Council Starts Interactive Dialogue on Human Rights and Transnational Corporations, Concludes Discussion on the Human Rights of Migrants The Human Rights Council this morning held an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions. It also started an interactive dialogue with the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, and concluded an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants. Morris Tidball-Binz, Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, said his report was about the respect and protection due to the deceased. The duty to respect and protect the bodies of victims of unlawful deaths was not an option but an obligation under international law, for the purposes of truth, justice and reparation, and also to guarantee the right of relatives to mourn. The report"s recommendations considered regulations and good practices and called for the consolidation of guiding principles and the growing international jurisprudence to assist in the planning, design and implementation of measures aimed at protecting deceased persons in all circumstances and contexts. Mr. Tidball-Binz also presented his report on his visit to Honduras, and Honduras took the floor as the country concerned. In the ensuing discussion on extrajudicial executions, some speakers, among other things, welcomed the report and recommendations, which strengthened collective efforts towards upholding and fulfilling the rights of victims and survivors of armed conflicts, gross violations of international human rights law, acts of terrorism, as well as serious violations of international humanitarian law. States were required to investigate all potentially unlawful killings as part of their duty to uphold the right to life. Bodies and human remains of victims of potentially unlawful death should be treated with respect, ensuring their proper and dignified search, recovery, collection, documentation, preservation and traceability. Ethical principles, as required under the Minnesota Protocol and other international standards, should be adhered to. Speaking in the dialogue were Iceland on behalf of a group of countries, European Union, Costa Rica on behalf of a group of countries, Ukraine on behalf of a group of countries, Luxembourg on behalf of a group of countries, Armenia, Israel, Egypt, France, Belgium, Algeria, Iraq, United States, Colombia, Iran, Russian Federation, Pakistan, Côte d"Ivoire, China, Brazil, Togo, Cameroon, Cuba, Paraguay, Yemen, Afghanistan, Venezuela, South Africa, State of Palestine, Sudan, Burkina Faso, Malawi, Azerbaijan, India and Argentina. Also speaking were the Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights and the Independent Commission for Human Rights of the State of Palestine, as well as the following non-governmental organizations: Peace Brigades International, Conectas Direitos Humanos, Al-Haq Law in the Service of Man, International Educational Development, Inc., International Action for Peace and Sustainable Development, Law Council of Australia, International Federation for Human Rights Leagues, United Villages, Iraqi Development Organization and World Muslim Congress. The Council also started an interactive dialogue with the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises. Robert McCorquodale, Chair of the Working Group, presented its report on investors, environmental, social and governance approaches and human rights. The report sought to raise awareness of the responsibility of investors to respect human rights and to provide recommendations as to how the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights could be applied by investors in their environmental, social, governance and sustainability approaches. Investors needed to place risks for people and the planet at the centre of their decision-making to fulfil their responsibility to respect human rights. They needed to also facilitate remedy, including through exercising leverage, when they were directly linked to adverse human rights impacts. Mr. McCorquodale also presented the Working Group’s report on its country visit to Japan, and Japan took the floor as the country concerned. In the ensuing dialogue on human rights and transnational corporations, some speakers, among other things, said the report represented a step forward in the understanding of the connection between investment activities and human rights. Investors needed to uphold human rights in all operations and consider issues related to environmental protection. Awareness raising campaigns and training were needed to promote responsible investment. Human rights due diligence needed to be carried out for all investment activities. Speakers expressed support for an international instrument that specified the obligations of transnational corporations to protect human rights. Speaking in the dialogue were European Union, Gambia on behalf of a Group of African States, United Nations Development Programme, Ecuador, Ireland, Iran, United Nations Children’s Fund, Nepal, Egypt, Luxembourg, Indonesia, France, Belgium, Iraq, United States, Colombia, Russian Federation, Côte d"Ivoire, China, Brazil, Senegal, Togo, Cameroon and Cuba. At the beginning of the meeting, the Council concluded its dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, the first half of which started in the previous meeting and can be found here. In closing remarks, Gehad Madi, Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, called on countries of origin and destination to work closely on the matter of ethical recruitment and include migrants in such processes. Bilateral agreements should consider the human and labour rights of migrants. He emphasised the importance of enacting and implementing anti-discrimination legislation and legislation which penalised hate crimes targeting