9th meeting, 12th Session of Open-ended Intergovernmental Working Group on Transnational Corporations Human Rights Council Date: 16 October 2026 Language: English Transcript: https://transcripts.un.org/en/asset/k13/k132zh5nko Transcripts available through this tool are created by using automatic speech recognition and are not official records nor official documents of the United Nations. Official records and official documents are available on the Official Document System of the United Nations. --- IWG · Chair-Rapporteur [0:03]: Good afternoon, distinguished delegates, distinguished participants. I call to order the final meeting of the 12th session of the open-ended intergovernmental working group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights. We'll now move to item 5 of the agenda, adoption of the report. First, I'd like to thank all delegations and representatives of civil society for their support and work carried out throughout this week. The draft report was will be submitted to all participants via Indico and will be published on the web page of the 12th session of the IWG. Delegations will have two weeks to notify the secretariat of any factual mistakes that they might detect in the draft report. The timeframe for submitting amendments will be Monday 2 November, so that the report will be ready on time for its presentation at the 64th regular session of the Human Rights Council in 2027. I remind you that, in step with the practice of the working group, the report does not attribute statements to its authors, nor does it seek to reflect in detail individual statements delivered by all states or other relevant non-state stakeholders, but just the main points raised during debates. I would like to open the debate on the draft report as a whole, including on its recommendations and conclusions. that were negotiated in detail this morning at an intergovernmental level. I invite you to maintain a constructive spirit to achieve a satisfactory result by consensus. Would any delegation like to take the floor at this point? That does not seem to be the case. I take it, therefore, that the working group would like to approve by consensus the report in its entirety ad referendum. The report is so adopted. I give the floor to the States to deliver closing statements. Should they wish, would any state like to take the floor at this point? I give the floor to the European Union. EU [3:33]: Thank you, Chair, rapporteur, and good afternoon. The EU would like to thank you, your team and the secretariat of the OHCHR for organizing and holding the 12th session of the Open-ended Intergovernmental Working Group. It allowed for transparent, inclusive and insightful considerations of your proposals for articles 12 to 16 and 1 to 3, respectively. We commend the Chair for your efforts to develop and present proposals seeking compromise based on those consultations. We value with appreciation this continued constructive approach commenced last year at the 11th session to deepen the work of this working group, in which we have the pleasure to engage pragmatically. As we have stated previously, the EU supports efforts to develop an international legal framework strengthening respect for human rights by business enterprises. Such a framework should establish clear obligations for states to protect against business-related human rights abuses. In particular, such a framework should support mandatory due diligence by businesses on human rights and the environment, provide for appropriate rules on legal liability, and ensure effective access to justice and remedies for victims. It should build on well established international frameworks, in particular, the UN guiding principles on business and human rights, including as regards personal scope. We have listened carefully to positions expressed during the week. We remain convinced that an approach that covers the prevention of abuses and protection of victims should extend to business activities generally, be they transnational business activities or other business enterprises, and guarantee appropriate safeguards for the SMEs. A framework on business and human rights at international level would help reduce regulatory fragmentation, facilitate due diligence by companies operating across borders, and contribute to a more level playing field for companies that already follow the international standards but face competitions from companies that do not. In this context, the EU has progressively advanced the implementation of the UNGPs through a broad and complementary body of legislation. Our legislation on corporate sustainability due diligence is being transposed by EU member states into national legislation beginning to apply to companies in scope as of mid-2029. and is complemented by other legislation, for instance, banning products made with forced labour as of the end of next year. This work is supported by the EU framework on business and human rights, seeking to enhance the coherence and impact of EU policies in this area, as well as by efforts in a number of EU member states to update their national action plans. Mr. Chair, we appreciate the proposed roadmap for 2027 and look forward to receiving the new draft LBI that will serve as a basis for the work next year. We stand ready to continue engaging constructively in the intercessional thematic consultations held next year, working with the Chair, rapporteur and friends of the Chair, which includes two EU member states. We hope that the exact dates of the consultations, as well as any supportive documents, can be communicated at the earliest opportunity. The EU will continue to participate in a constructive manner in the discussions with a view to contribute to a consensus-based instrument that enhances protection of victims while being legally sound and practically implementable. I thank you. IWG · Chair-Rapporteur [7:55]: Thank you very much to the EU. I give the floor to Iceland. Iceland [8:05]: Thank you very much, Chair. At the close of this 12th session, Iceland wishes to thank you, Chair-Rapporteur, for conducting this session in a transparent and efficient manner, as well as the legal experts