E/C.12/GC/24 jurisdiction, and thus under its control or authority, harmed the rights of others in other States, or where conduct by such an actor may lead to foreseeable harm being caused. Indeed, the Members of the United Nations have pledged “to take joint and separate action in cooperation with the Organization” to achieve the purposes set forth in article 55 of the Charter, including “universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion”.69 This duty is expressed without any territorial limitation, and should be taken into account when addressing the scope of States’ obligations under human rights treaties. Also in line with the Charter, the International Court of Justice has acknowledged the extraterritorial scope of core human rights treaties, focusing on their object and purpose, their legislative history and the lack of territorial limitation provisions in the text. 70 Customary international law also prohibits a State from allowing its territory to be used to cause damage on the territory of another State, a requirement that has gained particular relevance in international environmental law. 71 The Human Rights Council has confirmed that such prohibition extends to human rights law, when it endorsed the guiding principles on extreme poverty and human rights, in its resolution 21/11.72 28. Extraterritorial obligations arise when a State party may influence situations located outside its territory, consistent with the limits imposed by international law, by controlling the activities of corporations domiciled in its territory and/or under its jurisdiction, and thus may contribute to the effective enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights outside its national territory.73 In that regard, the Committee also takes note of general comment No. 16 (2013) on State obligations regarding the impact of the business sector on children’s rights, of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, 74 as well as of the positions adopted by other human rights treaty bodies.75 1. Extraterritorial obligation to respect 29. The extraterritorial obligation to respect requires States parties to refrain from interfering directly or indirectly with the enjoyment of the Covenant rights by persons outside their territories. As part of that obligation, States parties must ensure that they do 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 Charter of the United Nations, Article 56. Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports (2004), paras. 109-112. Trail Smelter case (United States of America v. Canada), Reports of International Arbitral Awards, vol. 3 (1941), p. 1965; International Court of Justice, Corfu Channel case (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v. Albania) (Merits), I.C.J. Reports, vol. 4 (9 April 1949), para. 22; and International Court of Justice, Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports (8 July 1996), para. 29. See also A/61/10, draft principles on the allocation of loss in the case of transboundary harm arising out of hazardous activities, adopted at the fifty-eighth session of the International Law Commission, in 2006 (in particular principle 4, stipulating that “each State should take all necessary measures to ensure that prompt and adequate compensation is available for victims of transboundary damage caused by hazardous activities located within its territory or otherwise under its jurisdiction or control”). The Maastricht Principles on Extraterritorial Obligations of States in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, adopted by a range of academics, research institutes and human rights non-governmental organizations in 2011, provide a restatement of the current state of international human rights law on this topic, contributing to its progressive development. Resolution 21/11 endorsed the final draft of the guiding principles on extreme poverty and human rights (see A/HRC/21/39), which provide, in para. 92, that “as part of international cooperation and assistance, States have an obligation to respect and protect the enjoyment of human rights, which involves avoiding conduct that would create a foreseeable risk of impairing the enjoyment of human rights by persons living in poverty beyond their borders, and conducting assessments of the extraterritorial impacts of laws, policies and practices”. See the Committee’s general comment No. 12, para. 36; general comment No. 14, para. 39; or general comment No. 15, paras. 31-33; the Committee’s general comment No. 19, para. 54; general comment No. 20, para. 14; and general comment No. 23, paras. 69 and 70; and E/C.12/2011/1, para. 5. See paras. 43 and 44. See, for example, CERD/C/NOR/CO/19-20, para. 17; and CCPR/C/DEU/CO/6, para. 16. 9