A/HRC/22/41 companies that have not signed the International Code of Conduct or with States that do not comply with the provisions and the good practices of the Montreux Document. In his view a legally binding international convention on the regulation of the activities of PMSCs would enable the United Nations to rely on the signatories of such an instrument to provide reliable information on security companies with which the Organization may seek to engage. 22. In the discussion, some delegations focused their remarks on the definition of PMSCs. One delegation took the view that a careful distinction should be made between private security companies, private military companies and mercenaries and cautioned against the development of a binding instrument on PMSCs that would take a “one size fits all” approach. 23. Noting the need to distinguish clearly between the activities of PMSCs and those of mercenaries, another delegation suggested that the definition of PMSCs should focus either on the nature of the company or the type of services it provides in a particular case. In this regard, another delegation took the view that it was difficult to distinguish between security companies and military companies and that a definitional categorization should depend on the type of services provided in a particular case. C. Possibility of elaborating an international regulatory framework 24. The third and fourth meetings were dedicated to a discussion of the possibility of elaborating an international regulatory framework. 1. Existing specific initiatives including the Montreux Document and the International Code of Conduct 25. In his presentation on existing specific initiatives, Nils Melzer recalled the primary responsibility of States for the regulation, oversight and accountability of PMSCs and their activities. International initiatives supported and complemented, but did not replace this responsibility. He then drew attention to existing initiatives: the Montreux Document; the International Code of Conduct; and initiatives under the auspices of the Human Rights Council, including the Working Group on the use of mercenaries and the intergovernmental working group on the activities of PMSCs. 26. Based on a humanitarian initiative by Switzerland and the ICRC, the Montreux Document was adopted in September 2008. It aimed to promote respect for international humanitarian and human rights law, and addresses international obligations and good practices for States related to operations of PMSCs during armed conflict. It addresses the specific obligations of home States where a PMSC has its seat, the contracting State for which a PMSC works and the territorial State where it carries out its activities. The Montreux Document thereby demonstrates that PMSCs do not operate in a legal vacuum. 27. The International Code of Conduct is a multi-stakeholder initiative convened by the Government of Switzerland in November 2010. As at August 2012, 464 companies had signed on to the Code. The Code sets out principles of conduct for private security service providers, such as: commitments to humane treatment, dignity and privacy, and human rights standards like prohibitions on torture and ill-treatment, slavery, trafficking, and discrimination, as well as principles of management relating to the selection, vetting and training of personnel; the use of weapons and equipment; incident reporting on use of force; grievance procedures and financial undertakings in case of liability to pay compensation. Mr. Melzer noted that this self-commitment by private corporate actors was to be welcomed, especially in the absence of other regulatory frameworks at the international level. 7