A/HRC/17/37 loan use and debt management. Some suggestions on strengthening parliamentary oversight of debt management were put forward. 84. A presentation on the role of civil society highlighted its role in the formulation, adoption and advocacy of principles, standards and rules on lending and borrowing; public revenue generation, public spending and debt management; establishment and implementation of monitoring mechanisms; and the ensuring of transparency and accountability in both borrowing and lending countries. The speaker emphasized the issues of lender responsibility for the impact of their lending on the one hand and borrowers’ dual obligations to the lender and to their citizens, on the other. 85. Participants noted that a human rights impact assessment was not a one-size-fits-all measure for loan agreements and that it depended on the project or activity in question. In this regard, they underscored the need for development of a detailed human rights impact assessment tool. It was further observed that impact assessments were the responsibility of both lenders and borrowers. 86. Participants underlined the need for the adoption of new, or the reinforcement of existing, constitutional and legislative provisions concerning the role of parliament in loan negotiation, contraction and debt management. Some participants expressed support for the creation of specialized parliamentary committees due to the technical nature of the subject. There was general agreement on the importance of debt audits – objective assessments of debt from an ethical, financial, social and legal perspective – in ascertaining the debt portfolio of countries. 87. Concern was expressed over the increase in borrowing from private financial markets due to the fact such loans were not subject to public auditing and impact assessments. F. Other sessions 88. The rest of the sessions were devoted to commenting on the scope and application of the guidelines, overarching principles, guidelines on foreign debt, and guidelines on economic reform policies, and to identifying missing elements in the draft guidelines. 89. Discussions reflected the need: (a) to include a broad range of international instruments in the general context section of the guidelines; (b) to include definitions of key terms used in the guidelines; (c) to identify key overriding norms and principles, such as the principle of non-retrogression and the do-no-harm principle; (d) to underscore the obligations of international assistance and cooperation as enshrined in legally binding human rights instruments; (e) to clarify the link between foreign debt and economic reform policies; (f) to explain the role of different domestic institutions such as national human rights institutions; (g) to refer to the impact of foreign debt on specific groups, as well as to measures to address the needs of specific groups; (h) to consider whether a system of remedies should be included in the guidelines; (i) to include the issue of bonds, secondary debt markets and “vulture funds”; and (j) to include debt audits. 90. Participants also stressed the importance of drawing lessons from other principles and guidelines, such as those on development-based evictions and displacement developed by the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and on the right to non-discrimination in this context. 16