A/HRC/32/40 sex industry. In 2010, in the context of the trade agreement between Panama and the United States, the National Bureau against Child Labour and for the Protection of Adolescent Workers was established within the Panamanian labour department. The partnership agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union, also known as the Cotonou Agreement, provided for the creation of cooperative education programmes towards the elimination of child labour. 61. For children whose parents are migrant workers, being excluded from education and health systems in the destination country can have lasting consequences on physical and mental health and development. In its 2004 publication “Free trade and children”, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) sheds light on the situation of migrant children, in the context of CAFTA-DR, who are disproportionately at risk of poverty, family disintegration and malnutrition because of declines in the agricultural sector and rural employment. B. Structural impact on the rights of migrants Protectionism, power imbalances, asymmetry and persistent inequalities 62. The Special Rapporteur reiterates that the manner in which international trade regulations and negotiations have been dominated by high-income countries has had tremendous consequences for the most vulnerable segments of the population, specifically migrants. Throughout the development of the multilateral trade regime, the protectionist approach to specific sectors has prevented developing economies from reaping the benefits of free trade where they have a comparative advantage in medium-to-low-wage labour. As migrants have continued to move towards high-productivity regions, the economic and political clout of developed countries has seriously undermined negotiations, monitoring and accountability in trade and mobility arrangements. Within WTO, high-income countries have filed the most complaints, largely owing to their superior financial and legal resources.21 Empirical studies also indicate that, when developing countries sue highincome countries, they tend to experience longer delays between the end of litigation and the beginning of compliance proceedings. In 2009, in recognition of inherent asymmetry in the global economy, heads of the Group of 20 pledged not to repeat the same protectionist mistakes in trade, but the International Monetary Fund reports that during the financial crisis 17 of the 20 countries imposed trade restrictions, distorting aggregate world trade by at least 0.25 per cent ($50 billion per year). As a result of institutionalized inequities, migrants’ concerns become even more attenuated in the context of trade, even though trade decisions have a direct impact upon migrants’ rights. 63. There must also be greater balance between the protections afforded States and investors and all other persons in the jurisdiction of trade parties. Rule of law and judicial oversight are compromised when investors can bypass the exhaustion of national remedies before seeking relief in supra-national tribunals, for example in investor-State dispute settlement tribunals. While investor-State dispute settlement provisions are included in trade and investment agreements throughout the world, 60 per cent of all cases in 2014 were brought against developing countries and countries with economies in transition.22 Although more cases are progressively being filed against developed countries, investors in capital-exporting countries have filed more than 80 per cent of all investor-State dispute 21 22 14 Martin A. Weiss and others, “International investment agreements (IIAs): frequently asked questions”, Congressional Research Service (15 May 2015). Ibid.