A/HRC/25/52 jurisdiction and none supported the equal inclusion of developing countries in policymaking on tax evasion in practice. All supported the position of the European Union that OECD should be the leading decision-making forum on those issues.51 46. It should be noted that OECD lacks global legitimacy in financial governance and, in particular, that its resolutions do not take the interests of developing countries sufficiently into account.52 47. To ensure transparency in payment flows, it is critical that States should require transnational corporations to make full disclosure in their annual statements of account and financial reports for all subsidiaries and holdings in the countries in which they are achieving turnover, earning returns and paying tax. 48. The Independent Expert also considers that robust international action is required to address the issue of secrecy jurisdictions. Regrettably, existing efforts in that regard by organizations such as the Group of 20 have not been very successful. V. Conclusions and recommendations 49. Illicit financial flows deprive Governments of substantial resources they need to fund programmes that contribute to the realization of economic, social and cultural rights, and to establish and strengthen the institutions for the protection and promotion of civil and political rights. While official development assistance remains an important source of finance for poverty alleviation and development, the substantial amounts lost to illicit financial flows — estimated at US$ 946.7 billion in 2011 — could help the efforts of developing countries to mobilize domestic resources for poverty alleviation, development and the realization of human rights, and to reduce their dependence on external financing, which can lead to the erosion of ownership of national development agendas and promote a paternalistic or charitable attitude towards developing countries. To ensure that repatriated illicit funds provide the most benefit for the populations of the countries of origin, such funds should be managed and spent in accordance with the principles underpinning a human rightsbased approach; repatriated illicit funds can enhance the maximum available resources. 50. In order to assist States in their efforts to counter the problem of illicit financial flows and to ensure the successful repatriation of illicit funds, as well as their efficient use for the realization of human rights, the Independent Expert recommends that : (a) States should ensure the prompt and unconditional repatriation of funds of illicit origin to the countries of origin; (b) Countries of origin should ensure that decisions concerning the use of repatriated assets are taken in accordance with the principles underpinning a human rights-based approach and that the assets are used in a manner that reflects the will of the population and with particular sensitivity to the situation of marginalized groups; (c) States should strengthen efforts under chapter VI of the United Nations Convention against Corruption to build the capacity, including through specialized training, of investigators, prosecutors and the judiciary in developing countries in the areas of anti-corruption, tax evasion and asset recovery; 51 52 14 Ibid. Tax Justice Network Germany, Taxes and Human Rights (footnote 25 above), p. 4.