and everyone else who participated or contributed to this session in one way or another. Iceland has engaged in this session in a spirit of openness, as we are currently developing our national policy on business and human rights. The discussions this week have been very valuable to that work. As you prepare the new draft, Chair Rapporteur, Iceland would respectfully ask that the considerations raised by our delegation this week, in particular on legal certainty, coherence with existing frameworks, effectiveness for victims and proportionality, be kept in mind. Iceland looks forward to the new draft and continuing to contribute constructively to this process, and we genuinely hope that our input has been somewhat helpful in this process. Thank you. IWG · Chair-Rapporteur [9:12]: Thank you very much, Iceland. I give the floor to the GCC. GCC · GCC [9:28]: Thank you, Chair. I deliver the statement on behalf of the member states of the GCC. At the end of the work of this session, we would like to thank you for your efforts in conducting negotiations and in responding to comments made by delegations. We are also grateful to the legal experts for their contribution. We are also grateful to the secretariat. We would like to express our Thanks to all states who've participated constructively in the dialogue and hearing out people's different positions is an important basis for bringing points of view closer together and addressing to legal and practical issues that require further consideration. Member states of the GCC through their statements and interventions throughout the session have made proposals and suggestions to contribute to reaching a balanced and clear instrument that can also be implemented, thus bolstering protection of human rights in the context of the work of businesses and providing victims the means for remedy. Therefore, we reiterate the importance of respecting the mandate provided for by the Human Rights Council resolution 26/9, taking duly into account harmony with the provisions and parameters and taking into account also causality between activities and harm and avoid evasion of responsibility based on relations in investment. We stress the need to take into account the provision when it comes to mutual legal aid, mutual legal assistance in implementing provisions, ensuring that the instrument is in line with the investment agreement. We trust that our proposals and observations will be duly taken into account during future work, especially during amendments to the text, and that observations from various delegations will be taken into account to address the concerns covering the provisions of the LBI. In conclusion, Rest assured of our commitment to contributing constructively to the work of this group to achieve the anticipated goal, which is to protect human rights and guaranteeing remedy and redress. Thank you. IWG · Chair-Rapporteur [12:43]: Thank you very much, GCC. Sadia Revie, please, shift the Saudi Arabia [12:54]: Thank you very much indeed, Chair. At the outset, my country's delegation aligns itself with the statement delivered by the GCC at the outset of the culmination of the work of this session. country is pleased to reiterate its esteem for the efforts that you have undertaken in steering our discussions. We thank the Secretariat for their support, and we thank delegations for their constructive work. Our country has, throughout this session, voiced our viewpoints regarding the issues under discussion. We have committed to undertaking constructive dialogue, seeking a balanced instrument which strengthens human rights in the framework of transitional business activities while respecting state sovereignty and legal certainty. Mr. Chairperson, Saudi Arabia would like to reiterate the fundamental points on which we have based our statements throughout this week. Firstly, the success of an instrument depends on respect for the mandate of the Human Rights Council Resolution 26/9, namely focusing on transnational corporations and other business enterprises respecting conventions and treaties that have been signed and agreed upon by member states without expanding responsibilities accepted by states and without creating commitments that are not wanted by states. The instrument focuses on business activities and we should not expand upon the activities covered by the competence of the authorities. We should not call into question the immunities of state under international law. Companies, businesses must fall in line with the parameters on an equal footing while distinguishing between the abuse by companies and violations perpetuated by states. Thirdly, the main definitions should be based on clear criteria, focusing on harm, causality, the clear impact, and ensuring legal certainty without presumption of responsibility. Fourthly, respect for national Competence requires exchange of assistance depending on each and according to each state's system. Such a refusal must be well grounded, must be sufficiently substantiated, and implementation should depend on domestic laws and the conventions signed. Fifthly, legal certainty requires that we explicitly address failure to respect obligations in international conventions, such as trade conventions and agreements and investment agreements, for example, and like the Vienna Convention, without, however, establishing priorities for such an instrument. It should bolster the complementarity of agreements signed by states. Sixthly, international collaboration and cooperation, including on financial matters, and an international fund for victims. This should be done based on the voluntary nature and the provisions regarding this. Countries in conflict should also look at the domestic legal regimes without compromising their sovereignty. My country would reaffirm that the proposals that we have made are initial comments and they do not compromise our position regarding the instrument. They take into account the principle that we need to agree on everything while taking into account national circumstances. This process must remain a governmental process guided by states to come to as broad a consensus as possible, and in so doing, strengthening