A/HRC/25/31 Special Rapporteur on the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation has emphasized that remedies must be financially accessible to the poor.67 To ensure economic accessibility, formal fees should be reduced or eliminated and attention should be paid to other costs that might limit access to justice.68 C. Legal assistance 19. Access to adequate legal assistance in pursuing a remedy is essential to the right to a remedy for economic, social and cultural rights violations. As the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has stated, “legal assistance for obtaining remedies should be provided within maximum available resources.”69 Several concluding observations adopted by treaty bodies emphasize that available legal assistance is crucial following a violation of economic, social and cultural rights.70 Other treaty bodies have confirmed the need for access to legal assistance and representation in pursuing remedies for economic, social and cultural rights violations.71 United Nations experts agree that legal assistance is necessary in the context of economic, social and cultural rights violations to ensure that all have access to justice.72 The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has added that “national ombudspersons, human rights commissions, and similar national human rights institutions should be permitted to address violations of the right”,73 thus proposing an expansion of the avenues for victims to access legal aid, present complaints and obtain legal redress.74 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 10 A/HRC/15/31/Add.1, para. 54. A/HRC/23/35, paras. 79–80; A/67/278, para. 96. See also European Court of Human Rights, Airey v. Ireland, 9 October 1979, paras. 26–28; Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Cantos v. Argentina, 28 November 2002, paras. 54–56 and 60. CESCR, general comment No. 19 (2008), para. 77; general comment No. 15 (2002), para. 56; general comment No. 7 (1998), para. 15. E/C.12/TKM/CO/1, 2011, para. 17; E/C.12/1995/3, 1995, para. 5; E/C.12/CYP/CO/5, 2009, para. 10; E/C.12/CAN/CO/4, E/C.12/CAN/CO/5, 2006, para. 14; E/C.12/1/Add.19, 1997, para. 9; CEDAW/C/CAN/CO/7, 2008, para. 22. CEDAW, general recommendation No. 26 (2008), para. 24 (f); CRC, general comment No. 16 (2013), para. 68. A/HRC/19/53, para. 59; A/HRC/23/35, para. 82 (k); A/67/278, paras. 60–67; A/66/265, para. 12; A/HRC/15/31/Add.1, para. 54; A/HRC/19/75, annex, art. 13, para. 2. CESCR, general comment No. 19 (2008), para. 77; general comment No. 15 (2002), para. 55; general comment No. 14 (2000), para. 59; general comment No. 12 (1999), para. 32. In the regional sphere, the inter-American human rights system has recognized the State’s obligation to remove any obstacles to accessing justice that result from economic status. Furthermore, the Plenary Assembly of the XIV Ibero-American Judicial Summit adopted the 100 Brasilia Rules on Access to Justice for Vulnerable Groups which provide guidance for ensuring access to justice for persons in vulnerable situations, and have been endorsed by the judiciaries, public defenders and Public Prosecutor’s offices of several Latin American countries. Both the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights have imposed in certain circumstances an obligation to provide free legal services to those in need to prevent a violation of their right to a fair trial and effective judicial protection. The Commission has set out three factors to be assessed in determining the need for free legal counsel in specific cases, namely the resources available to the litigant, the complexity of the issues involved and the significance of the rights at issue. The European Court of Human Rights has also highlighted that the requirement of legal representation before a court should not constitute a barrier to access justice (see European Court of Human Rights, Airey v. Ireland, 9 October 1979, paras. 26–28).