A/HRC/32/39 party is the State itself.19 Given the context in which private security providers often work, it is important to underline that those responsibilities can also apply extraterritorially. 20 B. International efforts at regulation and oversight 66. A great many mechanisms now exist at the international level aimed at regulating or monitoring the actions of private security providers. Meanwhile, an emerging regime of soft law regulations and codes of conduct are aimed at improving oversight, control and accountability in the sector, especially for those working in so-called “complex environments”, areas experiencing or recovering from unrest or instability, where the rule of law has been substantially undermined, and in which the capacity of the State authority is diminished or non-existent. 67. The Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights were established in 2000 to guide companies in maintaining the safety and security of their operations. The principles are limited to the extractive industries and energy sectors, but apply to private security providers insofar as they provide services for such corporations. Among the voluntary principles on private security conduct is the principle that private security entities should act in a lawful manner and should exercise restraint and caution in a manner consistent with applicable international guidelines regarding the local use of force, including the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials and the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, as well as with emerging best practices developed by companies, civil society and governments. 68. The Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination was established in 2005. Its mandate included monitoring and studying the effects of the activities of private companies offering military assistance, consultancy and security services on the international market on the enjoyment of human rights, and preparing draft international basic principles that encouraged respect for human rights on the part of those companies in their activities. After developing a draft international convention on the regulation of private military and security companies, the Working Group has been conducting a global assessment, on a regional basis, of national laws and regulations relating to such companies (see A/HRC/24/45, A/HRC/27/50 and A/HRC/30/34). 69. The draft convention on private military and security companies was presented in 2010, at which time the Council established an open-ended intergovernmental working group to consider the possibility of developing an international regulatory framework, including the option of drafting a legally binding instrument on the regulation, monitoring and oversight of private military and security companies. The working group has discussed gaps in the current regulatory framework because very few States have specific legislation on such companies. Efforts to ensure regulation through voluntary self-regulatory mechanisms are still being rolled out (see A/HRC/WG.10/3/2, para. 52).The working group is currently exploring both a legally binding instrument for private military and security companies and considering a range of other options, including international standard-setting and developing guidelines (A/HRC/30/47). 70. In a separate initiative, the Montreux Document on pertinent international legal obligations and good practices for States related to operations of private military and 19 20 10 See Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, principle 2. B. S. Buckland and A. M. Burdzy, Progress and Opportunities: Challenges and Recommendations for Montreux Document Participants, 2nd ed. (Geneva, Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, 2015), pp. 23-25.