A/HRC/43/66 countries of origin and any third parties and local or foreign investors, including national or regional or multinational or multilateral financial institutions. 56. The fund of funds would enjoy total freedom regarding the composition and management of their portfolios. However, two types of priorities should be taken into consideration: (a) Investing, although not exclusively, in the real sector and the financial sector of the countries of origin; (b) Lending greater attention to the activities that help to safeguard the environment, boost social equity and improve the quality of governance. 57. Revenues from such funds should be used to advance the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals, in accordance with national priorities, determined through wide consultation and participation processes. The management of the funds and the utilization of the profits should be fully transparent. Systems should be set up to provide access to reliable, timely and easy to comprehend information thereon. 58. Working as a group would generally reduce each developing country’s individual risk, and together they could avoid high trading costs, because the fund of funds would spread fee liability across all investors. Therefore, when properly managed, investment funds may provide a safe, consistent rate of return through which the countries of origin would progressively retrieve the amount of monies previously lost in the illicit financial flows. Investing in an equity fund, or investment fund, would entail buying shares of a portfolio overseen by a professional portfolio manager appointed by the country of origin. The portfolio manager would be responsible for picking the stocks in the portfolio and for the buy, sell and hold decisions. 59. The advantage of an investment fund is that money may be invested in a wide portfolio of shares and securities so as to spread risk and ensure “safe” returns. Destination countries holding funds must be willing to release them, however, which is dependent upon the political approach taken and bilateral negotiations. The funds could be managed by a mutual agency with several partners involved, which could provide more assurance to the country of origin. Proposal C: creation of a fund governed by national central banks 60. One expert was more favourable to the setting up of a fund governed by or associated with national central banks, a view appertaining to the sovereignty of the country of origin. Investment funds channelled through international financial markets to generate private investment in developing economies must be considered very critically, given that it can be extremely expensive, uses public funds to subsidize private funds and could potentially lead to a simple shift from public to private corruption. Proposal D: creation of a sovereign wealth fund in the country of destination 61. A sovereign wealth fund is also a means for utilizing the illicit funds which have not been repatriated. The country of destination could establish a sovereign wealth fund using the frozen illicit funds, which would be a State-owned investment fund investing in real and financial assets such as stocks, bonds, private equity funds or hedge funds. The return from the investments could be used for the benefit of the countries of origin. 62. Such a fund structure would enable Governments of countries of origin to apply for finance for specific programmes at low interest rates. Proposal E: channelling the funds through regional banks 63. Another proposal is to channel the funds through regional banks, which have the financing of projects in member countries as an objective. This would be in line with the 11