migrants. Member States should make additional efforts to expand regularisation programmes. In the discussion on migrants, some speakers said, among other things, that migrants were rights holders and that there was a need to reframe the impact that they had on society. The criminalisation of migrants and hate speech targeting migrants had led to numerous tragedies and served to dehumanise migrants, who made up a marginalised and vulnerable segment of society. The international community needed to cooperate to support migrants’ rights. Speaking in the dialogue were Iran, South Africa and El Salvador. Also speaking was the Burundi National Human Rights Commission, as well as the following non-governmental organizations: Franciscans International, Friends World Committee for Consultation, Madre, Inc., Centre du Commerce International pour le Développement., PRATYEK, Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, Edmund Rice International Limited, War Resisters International, Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR) Limited, and VIVAT International. The webcast of the Human Rights Council meetings can be found here. All meeting summaries can be found here. Documents and reports related to the Human Rights Council’s fifty-sixth regular session can be found here. The Council will reconvene at 3 p.m. this afternoon, when it will continue the interactive dialogue with the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, followed by an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. Time allowing, the Council will start an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on trafficking in persons, especially in women and children. Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants The interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants started in the previous meeting and a summary can be found here. Discussion Continuing the discussion, some speakers, among other things, appreciated the Special Rapporteur’s focus on the contribution of migrants to society, and welcomed his analysis of the effects of border violence on migrants and asylum seekers. Migrants were rights holders and there was a need to reframe the impact that they had on society. The criminalisation of migrants and hate speech targeting migrants had led to numerous tragedies and served to dehumanise migrants, who were a marginalised and vulnerable segment of society. The international community needed to cooperate to support migrants’ rights. Migration policies needed to consider the socio-economic needs of States, one speaker said. Some speakers presented national policies that provided opportunities for migrants to integrate into society; and legislation and bilateral agreements that protected migrants’ rights and tackled clandestine work. Speakers also deplored the trafficking of migrants and presented national measures to protect migrants from trafficking. Homelessness resulting from the refusal of asylum and residency applications was a serious problem that needed to be addressed, one speaker said. Support needed to be provided to prevent migrants from becoming homeless. Migration policies needed to promote mutual respect and solidarity. Irregular migrants should not be considered as criminals. One speaker called for conscientious objectors to compulsory conscription in their home countries to be granted refugee status. At least 56 million euros had been lost in failed applications for Schengen area visas for persons from Africa, one speaker said, calling for the reinvestment of this money in measures supporting migrants. South and Central American migrants and their families faced many challenges on their migration journey, a speaker said. These migrants faced inhuman treatment, separation from families, and a lack of access to residency and work permits. One speaker raised concerns about the abuse of the rights of domestic workers working under the kafala system in Gulf States. There was discrimination and pushbacks of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex asylum seekers and migrants in many countries, one speaker said, calling on the Special Rapporteur to focus on the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex migrants in a future report. Some speakers expressed concern about the impact of national legislation affecting migrants, asylum seekers and refugees in certain countries and regions. A number of speakers asked how the Council could reshape narratives about migrants to combat dehumanisation and discrimination of migrants; about measures for preventing criminal activities by transnational gangs harming the rights of migrants; and about measures for ensuring that domestic workers had fair working conditions and could change their employer without facing reprisals. Concluding Remarks GEHAD MADI, Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, in concluding remarks, called on countries of origin and destination to work closely on the matter of ethical recruitment and include migrants in such processes. Bilateral agreements should consider the human and labour rights of migrants. He emphasised the importance of enacting and implementing anti-discrimination legislation and legislation which penalised hate crimes targeting migrants. Migrants and their communities should be empowered to denounce any acts of violence. Mr. Madi said Member States should make additional efforts to expand regularisation programmes. Regarding the role of the Council in reshaping narratives on migration, the Council should continue its important work to address hate crimes and xenophobia. It should invite migrants themselves to events, to share their true and inspiring stories. Storytelling could help to counter harmful stereotypes against migration. Mr. Madi thanked all those who had submitted contributions to his call for inputs and those who took to the floor during the dialogue. He also recommended that Gulf States ratify the Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and Members of their Families. Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions Reports The Council has before it the reports of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Morris Tidball-Binz, on the protection of the dead (A/HRC/56/56) and on his visit to Honduras (A/HRC/56/56/Add.1). Presentation of Reports MORRIS TIDBALL-BINZ, Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, said it was an honour to present his fourth thematic report to the Council, along with the report on his visit to Honduras and a conference room paper on lethal autonomous weapons. In the year since his previous report, he had issued 155 communications to States and non-State actors and 71 press releases, in addition to four appeals for contributions. These communications could save and protect lives when properly addressed. Mr. Tidball-Binz had also made two country visits: to Honduras in May and June 2023, and to Ukraine last May. Today marked three years since he began his mandate, during which he had completed the plan of action outlined before the Council in June 2021, including the preparation of thematic reports on the contributions of the medico-legal systems to the investigation and prevention of unlawful deaths; the problem of deaths in prisons; the scourge of femicide; and the necessary protection of the mortal remains of victims of unlawful deaths. Today, these were recognised as benchmark standards by the international forensic community for investigating suspicious deaths. The report presented today was about the respect and protection due to the deceased as analysed from the perspective of international law, including the right to life, in order to provide legal foundations and practical elements to make them a reality. The duty to respect and protect the bodies of victims of unlawful deaths was not an option but an obligation under international law, including to reliably and effectively investigate all suspicious deaths for the purposes of truth, justice and reparation, and also to guarantee the right of relatives to mourn. The report"s recommendations considered regulations and good practices identified through the extensive study carried out for the report, and called for the consolidation of guiding principles and the growing international jurisprudence to assist in the planning, design and implementation of measures aimed at protecting deceased persons in all circumstances and contexts. Mr. Tidball-Binz presented the report on his visit to Honduras, which took place between 22 May and 2 June 2023. During the visit, he toured a large part of the country and met with senior representatives of the three branches of government and national, regional and local authorities, civil society organizations, academic entities and victims. This allowed him to learn first-hand about the enormous challenges inherited by the Government of President Xiomara Castro to investigate and prevent unlawful deaths, avoid impunity, and address the just claims of victims. He was able to verify persistent practices of institutional violence resulting in unlawful deaths, in particular police violence in the context of the fight against crime, as well as death threats, attacks and murders by powerful groups against social, indigenous, peasant and environmental leaders and also the persistence of deaths due to gender violence or sexual orientation. Impunity resulting from deficiencies in effective investigation encouraged the perpetuation of these crimes and the lack of protection for victims. Investigations of wrongful deaths did not conform to international standards, such as the Minnesota Protocol, and victims" families routinely faced long delays and challenges in achieving truth and justice. Mr. Tidball-Binz emphasised the Government"s great receptivity to his preliminary observations and recommendations, and its openness to constructive dialogue since the visit. Mr. Tidball-Binz also presented a conference room paper which updated the concerns of Philip Alston and Christof Heinz, his two predecessors, about the dangers posed by the development, use and proliferation of lethal autonomous weapons for the respect and protection of the right to life. This short report contained recommendations which would hopefully contribute to ongoing discussions to ensure that the development and use of new technologies were in accordance with international law, in particular the right to life. Statement by Country Concerned ANGÉLICA ÁLVAREZ, Minister for Human Rights of Honduras, said that Honduras was committed to strengthening the promotion and protection of human rights. Honduras was emerging from a dark period marked by organised crime. The State was now committed to strengthening the defence of democracy. It was providing training for law enforcement officials on human rights. Collaboration with the Special Rapporteur was of vital importance for the country. His inputs would help the country to move forward. Past criminal investigations of historical crimes of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and enforced disappearance had failed. The current Government was undertaking work to strengthen criminal investigations of such historical crimes. It had updated legislation on police training and established a register of detainees. It had also devised a draft bill on reparations for families of the victims of historical human rights abuses and enforced disappearances, and drafted laws on the search for disappeared migrants and on protecting members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex community from violence. A national museum of memory had been