A/HRC/26/42 V. Are there experiences of integrating a human rights perspective into the fight against corruption? 25. Regarding the questionnaire responses that were received from States, human rights and anti-corruption institutions, NGOs and other stakeholders, it is pertinent to consider whether there were any experiences of integrating a human rights perspective into the fight against corruption. There are different institutional approaches to dealing with corruption. In a number of States, independent agencies have been charged with counteracting corruption. Other States, in their replies, make reference to agencies or departments of the government. The structure and organization of such agencies or other specialized institutions varies from State to State. In some States, NGOs are an important instrument in combating corruption. In addition, the inspection bodies (supreme audit institutions, for instance) play an important role; they are interested in human rights–based approaches and work collaboratively with civil society and human rights organizations. Other States mention criminal prosecution or human rights institutions as the main instruments used in the fight against corruption. 26. With regard to the integration of a human rights perspective into the fight against corruption via cooperation between anti-corruption institutions and human rights institutions, the questionnaire responses from States give a multifaceted picture. In some cases, it is established that no cooperation is taking place or that no effective cooperation exists. Often, it is said that there is no formal cooperation but that there are informal contacts, for example for meetings, workshops, lectures, common trainings, or exchanging information. As for cooperation on a more formal basis, inter-institutional working groups are mentioned. Some States speak of collaboration between the related institutions occurring on a case-by-case basis. In sum, many States emphasize the need for and the importance of cooperation between the anti-corruption institutions and human rights institutions, but at the moment, this cooperation is informal and ad hoc. This same result is seen in the questionnaire responses from national human rights institutions and also in some responses from NGOs. 27. Regarding the questionnaire responses from NGOs, it is notable that some of them quote examples of collaboration between anti-corruption institutions and human rights institutions. However, no information is provided about the ways in which this cooperation is taking place. The need for and importance of such cooperation is nevertheless stressed in some responses. 28. In this regard, the response from the Council of Europe should be highlighted. It provides an illustrative example of integrating a human rights perspective into the fight against corruption. As examples, the Council of Europe listed the Civil Law Convention on Corruption (mentioned earlier) and the establishment of the Groupe d’États contre la corruption, which invited the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights to share his views on the impact of corruption on the effectiveness of human rights. In his view, the protection of victims of corruption, as well as of persons who report suspicions of corruption, should be seen as important tools in promoting both human rights and ethical behaviour. 29. The substance of the questionnaire responses from States and other stakeholders indicates that human rights play an important role in anti-corruption strategies. What is emphasized by some respondents is the importance of a well-informed and participatory society in order to combat corruption. This outcome will be aided by human rights education, which can raise awareness of corruption. 10