A/HRC/16/50 transnational corporations, and welcomed by the Human Rights Council, and affirms the responsibility of signatory companies to respect the human rights of, and fulfil humanitarian responsibilities towards, all those affected by their business activities, including the population of the area in which services are provided. The Code also envisages the establishment of an independent governance and oversight mechanism whose mandate is still to be determined. III. Issues of concern: due process in the context of counterterrorism A. Due process and targeted sanctions6 16. The international sanctions regime for individuals linked to Al-Qaida and the Taliban was established by Security Council resolution 1267 (1999) and modified by a series of subsequent resolutions, which together require all States, in connection with any individual or entity associated with Al-Qaida, Osama bin Laden and/or the Taliban as designated by the 1267 Committee, to implement sanctions measures including asset freezes, international travel bans, and arms embargoes.7 The Consolidated List maintained by the 1267 Committee differs from other sanctions lists in that it targets individuals and entities that do not necessarily have any links to a State or government. 17. Targeted sanctions are widely recognized as a significant preventive tool for effectively combating terrorism. While the objective of the sanctions imposed under the 1267 regime is preventive, their impact on the individuals and entities targeted is clearly punitive. I have repeatedly expressed my concern over the impact of the listing and delisting regime established by the Security Council, and of related national procedures for its implementation, on the human rights of those affected and their families. Sanctions imposed under the 1267 regime, including international travel bans and asset freezes, can result in a denial of access by listed individuals to their own property, limitations on their ability to work and restrictions on their ability to travel and may therefore unjustifiably infringe, for example, on the right to freedom of movement, the right to property, and the right to privacy. The reputational cost to those affected as a result of the suggested association with terrorism or terrorist groups is immeasurable. Moreover, as individual listings under the current regime are open-ended in duration, they may result in a sanction measure effectively becoming permanent. 18. The serious potential repercussions of targeted sanctions for the human rights of those affected underline the importance of ensuring that the procedures for the listing and de-listing of individuals and entities comply strictly with due process requirements. Yet the procedures established under the 1267 regime lack the judicial safeguards necessary to meet internationally recognized standards of due process including the right to a fair hearing, the right to judicial review and the right to an effective remedy. The sanctions regime established under resolution 1373 pose similar challenges. Since the 2005 call by the General-Assembly for the Security Council to ensure “fair and transparent procedures” for 6 7 In its resolution 13/26 the Human Rights Council requested the High Commissioner for Human Rights “to contribute further appropriately to the ongoing discussion regarding the efforts of Member States of the United Nations to assure adequate human rights guarantees to ensure fair and clear procedures, in particular with regard to placing on, reviewing and removing individuals and entities from terrorism-related sanctions lists”. Security Council resolutions 1333 (2000), 1390 (2002), 1452 (2002), 1455 (2003), 1526 (2004), 1617 (2005), 1735 (2006), 1822 (2008) and 1904 (2009). 7