established and a national plan for truth, justice and reparation devised. A law on a national DNA database had also been adopted to assist in the search for disappeared persons. Honduras took note of the recommendations made and stressed its willingness to gradually implement them. It was committed to the continuous strengthening of human rights. Discussion In the discussion, some speakers, among other things, thanked the Special Rapporteur for his comprehensive report that called for the development of human rights-based guiding principles to bridge the gap between different levels of protections for dead persons under international law. They welcomed the latest report and recommendations, which aimed at strengthening collective efforts towards upholding and fulfilling the rights of victims and survivors of armed conflicts, gross violations of international human rights law, acts of terrorism, as well as serious violations of international humanitarian law. Some speakers noted the specific challenges mentioned in the report, related to unidentified bodies and human remains. States were required to investigate all potentially unlawful killings as part of their duty to uphold the right to life. The concealment, destruction or despoliation of the bodies of victims impeded such investigations, fostering impunity for perpetrators and violating the rights of the families of victims. Many speakers said they shared the Special Rapporteur’s views that bodies and human remains of victims of potentially unlawful deaths should be treated with respect, ensuring their proper and dignified search, recovery, collection, documentation, preservation and traceability. With the proliferation of armed conflicts, migration, climate change, and the recurrence of natural disasters, the need to ensure the effective protection of the dead became more urgent than ever. These challenges meant the dignity of the dead was constantly violated, some speakers said. Disruptions of the processes by which individuals and societies across cultures and religions honoured and mourned the deceased harmed both individuals and societies, and could undermine or impede victims’ rights to truth, justice and reparation in cases of unlawful death. Addressing this issue required a multi-stakeholder approach, rooted in human rights, one speaker said. Ethical principles, as required under the Minnesota Protocol and other international standards, should be adhered to. The idea of establishing universally applicable guiding principles that ensured the comprehensive protection of the memory of the deceased and respected their bodies merited further discussion. Member States and other responsible parties were called upon to ensure adequate steps to recover, identify, record, and lay to rest the deceased with respect and dignity, in a manner consistent with international obligations, particularly those under international humanitarian law. One speaker emphasised that the need to respect and protect war monuments was crucial. Some speakers noted that the report highlighted the importance of recording and identifying the dead individually, including for the purposes of accountability, which was at the heart of the “responsibility to protect”. In this vein, a number of speakers maintained that casualty recording helped to guide efforts to protect civilians, identify patterns of harm, and shed light on behaviours that had the most adverse effect on human rights, as well as facilitating access to services to victims and their families. Recording and identifying casualties individually, including for accountability and upholding the right to truth and other human rights, was of paramount importance. Several speakers asked questions to the Special Rapporteur, including how could the Council and its mechanisms contribute to enhancing the protection of the dead, including the individual recording of casualties? When the identification of victims of unlawful death was not possible at the time of the investigation, which procedures should be put in place to help with future identification? Were there any best practices that States could learn from? What role could the best practices on casualty recording play for the development of the guiding principles as recommended? How could the international community best support efforts by independent civil society initiatives to uphold the protection of the dead, including by accurately recording casualties? Intermediate Remarks MORRIS TIDBALL-BINZ, Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, thanked speakers for their statements. He said that he had worked with Côte d"Ivoire to draw up national protocols for dealing with the bodies of the deceased. Côte d"Ivoire should be a reference point for other African States. There were best practices for dealing with the deceased throughout the world, many of which were presented in the report. Mr. Tidball-Binz expressed hope that these would be referenced by States. The Commonwealth War Graves Commission created in 1914 served as an example of how to handle and appropriately document the remains, graves and cemeteries of those who had fallen in conflict. Rudyard Kipling had offered the respectful title used on the epitaphs of the graves of unknown soldiers: “A soldier known only by God”. Today in Europe, there were other examples of good practices for building cemeteries for migrants who had perished in the Mediterranean. In Mexico, the law on enforced disappearance included examples of good practices for managing the bodies of the deceased. Mr. Tidball-Binz welcomed that there was a prohibition on mass graves in Gaza, and that authorities in Ukraine were making efforts to properly document the deceased. He said he would draw up principles for documenting and respecting the deceased in armed conflict