A/HRC/25/50 fund” litigation on debt relief and human rights (A/HRC/14/21); and the shared responsibility of creditors and debtors for “illegitimate debt” (A/64/289). 5. The independent expert has also conducted official visits to: Norway and Ecuador (A/HRC/14/21/Add.1), Australia and Solomon Islands (A/HRC/17/37/Add.1), Democratic Republic of the Congo (A/HRC/20/23/Add.2), Viet Nam (A/HRC/20/23/Add.1), Latvia (A/HRC/23/37/Add.1), Greece (A/HRC/25/50/Add.1), Japan (A/HRC/25/50/Add.2) and Argentina (A/HRC/25/50/Add.3). He is grateful to these States for their invitations and cooperation, and he hopes that they will remain engaged with the mandate for the purposes of the implementation of the recommendations contained in the respective mission reports. The independent expert further wishes to thank the Government of Egypt for its recent invitation to the mandate holder to visit the country. III. Foreign debt as a human rights issue 6. The issue of foreign debt and its impact on the realization of human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights, has preoccupied the Human Rights Council and its predecessor, the Commission on Human Rights, for many years. However, its efforts (and those of the Commission) have been undermined by the differences concerning whether or not foreign debt should be treated as a human rights issue.2 While acknowledging the potentially adverse impact of excessive debt burdens on development, the developed countries continue to argue that the Council was not the “appropriate” body to address the debt problem and that there were “other international fora which are much better equipped to deal with questions of foreign debt and debt forgiveness”.3 7. The arguments advanced by the countries contesting the competence of the Human Rights Council to address sovereign debt as a human rights issue are untenable for a number of reasons. First, they reflect an incorrect understanding of international human rights law which envisages a holistic approach to the promotion and protection of human rights comprising both proactive and reactive elements. Thus, for example, paragraph 13 of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action calls upon States to “eliminate all violations of human rights and their causes, as well as obstacles to the enjoyment of these 2 3 4 See, for example, Commission on Human Rights resolution 2004/18 of 16 April 2004, adopted by a vote of 29 in favour (Argentina, Bhutan, Brazil, Burkina Faso, China, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Mauritania, Nepal, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Republic of the Congo, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Togo, Uganda and Zimbabwe), 14 against (Australia, Austria, Croatia, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Republic of Korea, Sweden, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States) and 10 abstentions (Armenia, Bahrain, Chile, Costa Rica, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Ukraine); Human Rights Council decision 12/119, adopted on 12 October 2009 by a vote of 31 in favour (Angola, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Mauritius, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa and Uruguay), 13 against (Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, France, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Republic of Korea, Slovakia, Slovenia, Ukraine, United Kingdom and United States), and 2 abstentions (Mexico and Norway). “U.S. EOV on foreign debt as a human rights problem”, explanation of vote by the United States, mandate of the independent expert on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights, Human Rights Council, sixteenth session, Geneva, 23 March 2011. Available from www.geneva.usmission.gov/2011/03/23/eov-foreign-debt/. See also summary records of the Human Rights Council (21 March 2013).