A/HRC/43/34 19. On the governance challenges related to human rights, she emphasized in particular the difficulties regarding access to justice and gender equality. She introduced the peoplecentred service design and delivery criteria described in an OECD flagship publication entitled Equal Access to Justice for Inclusive Growth: Putting People at the Centre. Those criteria included evidence-based planning, equality and inclusion; availability, accessibility, prevention, proactivity and timeliness; appropriateness and responsiveness; outcome focus and fairness collaboration; and integration and effectiveness. To foster public governance dimensions of gender equality, gender-based analyses and impact assessments were important in order to help embed a “gender lens” in government decision-making and structural reforms. Approximately half of OECD countries had already used or planned to introduce gender budgeting. Tools such as public procurement and regulatory policies should also be adapted to address specific barriers faced by women in accessing financial support and government contracts. 20. Some countries, such as the Netherlands and Germany, had put in place institutional mechanisms to deliver on the Sustainable Development Goals and integrate them into their national planning frameworks. However, most countries still needed to build their capacity to integrate the 2030 Agenda into their day-to-day management systems. In OECD countries, the Sustainable Development Goals were often integrated into national strategies (73 per cent of countries) but less so into national budget systems (57 per cent of countries). States should be bold in developing partnerships for implementation at the local, national, regional and global levels, and connect the practitioners whose day-to-day experience shaped the ways in which the Sustainable Development Goals were put into practice. 21. Mr. Kedzia addressed the relationship between good governance, Goal 16 and the realization of economic, social and cultural rights from the perspective of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights neither required nor precluded any particular form of government or economic system, provided only that it was democratic and that all human rights were thereby respected.1 Nevertheless, the Committee had stressed the linkage between democracy and respect for human rights. That linkage was supported by the preamble of the Covenant, which emphasized the interdependence and indivisibility of the two sets of human rights (economic, social and cultural and civil and political). As set out in the Committee’s general comment No. 12, specific criteria for good governance and human rights included accountability, transparency, people’s participation, decentralization, legislative capacity and the independence of the judiciary. The development of strategies aimed at the implementation of rights should be based on representative processes, drawing on all available domestic expertise. The Committee had also linked good governance to the elimination of poverty and social exclusion, and called for the building of inclusive societies. 22. In the view of the Committee, broad participation in decision-making processes, in particular by groups affected by a State’s policies and decisions, was among the essential features of good governance. Independent judicial mechanisms and national human rights institutions were also essential. 23. He highlighted other aspects of governance in terms of understanding States parties’ obligation under the Covenant to use the maximum of their available resources for the progressive realization of economic, social and cultural rights. For example, the Committee had developed its own “emergency doctrine”, which recognized that in times of crisis some adjustments in the implementation of certain Covenant rights might be inevitable. However, the Committee had also identified certain requirements that States had to meet to be in compliance with the Covenant even when austerity measures were imposed. Such measures must be temporary; be necessary and proportionate; ensure that the rights of disadvantaged and marginalized individuals and groups were not disproportionally affected; and determine the minimum core content of rights or a social protection floor, and ensure the protection of that core content under all circumstances. 1 See Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, general comment No. 3 (1990) on the nature of States parties’ obligations. 5