situations in the future. Discussion In the continuing discussion, some speakers, among other things, extended gratitude to the Special Rapporteur for his comprehensive report on the obligations to protect and respect the dead, as well as the obligation to investigate. The report highlighted the obligations of States under international human rights law, international humanitarian law, and national legislation to ensure the proper management, identification, and return of the remains of the deceased to their families. The Special Rapporteur"s recommendation to develop human rights-based guiding principles for the protection of the dead was welcomed as a crucial step in bridging the gap between the laws of war and international human rights law. One speaker said the right to life was the most sacred, inviolable right, and the dignity of a person and the respect owed to their body and human remains did not cease with death. It was the duty of all States to protect and respect the deceased, and this obligation was enshrined in various international and regional human rights instruments, as well as in national laws across the globe. Some speakers recognised the universal importance of treating the deceased and their human remains with dignity and respect, regardless of the circumstances of their passing. State obligations to protect the dead were crucial to upholding the rights of families and to ensuring that all potentially unlawful deaths were investigated, in accordance with international standards. Several speakers outlined national steps to uphold human rights in this regard. These included the ratification of legal provisions and relevant instruments of international humanitarian law and human rights law; amendments to the Penal Code regarding the abuse of the bodies of the dead; the prosecution of violations, including extrajudicial executions; and specific criminal legislation. Many speakers reaffirmed their commitment to upholding the human rights of all individuals, including the deceased. Some speakers addressed country-specific situations where extrajudicial executions, genocide, mass graves, and torture of detainees were unlawfully taking place in environments of impunity. Some speakers said these issues had not been addressed in the Special Rapporteur’s report. The Council was called on to urgently investigate these war crimes. Some speakers called on the international community to help put an end to the violence in many countries and regions and for the perpetrators to provide reparations to the victims’ families. The Special Rapporteur was asked to monitor these situations. Other speakers mentioned situations in certain countries where families had had their remains identified after many years. These families had now been able to conduct mourning after years of uncertainty, which was a vital step in the healing process. Concluding Remarks MORRIS TIDBALL-BINZ, Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, in closing remarks, expressed appreciation for the feedback provided on his report. Statements highlighted the importance of operationalising the dignified treatment of deceased persons and potential victims of unlawful killing. A series of guiding principles needed to be developed in this regard. The Minnesota Protocol called for the protection of the dead and their dignity, but did not explain how to do that. The proposed guiding principles would fill this gap in the human rights protection system, guaranteeing due protection for bodies. There were increasing best practices in Latin American States such as Brazil, where all unlawful killings needed to be investigated in line with the Minnesota Protocol. Mr. Tidball-Binz offered to help with the implementation of measures to properly treat bodies of the dead. Investigations into the death of a former President in Brazil had followed the Minnesota Protocol and hoped to bring closure to his family. International cooperation was provided in forensic investigations in this case. The Council of Europe and other bodies had also published guidance on autopsy which was based on the Minnesota Protocol. There had been capacity building on the implementation of the Protocol in the Asia Pacific region. Bodies needed to be protected for proper investigations to take place. The 2017 investigations into deaths occurring during the Falklands War could not have taken place without proper respect for the Minnesota Protocol and investigation standards. Mr. Tidball-Binz concluded by saying that he looked forward to continuing to work with States regarding investigations of unlawful deaths for the remainder of his mandate. Interactive Dialogue with the Working Group on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and other Business Enterprises Reports The Council has before it the reports of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, on investors, environmental, social and governance approaches and human rights (A/HRC/56/55) and on its visit to Japan (A/HRC/56/55/Add.1). Presentation of Reports ROBERT MCCORQUODALE, Chair of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, said the Working Group’s thematic report underscored the urgent need for investors to implement the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Most financial actors failed to connect human rights standards and processes with environmental, social and governance criteria and investment practices. This was because of a prevailing lack of understanding in the sector that social criteria, and many environmental and governance indicators, reflected human rights issues. The Working Group’s report thus sought to raise awareness of the responsibility of investors to respect human rights, to clarify the baseline responsibilities of investors under the Guiding Principles, and to provide