A/HRC/41/51 of solving debt crises in a fair, speedy and sustainable manner. 52 According to the resolution adopted by the Parliament, the road map on sovereign debt workout developed by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the proposal to establish an international debt-restructuring court should be at the heart of the new mechanism.53 60. Meanwhile, vulture funds make the most of the absence of an international regulatory framework by exploring new ways to enforce the terms of their sovereign bonds, particularly through the international investment arbitration system. Despite the fact that the system is not designed to hear disputes over financial assets, it seems that arbitrators have opened the door to speculative claims (A/72/153, para. 60). 61. Furthermore, the mechanism appears to be manifestly inadequate to solve complex sovereign debt-restructuring disputes, as investment tribunals too often tend to ground their decisions in purely economic terms while ignoring the broader human rights implications of such situations. 62. The impact of such a worrying trend on the process towards orderly negotiated settlements should not be underestimated. Upholding the rights of investors without taking due account of the broad human rights implications of debt crises incentivizes vulture funds to continue their disruptive strategies. Increased power for hold-out creditors and vulture funds would lead to increased liability for debtor States and a higher risk that human rights obligations are undermined, as economic recovery is impaired and funding for public services giving effect to human rights reduced (ibid., paras. 54 and 59). VIII. Impact of the activities of vulture funds on human rights 63. Human rights monitoring bodies have underscored the negative impact deriving from the activities of vulture funds on the capacity of the State to fulfil its human rights obligations (see, in particular, A/HRC/14/21).54 The Independent Expert on foreign debt has observed that the settlement of excessive claims by vulture funds against poor countries with unsustainable debt levels has a direct, negative effect on the capacity of Governments to fulfil their human rights obligations. Economic, social and cultural rights, particularly the rights to health, water and sanitation, food, housing and education, are among the most affected. Empirical research supports the finding of negative economic and financial consequences deriving from protracted aggressive litigation against debt-distressed and poor States.55 64. Through lengthy and costly litigation, vulture funds contribute to diverting State resources from other, more pressing developmental, social and human rights issues (A/HRC/14/21, para. 35). Protracted litigation may cause important delays in resolving the debt crisis and limit the capacity of a State to commit the resources and efforts necessary to bring the country out of its debt crisis. It may worsen the already significant economic and financial consequences attached to the crisis and lead to policies that have a severe impact on the enjoyment of human rights (A/72/153, para. 6). 56 Some of the most prominent negative impacts deriving from the activities of vulture funds are described below. 52 53 54 55 56 See resolution 2016/2241(INI), para. 32. See UNCTAD, “Sovereign debt workouts: going forward. Roadmap and guide” (April 2015); Martin Guzman and Joseph E. Stiglitz, “Creating a framework for sovereign debt restructuring that works” in Too Little, Too Late, Martin Guzman, José Antonio Ocampo and Joseph E. Stiglitz, eds. (New York, Columbia University Press, 2016); and “A soft law mechanism for sovereign debt restructuring”, Developing Economics (13 November 2017). The duty to fulfil imposes on the State an obligation to take appropriate legislative, administrative, budgetary, judicial and other measures towards the full realization of economic, social and cultural rights. The effects of disruptive litigation on the debt sustainability of heavily indebted poor countries have been tracked on an annual basis by the Millennium Development Goals Task Force and the IMF. A debt crisis may entail a great deal of economic destruction and economic reversal along with sacrifice in human rights terms. A country can lose 5–15 per cent of its GDP. 13