A/HRC/26/42 proceedings. Furthermore, the criminal approach does not offer ways of addressing the structural problems caused by corruption. It is concentrated, by its very nature, on the single offence, and typically cannot deliver the collective impact and the general impact referred to in this report. 17. Corruption can also be combated by applying remedies from private law. This approach is quite common among States. In international law, the Civil Law Convention on Corruption, which was adopted by the Council of Europe in 1999,13 deals, inter alia, with compensation for damage, liability, the validity of contracts and the protection of employees, and therefore focuses on the consequences of corruption in private law. One distinction between the criminal law approach and the private law approach in the fight against corruption is that the latter addresses the impact of corruption on the person concerned and aims to obtain compensation. 18. A human rights perspective on the impact of corruption can add an approach that moves the victims to the centre of the fight against corruption. It does so by highlighting the negative impacts that corruption brings to the individual concerned, to groups of individuals typically affected by corruption (which are very often marginalized groups), and to society at large. Linking corruption and human rights can show the social implications — the effects that corruption has on human lives. It can help people to make connections between corruption and problems that they suffer from in their lives, and can be an important way of making corruption a public issue. In this way, the social impact of corruption is made visible; it generates awareness in society about the consequences of this scourge and creates new alliances in the fight against corruption. 19. Moreover, the human rights perspective on the negative impact of corruption reveals that the State bears ultimate responsibility for corruption. This responsibility means, as a first step, abstaining from corruption in order to avoid human rights violations. As a second step, the State’s responsibility with regard to human rights means reacting to the negative impact of corruption in order to fulfil human rights obligations. In the latter context, criminal prosecution is one instrument in combating corruption and its negative impact on the enjoyment of human rights. Criminal prosecution is, however, not an effective instrument for resolving the negative consequences of corruption for the individual, for specific groups or for society in general. Consequently, the human rights perspective on the negative impact of corruption emphasizes the State’s obligation to take measures against the negative effects of corruption. Furthermore, preventive measures against corruption are strengthened by combining them with human rights. By integrating a human rights perspective into anti-corruption strategies, it also becomes an obligation to implement preventive policies in areas such as transparency, affidavits, laws on access to public information and external controls. 20. Corruption can lead to a human rights violation directly or indirectly. Corruption may directly violate a human right when a corrupt act is deliberately used as a means to violate a right or when a State acts or fails to act in a way that prevents individuals from enjoying that particular right. In other situations, corruption will be an essential factor contributing to a chain of events that eventually leads to the violation of a right. In this case, the right is violated by an act that derives from a corrupt act, and the act of corruption is a necessary condition for the violation. This situation will arise, for example, if public officials allow the illegal importation of toxic waste from other countries in return for a bribe, and that waste is placed in, or close to, a residential area. The rights to life and health of residents of that area would be violated, indirectly, as a result of the bribery.14 Another 13 14 8 Civil Law Convention against Corruption, ETS No. 174. Contribution by Mr. Alfred Karokora, Member of the Advisory Committee.