recommendations as to how the Guiding Principles could be applied by investors in their environmental, social, governance and sustainability approaches. Data on investors, environmental, social and governance approaches was insufficient and approaches in these fields varied widely. Investors needed decision-useful data from investees on human rights and alignment with the Guiding Principles across each of the criteria. The report underscored the importance for States to create consistent and robust standards, including through a smart mix of measures, to ensure that human rights considerations were applied across the environmental, social and governance criteria. This included ensuring that State-owned financial institutions complied with the Guiding Principles, and that mandatory human rights due diligence legislation included obligations on investors within them. Investors needed to place risks for people and the planet at the centre of their decision-making to fulfil their responsibility to respect human rights. This could be done by embedding human rights into their policies and strategies, undertaking ongoing human rights due diligence, and ensuring remediation of adverse human rights impacts they caused or to which they contributed. Investors needed to also facilitate remedy, including through exercising leverage, when they were directly linked to adverse human rights impacts. The Working Group noted the need for a collaborative effort between investors, investees, States and rightsholders to achieve meaningful access to remedies. Stakeholders should also contribute to more just and accountable frameworks that ensured the protection of, and respect for, human rights in relation to investment activities. Mr. McCorquodale said the Working Group visited Japan from 24 July to 4 August 2023. The Working Group expressed thanks to the Japanese Government for its excellent cooperation and for the valuable contributions of many stakeholders. The report on the visit welcomed important advances by the Government on business and human rights, including the development of a national action plan on business and human rights and the issuance of the guidelines on respecting human rights in responsible supply chains. However, the Working Group expressed concerns about systemic human rights challenges in Japan, particularly deeply embedded harmful gender and social norms, which were particularly evident in the workplace, and discrimination and harassment experienced by women, indigenous peoples, Buraku people, persons with disabilities, migrant workers, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons, among other groups. These concerns were not being sufficiently tackled as part of State and private sector initiatives in the business and human rights space. The establishment of an independent national human rights institution in Japan would serve to address these issues, closing a significant gap in Government efforts to promote business respect for human rights and enforce corporate accountability. The Working Group observed additional challenges and opportunities related to business and human rights in Japan, including on health, climate change and the environment, in relation to cases such as the redevelopment of the Meiji Jingu Gaien; labour rights, especially those of migrants; the media and entertainment industry; and in regulating value chains and finance. The Eighth Regional Forum for Latin America and the Caribbean on Business and Human Rights, themed “Building bridges between business, human rights and the right to a healthy environment”, was held from 10 to 12 October 2023, in Santiago de Chile with an in-person meeting with online streaming. It hosted 38 sessions with over 400 participants. The Ninth Regional Forum would be held in Brazil in 2025. The 2023 Forum on Business and Human Rights, titled “Towards effective change in implementing obligations, responsibilities and remedies”, was successfully conducted in-person with online transmission from 27 to 29 November 2023. The report on the Forum would be presented to the Council on 3 July. Statement by Country Concerned Japan, speaking as a country concerned, said the Government expressed its appreciation for the great efforts by the Working Group on business and human rights. The Government had continued to promote respect for human rights in business activities under the national action plan on business and human rights that was formulated in 2020, and had welcomed the members of the Working Group to Japan from late July to early August last year. Japan had supported the activities of the Working Group by arranging for exchanges of views with government ministries and agencies and local governments and continued to provide information after the visit. While Japan did not agree with all the points raised in the report, the report would serve as a reference for future discussions. Taking the report into account, the Government of Japan would continue to consider measures for business and human rights, while placing importance on dialogue. While it was positive that the Working Group shed light on issues surrounding business and human rights, to ensure the objectivity of the report’s findings, it would be more desirable to conduct a certain degree of verification of the findings. Japan hoped that the future activities of the Working Group would reflect a greater diversity of opinions and be carried out efficiently. Japan would continue to actively contribute to further progress in the international community’s efforts regarding business and human rights. Discussion In the ensuing dialogue, some speakers, among other things, said the report represented a step forward in the understanding of the connection between investment activities and human rights. Investors played