the likelihood of this instrument being properly implemented. To conclude, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia would stress that it has presented to the Secretariat, through a note verbal, the textual proposals that we have made regarding the wording from the chair in English and we hope that these proposals will be taken into account during the consideration of the next version of the draft of the instrument. My country reiterates its support to respectful trade conduct respecting channels for remedy in the case of abuse, and we stand ready to pursue our work in a constructive spirit to achieve our shared goal, namely that of ensuring that human rights are respected in the framework of the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises. Our country would voice its thanks to our interpreters for the efforts. that they have made throughout this session. Thank you very much, Aditi, Chair. IWG · Chair-Rapporteur [19:04]: Thank you very much. I give the floor to the UK. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [19:15]: Thank you, Chair. The United Kingdom would like to thank you, the Secretariat, and all delegations for your work during the 12th session and the way in which you've guided the process. We've appreciated the constructive and detailed exchanges this week. Those discussions have underlined that significant legal, policy and practical questions remain and require further consideration. Those include, but are not limited to, the scope of the instrument, the participation of stakeholders in the proposed treaty body and the balance between addressing the specificities of the human rights challenges at hand and aligning with existing international law. For the United Kingdom, it is essential that any future instrument is firmly anchored in the hard-won consensus documents, including the protect, respect and remedy framework, and preserves and builds upon the achievements of the UN guiding principles, as well as avoiding legal uncertainty for rights holders, states and businesses. We reiterate our position that, to avoid protection gaps, the instruments should apply to the business activities of all business enterprises, including those of a transnational character, to ensure that access to remedy is truly universal and effective. Finally, we continue to underline the importance of broad participation. To be effective, any instrument must be capable of securing wide support and being implemented across diverse jurisdictions. We look forward to continuing those discussions in 2027. Thank you. IWG · Chair-Rapporteur [20:45]: Thank you very much, Trinity Kingdom. The State of Qatar has the floor. Qatar [21:01]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The delegation of the State of Qatar would like to express its appreciation to the efforts deployed during this 12th session. We commend the constructive dialogue and excellent exchange of opinions between the delegations. Special thanks are due to the chair, rapporteur, and the legal experts, as well as the simultaneous interpreters, and as well as all the organizers of this session. At the conclusion of the session, and as we look forward to the next steps, we stress that states must have the opportunity to provide its textual propositions and other proposals in order to have a successful outcome of this document, of this instrument. We also commend the redrafting of the chair and his role to bring our divergences to close and to build on further consensus. However, we believe that some substantive legal issues still need further consideration, including the scope of implementation of the instrument, as well as the applicable sources in the context of human rights, as well as the legal liability and legal jurisdiction and the arrangements of dispute settlements as well. Therefore, a unified negotiating document must be prepared that reflect the proposals that were discussed as well as the options that are still on the table. In addition to the questions that need further considerations to bolster transparency and to understand the legal consequences of the adoption of the instrument. In conclusion, we believe that a transparent and inclusive negotiating approach that takes into consideration the different legal and country considerations will get us towards a balanced instrument. We are looking forward for the, uh, upcoming version of the, uh, instrument, and we hope that our proposals and ideas have enriched the discussions while keeping the, uh, consensus that we have achieved throughout this session. Thank you, Mr. Chair. IWG · Chair-Rapporteur [23:39]: Thank you very much, Qatar. Mexico, you have the floor. Mexico [23:48]: Thank you very much indeed, Chairperson, Rapporteur. We wanted to thank you for having convened this session and this meeting this morning, as well as for the transparent, effective way you've guided our work. We appreciate the methodology used over the course of our discussions, as well as the proposals that you've made to move our discussions forward and to bring us closer to an agreement on the draft legally binding instrument. We also welcome the discussions and positions expressed by States and non-state actors over the course of this session, as well as the inputs from legal experts. who have fuelled our understanding of the content, scope and purpose that the future legally binding instrument should have. We also welcome the valuable inputs from the Secretariat and our interpreters over the course of this procedure. We support the roadmap that the Chairperson-Rapporteur has put forward and we look forward to receiving the new draft of the LBI. We trust that this will take into account all of the stances voiced during this session of the IWG. Looking to the future and bearing in mind all of the years that have been spent discussing the different aspects of the draft instrument, we believe that the time has come for us to begin discussing together how to conclude this process and how to convene negotiations to finalize and to adopt the legally binding instrument. It is only in this way that we believe that we'll be able to promote the final agreements and come