A/HRC/41/51 enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights should therefore be systematically assessed. 89. The Advisory Committee recommends that the Human Rights Council: (a) Maintain the issue of vulture funds and human rights on its agenda in order to assess the impact of their activities on economic, social and cultural rights and the right to development, and support further initiatives aimed at identifying and curtailing illegitimate activities by vulture funds; (b) Explore further ways of mainstreaming human rights in the context of debt-restructuring workouts and of operationalizing processes aimed at assessing and monitoring the negative impact of the activities of vulture funds on the full enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights and on the realization of the Sustainable Development Goals; (c) Commend the work of the African Legal Support Facility, and call upon States to support the expansion of this mechanism so as to assist developing countries in their disputes with vulture funds and other similar speculative ways of manoeuvring on financial markets; (d) Adopt a new resolution, following the examination of the present report, entrusting the Advisory Committee with the follow-up to this issue, with a view to making concrete recommendations to States and relevant stakeholders. A further study reviewing relevant national legislation and case law, as well as good practices, would help States in the process of establishing an adequate legal framework. 90. The Advisory Committee recommends that Member States: (a) Enact legislation aimed at curtailing the predatory activities of vulture funds within their jurisdictions. Domestic laws should not be limited to heavily indebted poor countries but should cover a broader group of countries and apply to commercial creditors that refuse to negotiate any restructuring of a debt. Claims that are manifestly disproportionate to the amount initially paid to purchase a sovereign debt should not be considered. The laws in Belgium and the United Kingdom provide valuable examples for other States in drafting national laws aimed at limiting the practices of vulture funds; (b) Adopt measures aimed at limiting disruptive litigation by vulture funds in their jurisdictions. National courts or judges should not give effect to foreign judgments or conduct enforcement procedures in favour of vulture funds that are pursuing a disproportionate profit. It is a good practice to limit the value of the claims of vulture funds to the discounted price originally paid for the bonds; (c) Enhance and promote transparency by ensuring that the owners and shareholders of vulture funds are disclosed and made subject to appropriate taxation. Transparency on sovereign debt in the secondary market should be particularly ensured and courts and other relevant national authorities must have access to all relevant documents and information on the amounts concerned and the identity of creditors; (d) Ensure that adjudication bodies, including the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes and the Permanent Court of Arbitration, integrate into their practices the duty of arbitrators to assess at a preliminary stage the bona fides of vulture fund claims, as well as the standing of the claimant, by requiring that the details of the debt be disclosed; (e) Ensure that the principle of bona fides is adequately reflected in national legislation and applied by the domestic courts in relation to litigation concerning sovereign debt restructuring processes by ensuring that abusive creditors do not enjoy better treatment than cooperative creditors acting in good faith. 18