A/HRC/32/40 agreement. Doing so will ensure that they have grounds to terminate the trade agreement where migrants’ rights have been violated. General exception clauses 80. General exception clauses have served as an effective means of advancing goodfaith measures by States to pursue public welfare objectives. In the context of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and WTO, States have already acknowledged that, without the introduction of appropriate safeguards and implementing national legislation, trade rules and policies can have an adverse impact on workers’ rights. They have used exception clauses to address forced and child labour and introduce other protections by requiring the adoption of labour standards. 81. The Special Rapporteur believes it is promising that the proponents of general exception clauses have been geographically and economically diverse. Several countries from Asia and the Pacific and South America have included general exception clauses in trade agreements. General exception clauses also appear in the treaty programmes of Canada, Mauritius and Turkey, as well as in multilateral agreements such as the Investment Agreement for COMESA. Access to judicial remedies 82. The Special Rapporteur stresses the need for migrants to be able to seek remedies directly in public courts and tribunals: the independence of the judiciary and the type of public oversight that are guaranteed by the international human rights framework are essential to the preservation of fundamental rights. As has been discussed, the complex, opaque and multilayered nature of the current trade regime obscures migrants’ knowledge of their rights, legal recourses and available remedies. Under the current dispute settlement mechanisms included in trade agreements, migrant workers submit to a separate, privatized standard in order to seek relief for trade infractions and are required to go through traditional, costly and more onerous administrative channels to obtain remedies. Migrants also become reliant upon States to pursue their claims where States may have separate, distinct and, at times, competing interests. Ensuring the availability of outlets to pursue remedies in public courts would increase State accountability and also inform public discourse about labour migration programmes and the treatment of migrant workers. It is also by removing barriers to justice that migrants will be empowered to independently pursue their own fundamental human rights. Balanced accountability and representation in international organizations 83. The Special Rapporteur stresses the importance of States holding each other accountable for the manner in which their citizens are being treated while abroad. Beyond dispute settlement mechanisms and judicial remedies, States should consider utilizing all of the international human rights and ILO mechanisms to address concerns about the treatment of migrant workers, who would be better protected if trade agreements made explicit reference to international human rights and labour instruments. 84. Greater attention should also be paid to ensuring that international mechanisms in the areas of trade and migration do not disproportionately penalize developing countries and that they are accountable and representative of all stakeholders. The Special Rapporteur believes there is a need to create stronger institutional links between trade and labour rights in the international framework. 18