A/HRC/10/48 page 8 23. In some States parties to the Convention such as Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Hungary, Mali, Niger, Qatar, Slovenia and Spain, for example, the provisions of the Convention have direct legal effect on the national legal framework and are in principle directly applicable including in courts of law. In such States, international agreements to which the State is a party become part of domestic law by effect of the ratification of the international agreement (monist approach). In so-called dualist legal systems, on the other hand, the international and national legal systems form part of two separate legal spheres. In such countries, international human rights treaties to which the State is a party have no force, as such, within the domestic legal system and domestic legislation must be adopted to incorporate the treaty into the domestic legal order. While some States parties have made amendments to existing legislation for compliance with the Convention, it appears that the steps taken so far fall short of giving direct effect to the full Convention in the domestic system.19 24. Human rights treaty bodies have often recommended incorporation of the treaty in the domestic legal order as a measure for realizing the full potential of the treaty. The Human Rights Committee, for example, while noting that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights does not explicitly require States parties to incorporate the Covenant, also expressed the view “that Covenant guarantees may receive enhanced protection in those States where the Covenant is automatically or through specific incorporation part of the domestic legal order” and invited States parties to proceed to incorporation.20 Similar views were expressed by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: “legally binding international human rights standards should operate directly and immediately within the domestic legal system” and “while the Covenant does not formally oblige States to incorporate its provisions in domestic law, such an approach is desirable”.21 The views expressed in these general comments are often reiterated during the discussion of the periodic reports of States parties and contained in concluding observations as recommendations.22 B. The hierarchy of the Convention in the legal system of States parties 25. According to information provided, in States where the Convention is directly applicable, it has been assigned different levels within the domestic hierarchy of laws. Costa Rica, for example, recognizes the Convention in the supra-constitutional rank, with the effect that it takes precedence over the national constitution in the aspects in which it recognizes broader rights or protection. In Argentina, a bill was presented to Parliament for recognition of the Convention at 19 Full incorporation or transformation takes place by the adoption of an act to which the Convention is attached as a schedule. 20 Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 31 (2004) on the Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant, para. 13. 21 Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), general comment No. 9 (1998) on the domestic application of the Covenant, para. 8. 22 See for example CCPR/C/IRL/CO/3, para. 6, or E/C.12/ALB/CO/1, paras. 15, 41 and 44.