E/C.12/2001/10 page 4 13. In conclusion, anti-poverty policies are more likely to be effective, sustainable, inclusive, equitable and meaningful to those living in poverty if they are based upon international human rights. For this to occur, human rights need to be taken into account in all relevant policy-making processes.9 Thus, there is a need for appropriately trained officials operating good processes that are informed by reliable, disaggregated data. Obligations and accountability 14. The Covenant empowers the poor by granting them rights and imposing legal obligations on others, such as States. Critically, rights and obligations demand accountability: unless supported by a system of accountability, they can become no more than windowdressing. Accordingly, the human rights approach to poverty emphasizes obligations and requires that all duty-holders, including States and international organizations, are held to account for their conduct in relation to international human rights law. In its General Comment No. 9, the Committee remarks upon mechanisms of legal accountability for State parties. As for other duty-holders, they must determine which accountability mechanisms are most appropriate in their particular case. However, whatever the mechanisms of accountability, they must be accessible, transparent and effective.10 Core obligations: national and international responsibilities 15. According to the Covenant, the enumerated rights are subject to resource availability and may be realized progressively.11 However, General Comment No. 3, adopted in 1990, confirms that State parties have a “core obligation to ensure the satisfaction of, at the very least, minimum essential levels of each of the rights” enunciated in the Covenant. As the Committee observes, without such a core obligation, the Covenant “would be largely deprived of its raison d’être”.12 16. More recently, the Committee began to identify the core obligations arising from the “minimum essential levels” of the rights to food, education and health,13 and it confirmed that these core obligations are “non-derogable”.14 In General Comment No. 14, the Committee emphasizes that it is particularly incumbent on all those in a position to assist, to provide “international assistance and cooperation, especially economic and technical” to enable developing countries to fulfil their core obligations.15 In short, core obligations give rise to national responsibilities for all States and international responsibilities for developed States, as well as others that are “in a position to assist”. 17. Thus, the core obligations of economic, social and cultural rights have a crucial role to play in national and international developmental policies, including anti-poverty strategies. When grouped together, the core obligations establish an international minimum threshold that all developmental policies should be designed to respect. In accordance with General Comment No. 14, it is particularly incumbent on all those who can assist, to help developing countries respect this international minimum threshold. If a national or international anti-poverty strategy does not reflect this minimum threshold, it is inconsistent with the legally binding obligations of the State party. 18. For the avoidance of any misunderstanding, the Committee wishes to emphasize three points. First, because core obligations are non-derogable, they continue to exist in situations of