A/HRC/40/57 and remedies available to them and that these mechanisms are physically and financially accessible to all. Commentary 21.1 The right to an effective remedy includes reparations and guarantees of non-repetition. An independent, well-financed and proactive judicial branch is essential to both preventing economic reforms from harming human rights and to providing effective remedies should harm occur. A human rights impact assessment can serve to ensure that accountability procedures exist and mechanisms are in place by requiring clearly articulated and justified policy choices that have been developed through inclusive participation of the potentially affected population. 21.2 Engaging in an inclusive and accountable decision-making process strengthens the legitimacy and ownership of the choices made. Furthermore, it is likely to reduce social conflict, which can undermine democratic institutions and the rule of law. A functioning system of national, regional and international human rights accountability mechanisms, including independent and empowered national human rights institutions, is critical to this aim. States should take all measures to implement the recommendations of national, regional and international human rights bodies. 21.3 Measures covered by the present guiding principles should be agreed at all governmental levels, paying special attention to the ways in which burdens are distributed over and financial resources allocated to local authorities, which are often the main providers of social services to the population. These measures should also be open to oversight, including judicial scrutiny of applicable law, and public officials involved in the design and adoption of such measures should be accountable for any policy decisions that endanger the enjoyment of human rights. 21.4 Since corruption can play a role in the design, implementation and monitoring of economic reform policies, clear measures and mechanisms to prevent and combat corruption must be put in place with a view to ensuring accountability. Principle 22 – Who should conduct the assessment(s) Human rights impact assessments of economic reform policies should be independent, robust, credible and gender responsive. In this regard, each country should decide which institution(s) is/are best suited to be in charge of carrying out this exercise, based on applicable criteria. Commentary 22.1 The present guiding principles are flexible enough to be adjusted to the particular needs of government departments, advisory bodies, parliamentary committees, national human rights institutions, courts, international financial institutions, private creditors, international human rights mechanisms, academic institutions or civil society organizations. 22.2 The appropriateness of the institution or team conducting the impact assessment should be measured against pre-established criteria, which should include, as a minimum, the following aspects: its independence from the executive branch and any creditor/creditor-aligned institution; appropriate expertise; adequate funding;30 diversity of members of the team or body in charge of carrying out the assessment and, notably, gender parity; engagement of affected communities; and credibility and legitimacy in the eyes of different stakeholder groups such as government agencies, international actors and civil society. 30 22 See A/HRC/19/59/Add.5.