A/HRC/4/88 page 11 − Accessibility: Only States have standing in the current United Nations sanctions regime, which assumes that the State will act on behalf of the individual. In practice, often this does not happen and individuals are effectively excluded from a process which may have a direct punitive impact on them; and − Remedies: There is a lack of consideration to remedies available to individuals whose human rights have been violated in the sanctions process. 26. These concerns were reflected in the World Summit Outcome Document (see General Assembly resolution 60/1), which calls upon the Security Council, with the support of the Secretary-General, “to ensure that fair and clear procedures exist for placing individuals and entities on sanctions lists and removing them, as well as for granting humanitarian exemptions”.8 27. Pursuant to this mandate, which was enshrined in paragraph 109 of General Assembly resolution 60/1, the Secretary-General tasked the Office of Legal Affairs - in close cooperation with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Department of Political Affairs - with beginning an interdepartmental process to develop proposals and guidelines that would be available for the consideration of the Security Council.9 On the basis of this process, the Secretary-General drafted a non-paper, setting out his views concerning the listing and delisting of individuals and entities on sanctions lists, which he sent to the members of the Security Council for their consideration. On 22 June 2006, the Security Council held an open thematic debate on “Strengthening international law: rule of law and maintenance of international peace and security”. In a statement in the framework of this debate, the Legal Counsel referred to the Secretary-General’s non-paper, stating that: “According to the non-paper, the minimum standards required to ensure that the procedures are fair and transparent would include the following four basic elements: “First, a person against whom measures have been taken by the Council has the right to be informed of those measures and to know the case against him or her as soon as and to the extent possible. The notification should include a statement of the case and information as to how requests for review and exemptions may be made. An adequate statement of the case requires the prior determination of clear criteria for listing. 8 Various initiatives to follow up on the Outcome Document are ongoing. For example, in March 2006, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland, together with other like-minded States, circulated an analytical report commissioned from the Watson Institute for International Studies, entitled “Strengthening targeted sanctions through fair and clear procedures”. The Council of Europe also commissioned a report by Iain Cameron, entitled “The ECHR, due process and UN Security Council counter-terrorism sanctions”. 9 Report of the Secretary-General on the implementation of decisions from the 2005 World Summit Outcome for action by the Secretary-General (A/60/430 of 25 October 2005), para. 20.