to final agreements on subjects where difficulties remain. Thank you very much, sir. IWG · Chair-Rapporteur [25:39]: Thank you very much to Mexico. Do any other states wish to take the floor at this time? The State of Palestine has the floor. State of Palestine [25:55]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The State of Palestine expresses its sincere appreciation to you and to your dedicated team for the transparent and inclusive manner in which you have guided this 12th session. We thank the Secretariat, the legal experts, and the interpreters for their continuous support, and all States for their engagement. Above all, we thank civil society organizations, trade unions, social movements, indigenous people, and representatives of affected communities. Many of them have traveled far to be with us here. They remind us session after session that behind every provision we negotiate are people whose lands, livelihoods, and lives have been harmed and who are still waiting for justice. As we move towards a new draft, we recall the mandate entrusted to this working group by Human Rights Council resolution 26/9, to elaborate an international legally binding instrument to regulate the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises. The whole raison d'etre of that mandate is about closing the gaps that allow corporate violations and abuses to go unpunished and victims to go unheard. This is why broad support for the instrument is important, but it must not come at the expense of its substance. The new draft should strengthen, not weaken, protections, obligations and accountability mechanisms. It must respond to the realities of transnational business operations, including in situations of conflict and occupation, where the risk of violations is heightened. and it must give its promises real force through effective enforcement, including an international tribunal. The new draft must enshrine the primacy of human rights, in particular over trade and investment agreements, and offer the strongest protection for human rights, the environment, and the rights of victims and affected communities. Mr. Chair, we meet at a time when international law and multilateral institutions are being eroded by the use of force and by the growing grip of corporate interests on global agendas. This treaty is our chance to prove that multilateralism can still deliver for people. We stand at a historic turning point. If we succeed, we will show that no actor, however powerful, stands above the law. If we fail, power and vested interests will once again prevail over the multilateral system and over the very people it exists to protect. The Palestinian people know all too well what happens when the law is not upheld and impunity becomes the rule. That is why we remain committed to engaging constructively and in good faith towards an instrument that ends corporate impunity and delivers justice to victims. Those who have waited so long for justice should not have to wait any longer. As we look ahead to the next draft, let us make this treaty the moment the law finally stood on their side. I thank you. IWG · Chair-Rapporteur [28:57]: Thank you very much. The State of Palestine, Uruguay, you have the floor. Uruguay [29:13]: Thank you very much, Chair-Rapporteur, and a very good afternoon, everybody. As we conclude this session, Uruguay would like to particularly thank you, Chair-Rapporteur, for the way you have guided our work and your efforts to promote an open, constructive and transparent dialogue. We would also flag our recognition towards delegations and stakeholders who participated in our exchanges this week, as well as the Secretariat, legal experts and our interpreters. The discussions that we have had over this week have once again shown both the complexity of the matters that we have before us, as well as the value of holding a substantive, open, constructive dialogue. Even when differences persist, we have still been able to note that there is space to continue to bring positions closer together and to move forward on the basis of the work done over the past few years. For Uruguay, this process remains extremely relevant. The drafting of a legally binding instrument represents a valuable opportunity to strengthen the international framework of protecting human rights, given the impact of business activities, and to provide more effective responses to victims and affected persons. We would therefore like to reiterate our commitment to this process and our will to continue contributing actively to the drafting of a robust, effective instrument. that is able to specifically bolster human rights protection. We would once again like to thank everybody for their constructive spirit that has prevailed over the course of this week, and we do look forward to moving forward on this same basis in the next stages. Thank you. IWG · Chair-Rapporteur [30:45]: Muchas gracias, Uruguay. Thank you very much to Uruguay. South Africa, you have the floor. South Africa [30:53]: We take this opportunity, Chair, to thank you for your able leadership during the session, and commend your sustained efforts, including through textual proposals, which have been valuable in advancing our discussions during the session. We also thank the Secretariat, the legal experts and interpreters for their diligence, as well as the delegations and diverse stakeholders for their contributions to the session. Chair, our engagement with the text is guided by its central purpose. in preventing human rights abuses in the context of transnational business activities, addressing accountability gaps, and ensuring effective access to justice and remedy for victims. The instrument must be clear in its scope, coherent in its obligations, and capable of effective implementation. South Africa remains committed to engaging constructively and finding common ground where possible. We must build on areas of convergence and address any outstanding differences. Our efforts here must deliver an effective instrument that strengthens human rights protection and makes a real difference in the gaps that have given rise to this process. We therefore reaffirm our support