A/HRC/27/55 adjudicate claims. The Special Rapporteur recommends that courts, human rights bodies, and civil society make concerted efforts to demand budget transparency and bring budgetary decisions under review for human rights compliance. 3. Corrupt practices 44. Human rights violations may result from misappropriation of resources allocated for the realization of the rights to water and sanitation. Corruption directly affects the available resources for basic service provision: in 2006 the World Bank estimated that there would be a loss of US$ 20 billion in financing over the next decade.43 Corruption increases the price of services, making them unaffordable, for example when bribes have to be paid. Corrupt practices disproportionately affect poor and marginalized groups, who lack the resources to pay bribes and the power and voice to oppose the vested interests of elites.44 45. While courts tend to address corruption as an issue of criminal law, there has also been success in securing compensation for users of services who suffer the effects of corruption, and in linking corruption to human rights. In a case of corruption in the privatization of water services in Grenoble, France, the Court of Appeal ruled that FF 300,000 in compensation be awarded. 45 The Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States found that the misappropriation of public funds could constitute a violation of the right to education and required compensation.46 4. Unjustified retrogressive measures 46. A retrogressive measure is one that leads to a backward movement in the enjoyment of the human rights to water and sanitation. 47 The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has stated that the burden of proof rests with the State to show that the adoption of retrogressive measures was based on the most careful consideration of alternatives, that disadvantaged groups have been prioritized and that the measures can be justified by reference to the totality of the rights and by the fact that full use was made of available resources.48 The Committee has mainly expressed concern about measures that are deliberately retrogressive, in particular in the context of austerity measures. 49 The Special Rapporteur has previously stated that even if not deliberately retrogressive, some acts and omissions may have a retrogressive effect, for instance where States fail to ensure operation and maintenance and services are unsustainable as a result. Even where retrogression is non-deliberate, the human rights framework obliges States to act with care and deliberation, to assess the impacts of their actions and omissions, and to adjust their policies and measures as soon as they become aware that current policies might lead to unsustainable results.50 States’ failure to meet this obligation may result in human rights violations. 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Stalgren, P., Corruption in the Water Sector: Causes, Consequences and Potential Reform. Swedish Water House Policy Brief No. 4, p. 3 (SIWI ed., 2006). Transparency International, Global Corruption Report 2008: Corruption in the Water Sector, p. 44 et seq. Cour de Cassation, chambre criminelle, France, arrêt du 08/04/1999, pourvoi n.º060 98-84539. Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States, SERAP v. Nigeria, Judgment, ECW/CCJ/APP/12/07; ECW/CCJ/JUD/07/10, paras. 21 and 28 (ECOWAS, Nov. 30, 2010). A/HRC/24/44, para. 14. E/C.12/2007/1, para. 9; Letter to States parties by the Chairperson of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 16 May 2012. Letter to States parties by the Chairperson of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 16 May 2012.. Report by the Special Rapporteur on water and sanitation (A/HRC/24/44), para. 16. 13