A/HRC/22/41 28. He further briefed participants on the work of a temporary steering committee, consisting of representatives of States, the industry and civil society, to develop a draft charter for the oversight mechanism of the International Code of Conduct. The current draft foresees a certification process that signatory companies have to successfully undergo to become member companies, as well as continuous performance assessment and a grievance mechanism. He recognized that, although the proposed grievance mechanism allowed victims to seek a review of the substance of their grievances, practical obstacles and security concerns would probably make it impossible for the mechanism to investigate the alleged facts with sufficient reliably in the field. Therefore, rather than fact finding with regard to an alleged violation of the Code, the mechanism would probably have to focus on whether the company adequately cooperated in effectively addressing the grievance in question. 29. In the discussion, a number of delegations expressed their support for the Montreux Document and the International Code of Conduct and the proposed oversight mechanism as initiatives which complement national regulations. Some delegations noted that market pressures were one means for encouraging implementation and highlighted efforts by States to require adherence to the International Code of Conduct in contracts and tenders. One delegation also noted recent developments in producing performance standards for PMSCs. While there was room to discuss additional measures, including under the auspices of the Human Rights Council, these should complement existing initiatives and focus on human rights, taking into account and based on the viewpoints of all stakeholders. No one regulatory initiative could be viewed as the ultimate solution. Rather, a multifaceted approach was needed. 30. Some delegations felt that the existing initiatives, despite having many positive features, also had considerable gaps, which should be addressed through an international convention. For example, the Montreux Document failed to clarify the legal status of armed PMSC staff, whose presence in conflict zones created challenges in terms of ensuring respect for the principle of distinction. It also failed to limit the number of staff that could be deployed and the types of activities they may undertake. In this respect, the term “private military companies” was in itself problematic, as some member States considered military functions to be strictly a State prerogative. 31. Other delegations noted that other weaknesses from a human rights perspective include the fact that the Montreux Document did not refer to an obligation for member States to conduct human rights impact assessments prior to engaging the services of a PMSC. The International Code of Conduct also had inherent weaknesses in that it did not ensure remedies for victims. As the code is a voluntary initiative for industry, it cannot be invoked in a court of law unless it has been integrated into a contract or national legislation. Neither the Montreux Document nor the International Code of Conduct required that States contract only with companies that would sign and adhere to the Code. In some cases, States had contracted private military and security companies that faced serious allegations of human rights abuses. 32. Some delegations noted that existing initiatives did not ensure criminal accountability for abuses committed by PMSC staff. In this regard, one non-governmental delegation presented the findings of a study undertaken in one country that was emerging from armed conflict. The study found that no PMSC staff accused of serious crimes, including alleged violations of international human rights and international humanitarian law, had been held accountable either by the territorial, home or contracting State. In this regard, Mr. Melzer acknowledged the jurisdictional difficulties arising from the transnational nature of the private security business and recalled that it was up to States to take legislative measures to address these difficulties. He pointed to draft Swiss legislation 8