A/HRC/10/14 page 19 formulated, which may require private military and security companies to submit annually data on their current corporate structure, contracts and operations. Whilst domestic criminal jurisdictions could be in charge of enforcing regulations, other mechanisms could be put in place to ensure accountability of individuals and companies providing security or military services, such as a vetting mechanism of the employees of private military and security companies and mandatory human rights and legal training for them. 79. In principle, the export of military and security services, even military consultancy and training services, should be placed within a category similar or comparable to the export of arms or military equipment. States could be required to report regularly to the United Nations on contracts over a certain size for both outgoing and incoming military and security services. 80. Issuance of a licence might require training of employees on international humanitarian law and human rights, as well as vetting of new and existing employees, including both national and international criminal checks. Thus, a human rights abuses prevention regime would be built into the general export criteria for the military and security services industry. 81. In addition to a monitoring mechanism, a complaint mechanism open to individuals, State agencies, foreign Governments and other companies and entities should also be put in place to ensure criminal responsibility of individuals and civil liability of companies. 82. Member States may also legally define the types of activities in the military and security field which under no circumstances could be outsourced by a State to the private sector, for example gaining access to weapons of mass destruction, declaration of war or armed invasion. National legislation on the private military and security industry should clearly list the types of activities prohibited for nationally registered companies, including mercenary-related activities banned by the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries, or participating in overthrowing legitimate governments and political authorities. 83. The Working Group recommends that parliamentary oversight of private military and security companies must be established at the State level and could involve regular parliamentary hearings, inquiries and investigations. In States exporting security and military services, a specific committee, subcommittee or commission could be created within the national parliamentary structure, aimed at scrutinizing the issuance of licences and monitoring and investigating the actual activities of private military and security companies. 84. In order to implement the General Assembly and Human Rights Council mandates regarding the creation of new legal instruments to fill the gaps in existing legislation, it is recommended to create in due time, when the Working Group on mercenaries will finalize its range of consultations on drafting legal instruments, an intersessional intergovernmental open-ended working group within the United Nations framework, consisting of representatives and experts nominated by States, with the task to elaborate