A/70/275 Rights (see Human Rights Council resolution 17/4) and the UNCTAD Principles on Responsible Sovereign Lending and Borrowing mentioned above, give much consideration to the due diligence duties of lenders, highlighting the fact that a realistic assessment of a sovereign borrower’s capacity to service a loan must be made. It is clear that unsustainable debts negatively affect the achievement of development goals and the realization of economic, social and cultural rights. 53. The increasing recognition of debt sustainability as a principle of public international law, which aims to promote economic development, growth and human rights, reveals and synthesizes a gradual change towards a debt paradigm more respectful of the importance of human rights. 35 This paradigm change, which became clear after the end of the Cold War, recognizes the public interest in debt practices aiming to promote such public goods. 54. As stated in a recent UNCTAD report on sovereign debt: “[d]ebt sustainability is not just a financial category. Rather, full debt sustainability is only achieved when debt service does not entail intolerable sacrifices for the well-being of society.” 36 On the other hand, as highlighted by the Guiding Principles on Foreign Debt and Human Rights, “[d]ebt sustainability assessments must not be limited to economic considerations (the debtor State’s economic growth prospects and ability to service their debt obligations) but must also take into consideration the impact of debt burdens on a country’s ability to achieve the Millennium Development Goals and to create the conditions for the realization of all human rights.” 37 55. To think of sovereign debt markets as totally independent from the notion and realization of social and economic human rights is something unacceptable not only from an economic point of view, 38 but also from a legal perspective. Once it is acknowledged that there are links between sovereign debt and the realization of economic, social and cultural rights, there may be a clash of international norms, or even regimes, focusing on different public goods. 56. When there is a relationship of conflict between two valid and applicable norms that lead to incompatible decisions, the effort should be made to interpret them so as to give rise to a single set of compatible obligations. In this regard, it is worthwhile to recall the conclusion of the Study Group of the International Law Commission that, in the case of conflict between one of the hierarchically superior norms (including human rights erga omnes obligations) and another norm of international law, the latter should, to the extent possible, be interpreted in a manner consistent with the former. 39 This is why pacta sunt servanda needs to be reconciled with human rights law in the context of debt restructurings. 57. Both sovereign borrowers and lenders of every type are asked to protect human rights. More specifically, in its general comment No. 3, 40 the Committee on __________________ 35 36 37 38 39 40 16/18 Bohoslavsky, J. P. and Goldmann, M., “Sovereign Debt Sustainability as a Principle of Public International Law: An Incremental Approach”, UNCTAD Working Paper, March 2015, Geneva. See also Riegner, Michael, “Sustainability as a General Principle in Sovereign Debt Restructuring,” 2015. UNCTAD, “Sovereign Debt Workouts: Going Forward: Roadmap and Guide” (2015), Geneva. Human Rights Council resolution 20/10. See Dowell-Jones, M. and Kinley, D., “Minding the Gap: Global Finance and Human Rights” Ethics & International Affairs, Issue 25.2.2011. See A/CN.4/L.702, para. 14 (42). E/1991/23, annex III, para. 10. 15-12541