A/HRC/19/32 Social, and Cultural Rights, and that they served as an important framework for MDG and post-MDG implementation.4 They were to be seen in the wider context of social and economic governance.5 Virtually all parties agreed with the focus on cross-cutting conditions in general, and the special emphasis given to women and children, in particular. A number of further conditions were mentioned by individual parties, though all agreed that a broad and all-inclusive focus should be maintained. This consensus should also inform any discussion on the viability of a specific definition of extreme poverty. Furthermore, parties highlighted the importance of addressing stigmatization and discrimination 6 as structural causes of extreme poverty, as well as the reliance on empowerment 7 as a core element of the fight against extreme poverty. Regarding part III: “Conceptual framework” C. Question: “Considering that the majority of those living in extreme poverty are children, should the guiding principles have a dedicated section on this specific group or should this issue be cutting across the text? (A/HRC/15/41, para. 19); and what about other specific groups?” 17. The Governments of Canada, Chile, Lithuania, Mexico, Norway, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as well as the International Commission of Jurists observed that children were a pre-eminently important group among those especially vulnerable to extreme poverty. However, they also agreed that child poverty had to be seen in the context of the poverty of their parents and, generally, as a cross-cutting issue of the broader societal problem of extreme poverty. Special attention should be paid to street children and girl children who were frequently victims of both extreme poverty and gender-related discrimination. The Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, Najat M’jiid Maalla added that the issue of children living in extreme poverty should be based on the four guiding principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, namely that children living in extreme poverty should be recognized by the law, that their rights and dignity should be respected, that their physical and mental integrity, their security and their development should be protected, and that their free expression should be encouraged and taken into consideration. Likewise, children living in extreme poverty should enjoy the full protection of economic and social rights. 18. The Governments of Argentina, Canada, Ecuador, Finland, France, and Germany, as well as the National Human Rights Commissions of India, Jordan, Malaysia and South Africa and the Bosnia and Herzegovina Ombudsman emphasized the appropriateness of including specific mention of other vulnerable groups, in particular women, older persons, people with disabilities, including those rendered invalid through armed conflict, migrant workers, refugees and asylum seekers, ethnic, racial and linguistic minorities, people with HIV/AIDS, people of lower castes, the rural poor, and indigenous people. They contended that these groups suffered from multiple forms of discrimination and were most in need of protection. Not only should the misfortune of these groups cut across the entire text of the guiding principles, there should also be a specific segment that recognized them as key target groups for a multifaceted approach towards the eradication of poverty. 4 5 6 7 See submissions of the Governments of Peru as well as the North-South Institute (NSI). See submissions of the Governments of Finland, Mexico and Bolivia. See submissions of the National Human Rights Commission of Azerbaijan (Human Rights Ombudsman) and the Qatar National Human Rights Committee. The Governments of Peru and Sweden. 7