progress from general discussions to the seeking, and in certain cases, the putting into operation, of practical measures towards a liquidation of the refugee problem [emphasis added].” Even prior to that, in its Fourteenth Progress Report, the UNCCP asserted that it had “been guided by the terms of General Assembly resolution 512 (VI) of 26 January 1952, which expressed the view that the Governments concerned had the primary responsibility for reaching a settlement of their outstanding differences” (UNCCP, “Fourteenth Progress Report of the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine,” March 3, 1955, para. 1, UN Doc. A/2897, http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL. NSF/0/7168EDBD1912F7BD85256102006039A6), seemingly moving away from the pursuit of a durable solution. 180 Akram, “Palestinian Refugees and their Legal Status,” 42.Property-related activities were part of UNCCP’s mandate as established by resolution 394(V): "[the UNCCP shall] [c]ontinue consultations with the parties concerned regarding measures for the protection of the rights, property and interests of the refugees [emphasis added]" (UN General Assembly, “Resolution 394(V),” para. 2(c)). 181 UNCCP, “Fourteenth Progress Report of the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine.” 182 UNCCP, Report of the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine, August 31, 2004, A/59/260, Annex. 183 UNCCP, Report of the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine, September 3, 2013, A/68/335, Annex. Handbook on Protection of Palestinian Refugees