6. Over the years, a large number of commitments have been adopted, and specific forms, procedures and instruments developed, in particular for the human dimension. Yet unlike other human rights treaties or frameworks, the OSCE has not created a court or other individual petition bodies to enforce the case-by-case implementation of commitments. There is no provision for systematic verification, sanctions and/or penalties for non-compliance within the OSCE context. This reflects the political character of the OSCE process and the intention not to duplicate other existing mechanisms. 7. On the contrary, the OSCE reinforces these important mechanisms and calls upon States to subscribe to them while abiding by standards set by other international organizations. It is also important to note that the absence of an individual-complaints process does not preclude that cases might be brought to the attention of the political bodies of the OSCE. In fact, the ODIHR has a specific duty to bring concrete circumstances, including individual cases, to the attention of the Permanent Council and to that of the OSCE’s Chairman-in-Office. 8. As States confirmed in Maastricht in 2003, the prime responsibility for providing security for their citizens lies with individual participating States. They are accountable to their citizens and responsible to each other for implementation of their OSCE commitments.  The core of implementation review is therefore contained in what is often referred to as the peer-review concept. This puts the focus of implementation review (as well as determining the consequences of persisting non-compliance) on the participating States themselves rather than on any supranational body. Some may see this as a feeble mechanism compared to other international contexts developed during the same period, but it remains firmly within the logic according to which the OSCE operates as an organization. Non-compliance with OSCE commitments, however, does not come without consequences. Aware that commitments without sanctions would be of little value, States agreed that non-compliance would “impair relations between them and hinder the development of co-operation among them”. 9. In order to improve the implementation of human dimension commitments, the participating States agreed, in Budapest in 1994, to use the OSCE Permanent Council for possible action in cases of non-compliance. To this end, the participating States decided that human dimension issues would be regularly dealt with by the Permanent Council. First and foremost, the Organization is led by the Chairman-in-Office (CiO), who exemplifies the principles of the Organization, taking the lead on promoting implementation throughout the region while setting an example at home; if necessary, the CiO will act in cases of serious noncompliance. This concept of rotating responsibility and leadership has produced good results in the past and has proven to be effective.   The 1994 Budapest Document provides that the ODIHR will, in consultation with the Chairman-in-Office, and “acting in an advisory capacity, participate in discussions of the…Permanent Council, by reporting at regular intervals on its activities and providing information on implementation issues” (Decision VIII, The Human Dimension, para. 8). Cf. also para. 6 of the Budapest Document, which encourages the CiO to inform the PC of serious cases of alleged non-implementation, including on the basis of information from the ODIHR.   11th Meeting of the Ministerial Council, OSCE Strategy to Address Threats to Security and Stability in the 21st Century (MC. Doc/1/03, Maastricht, 2 December 2003), at para. 18.   Art. 25 of the Vienna Document (1989). Cf. also the wording on the issue of peer review as utilized in the Budapest Declaration (1994). There, States confirmed that “issues of implementation of CSCE commitments are of legitimate and common concern to all participating States, and that the raising of these problems in the cooperative and result-oriented spirit of the CSCE was therefore a positive exercise”. Common Responsibility: Commitments and Implementation