to you, chair, and wish you fortitude in the preparation of the next draft of the instrument. Thank you. IWG · Chair-Rapporteur [32:23]: My thanks to South Africa. If there are no further requests for the floor from States, in line with our usual practice, I will now give the floor to a limited number of non-governmental organizations for joint statements. There will not be an open list of speakers. I would like respectfully to remind each organization that they would have a maximum of two minutes for their concluding statements. I give the floor to the IOE. IOE [33:10]: Thank you very much, Chair, for your support and for this last opportunity to take the floor. Chair, distinguished delegates. On behalf of IOE and USCIB, allow me to close this session with a few frank observations on the process and what we expect from the fifth draft. Chair, the levels of states' participation in this process is itself a message. This week, only around a dozen states consistently engaged with the Chair's proposals, compared with 21 last year, 23 the year before, and 29 in 2022. After 12 years, declining participation and persistent divisions raise serious questions about whether this process should continue on its current course, including when the Council considers renewing or not its decision at HRC 65. At a time when the UN80 initiative calls on the entire system to focus resources on what delivers results, every process has the duty to ask itself whether it is making progress and bringing us any closer to its objective. Let us be unequivocal. The global business community does not support the current draft. IOE and USCIB, with the support of OECD BIAC and BusinessEurope, cannot support an unrealistic and punitive approach that risk undermining companies, discouraging investment, trade and job creation, and ultimately harming the very countries grappling with child labour, forced labour and informality. The draft also risk undermining implementation of the UN Guiding Principle, while raising serious concerns about state sovereignty and legal certainty. Chair, IOE represents over 50 million companies across 150 countries. Most of them, again, are small and medium-sized enterprises. The private sector provides around nine out of 10 jobs in developing countries. Businesses create livelihoods, pay taxes, and invest in communities. Employers organizations are on the ground, helping companies of all sizes strengthen their human rights due diligence. Any instrument must be built around this reality, with business, not against it. This week, however, we heard in this room that moving further away from the UNGPs will be moving in the right direction. We fundamentally disagree. The guiding principles are the internationally endorsed common framework underpinning national action plans, due diligence laws, and business practice. Moving away from them does not raise the bar. It disconnects this treaty from the framework already driving action on the ground. We also heard that states' reservations should simply be taken note of, since they could choose not to ratify. But a treaty that fails to secure meaningful ratification and implementation will fail to deliver the protection it promises. Treating this concern as a formality also disregards the time, resources, and expertise that every delegation in this room has invested. The fifth draft, therefore, requires a fundamental change of approach, a streamlined, realistic, legally sound, and less prescriptive text, the state's duty to protect at its center because the gap on the ground lies in the enforcement of existing laws, a risk-based, process-oriented approach consistent with the guiding principle focused on obligations of means, not guarantees of results. Legal certainty, respect for established legal principles, and no extraterritorial jurisdiction or liability for conduct beyond a company's control. Chair, none of this can be achieved without meaningful buy-in from business. We renew our request for a dedicated consultation with business before the fifth draft is finalized. After 12 years, we remain ready to contribute our practical experience in good faith, but the fifth draft must demonstrate that our concerns have been heard and that meaningful engagement for progress is possible. If it does not, we will have to seriously question the value of continuing to invest our time and expertise in this process. Thank you. IWG · Chair-Rapporteur [37:20]: Thank you very much. I give the floor for policy studies. Speaker 24 [37:26]: Thank you, Chair Rapporteur. My name is Maxine Bezuidenhout from Cape Town, South Africa, and I deliver this statement on behalf of the global campaign ECSRNet, the Feminists for a Binding Treaty, and other civil society groups, social movements and trade unions committed to a strong binding treaty that ends corporate impunity and guarantees justice for affected peoples everywhere. We reaffirm our full support for this process and thank the Chair for advancing the process and all States committed to upholding the demands from affected communities, civil society and social movements during the 12th session of this Working Group. Social movements and affected communities from across the world present here have suffered the consequences of corporate impunity, while the perpetrators, transnational corporations, continue to increase their power and profits at the expense of human rights. From illegal mining in Latin America to resource extraction in Africa and labor exploitation in Asia, as well as with the new forms of value extraction big tech imposes in all of our continents, profit is systemically placed above human life and dignity. We are seeing one of its most stark manifestations in the ongoing genocide in Palestine. We also continue to see the triple planetary crises worsen as transnational corporations damage the environment with impunity. This exposes our deeply corporate interests intertwined with violence and human rights violations, becoming not just complicit, but also financially contributing to its active perpetuation. We are the communities most affected by corporate crimes. This is why this treaty belongs to us. It is our collective