A/HRC/14/21 implement legislative measures (which the courts would be bound to apply) to protect vulnerable countries from vulture fund activity. V. Conclusions and recommendations 67. Despite their limitations, international debt relief initiatives have helped reduce the debt burdens of heavily indebted poor countries (HIPCs) and create fiscal space for poverty-reducing expenditures in these countries. There is some evidence that reduced debt burdens and improved fiscal space has led to increased investment in essential social services related to human rights, such as health and education, in these countries. 68. Nevertheless, the voluntary nature of international debt relief schemes has created opportunities for vulture funds to acquire defaulted sovereign debt at vastly reduced prices and then seek repayment of the full value of the debt through litigation, seizure of assets or political pressure. While the debts held by vulture funds do not represent the bulk of poor countries’ debt, awards in vulture fund lawsuits represent a considerable burden on the budgets of these countries. Further, vulture fund activities complicate sovereign debt restructuring by causing inequitable burden sharing among creditors, and undermine trade and investment relations of the countries that they target. They may also hamper efforts by HIPCs to normalize their financial relationships with the international banking community. 69. By forcing HIPCs, through litigation and other means, to divert financial resources saved from debt cancellation, vulture funds diminish the impact of, or dilute the potential gains from, debt relief for these countries, thereby undermining the core objectives of internationally agreed debt relief measures. Vulture funds profiteer at the expense of both the citizens of HIPCs and the taxpayers of countries that have supported international debt relief efforts. 70. From a human rights perspective, the settlement of excessive vulture fund claims by poor countries with unsustainable debt levels has a direct negative effect on the capacity of the Governments of these countries to fulfil their human rights obligations, especially with regard to economic, social and cultural rights, such as the rights to water and sanitation, food, health, adequate housing and education. 71. The various initiatives (including the creation of legal support funds, voluntary codes and provision of legal advice) that have been undertaken at the international level to address vulture fund activity have all contributed towards addressing the negative effects of vulture fund activity on debt relief. However, these initiatives are insufficient. Given that the success rate of past litigation may generate more lawsuits against HIPCs, more concrete, legally enforceable measures are urgently required to curb predatory creditor activity and preserve the gains from international debt relief efforts. 72. Consideration should be given to making international debt relief schemes legally binding on all creditors (including commercial creditors). This would help prevent the exploitation of the proceeds of debt cancellation by unscrupulous creditors. 73. The absence of an international insolvency procedure concerning defaulted sovereign debt creates opportunities for vulture funds to profiteer at the expense of HIPCs and other creditors. Consequently, urgent consideration should be given to the establishment of a fair and transparent debt resolution mechanism at the international level. As the independent expert intimated in his report to the General 20 GE.10-13156