an important role in influencing business activities and corporate culture. It was regrettable that transnational corporations had become major actors in several human rights violations occurring around the world. Speakers welcomed the report’s focus on opportunities for investors to align with the United Nations Guiding Principles. Much more needed to be done to ensure that investors respected human rights. Investors needed to uphold human rights in all operations and consider issues related to environmental protection. Most investors failed to connect investment activities with human rights and environmental, social and governance principles. Companies needed to provide investors with information on human rights in accordance with the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Assessments needed to be carried out into investments before and after they were made, and in the case of human rights violations, divestment needed to be considered. Awareness raising campaigns and training were needed to promote responsible investment. Human rights due diligence needed to be carried out for all investment activities. The availability of quality data on the impact of business activities on human rights was currently insufficient. There needed to be increased collection of such data. States needed to implement measures to foster investors’ respect for human rights. Communities affected by human rights violations supported by investments needed to be provided with reparations and to be involved in the creation of investment regulations offering human rights protections. Some speakers expressed support for an international instrument that specified the obligations of transnational corporations to protect human rights. There was a need to mainstream the Guiding Principles around the world. One speaker said that such a document should not be restricted to transnational corporations but should apply to businesses more broadly. One speaker argued for the revision of the international financial architecture to create a fairer international financial system for developing countries. There was a need for increased consideration of the impacts of business activities on children, one speaker said. Children’s rights were intrinsic to responsible business practices. Actions to enhance the United Nations Guiding Principles needed to also enhance the rights of children. Some speakers presented measures to regulate investments and require investors to declare relationships with investees; establish “green bonds” and investments that promoted environmental sustainability and protection; develop corporate social responsibility and due diligence guidelines; promote increased access to remedies for victims of human rights violations committed by businesses; and conduct training on guidelines for environmental protection. A number of speakers asked about efforts to align environmental, social and governance criteria with the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights; how Member States could best engage investors to ensure that human rights were respected in investment activities; measures to encourage collaboration between investors, corporations and rights holders to promote human rights; the role that the Human Rights Council could play in the development of international financial regulations; the effects of “human rights washing” and how to prevent this practice”; how to encourage investors to conduct human rights due diligence while still encouraging them to continue investing in innovation; and the role of small and medium enterprises in upholding human rights principles. Intermediate Remarks ROBERT MCCORQUODALE, Chair of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, said he appreciated Japan’s thoughtful and careful response and agreed that the report could serve as a point for future discussions in the areas of business and human rights. He was delighted at the support expressed for the report during the dialogue. The Working Group had indicated in a statement to the European Union that the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights applied to all business, regardless of their structure, size or business type. The Working Group urged the European Union to include the financial sector in full and not just upstream activities. The Working Group always sought to give examples of good practices. The report had several, including how India and Japan were among the first jurisdictions to address the issues of commercial providers in environmental and social governance criteria data and the transparency in that. Micro, small and medium enterprises were included within the Guiding Principles. It was important to recognise that even a small enterprise may be affected by an investor and how they responded to that. A business reporting about human rights without any accountability could lead to “human rights washing”. For this reason, the Working Group urged global standards when it came to environmental and social governance criteria. Investors were subject to the responsibility to respect human rights, including the need to take human rights due diligence seriously. Discussion Continuing the dialogue, some speakers, among other things, said businesses needed to always consider the impact of their activities on people and the planet. The Working Group played a key role in ensuring that businesses respected human rights. Some speakers called for a legally binding instrument that regulated transnational business activities and required that reparations be provided for the victims of rights violations. A number of speakers presented national action plans to protect human rights in the context of business activities; and measures to ensure that foreign investment in development activities upheld human rights standards.