voices, our struggles and our rights that should shape and define it. It is crucial to remember that women and gender diverse people suffer from disproportionate consequences from corporate abuses and violations, including multiple and intersectional forms of discrimination, which are compounded by economic inequalities, imbalances of power and corporate capture that have been historically invisibilized. This treaty must acknowledge and properly address the differentiated realities of these groups. We would like to address the recurrent narrative according to which a balanced RBI and therefore weaker instrument is needed to safeguard investment and development. In the same vein, an ambitious and detailed instrument, one that contributes to the evolution of international human rights law and the closure of accountability gaps, is viewed as detrimental to the economies of states in the global south. The exact opposite is the case. It's human rights violations and environmental destruction perpetuated throughout global value chains of transnational corporations that prevent our states from actually improving people's lives. Binding regulations can help foster sustainable development, weeding out vulture investments to improve living conditions and protect the environment. As we look ahead to the next stage of this working group, we would like to reiterate the importance of keeping at the center of this process those who have experienced and continue to experience the consequences of corporate human rights violations and abuses, the victims, affected individuals and communities, social movements, trade unions, and human rights defenders. This treaty should ultimately be judged by its capacity to prevent violations and abuses, enforce accountability, and provide effective access to justice and remedy for those affected. The voices, experiences, and demands of affected communities should therefore continue to inform both the substance of the negotiations and the way in which the process itself is conducted. Thank you, Chair. IWG · Chair-Rapporteur [41:22]: Thank you very much. I give the floor to Sidse. Global Campaign, Feminists for the Treaty and Red S [41:28]: Thank you very much, Chair. My name is Margarita and I present this statement on behalf of the Global Campaign, Feminists for the Treaty and Red S, as well as all civil society, social movements and unions committed to a robust binding treaty that puts an end to corporate impunity and guarantees justice for affected peoples in all regions. On the methodology and participation, we want to stress that the quality and legitimacy of negotiations depend on meaningful, effective participation. Affected communities and CSOs should be able to participate not just in formal sessions in Geneva but also intersessionally. That means guaranteeing that we properly address practical barriers to participation, including financial and logistical obstacles and acquiring visas. Therefore, we urge the chair to always bear in mind, if possible, hybrid modalities that would allow organisations and affected communities that cannot travel to Geneva to participate meaningfully in debates. Those measures would not only expand participation but also strengthen the substance of negotiations, ensuring that the perspectives of those who are directly affected by corporate violations and abuses can remain present throughout the whole process. The drafting process must follow clear criteria to ensure that we prioritise a text that offers maximum protection for human rights, the environment and the rights of victims and affected communities. We demand that the drafting process be governed by the principle of avoiding any conflict of interest and that we establish effective prevention, legal liability, access to justice and reparation mechanisms. Therefore, we respectfully ask the chair to consult with affected communities and with CSOs prior to publication of the next draft, to ensure that it reflects the demands and key proposals from those people who are directly concerned. With regard to the methodology for the 13th session, given the current stage of the process, we think that the methodology for the 13th session would be particularly important. We urge the chair to establish working methods that enable states to progressively reach agreements or provisional agreements on provisions or specific paragraphs, instead of leaving all substantive issues unresolved until the end of the meeting. A paragraph-by-paragraph approach would help identify references from states through dynamic negotiations geared towards convergence and would reduce pending differences and would achieve tangible progress towards a text that would then have broad support. For that mythology to be effective, however, it is crucial for States to participate with a high level of representative and adequate decision-making powers. Therefore, we respectfully urge the Chair to consider sending a diplomatic note to States sufficiently in advance of the next session, urging them to guarantee participation of representatives who have the mandate and necessary authority to negotiate and, where possible, reach agreements on provisions that are under debate. At this stage of the process, political will and decision-making powers in negotiations are essential if the working group is to achieve meaningful progress. In that respect, we urge the chair rapporteur to submit as soon as possible a clear methodology and a road map for the next phase of negotiations, so that states, affected communities and civil society can adequately prepare. Ultimately, the goal should not just be to move forward as fast as possible to draft a text, but rather to develop a LBI that is robust and effective and that is able to be implemented and can meet the challenges that communities face due to the abuses that are committed by corporations. Finally, unlike what was said by the lobbyist for Enterprise, a treaty with gaps could be ratified, but it would not change the reality of violations and impunity on the ground. We assume the responsibility stipulated in resolution 2611, and let us establish the norms that we are mandated to establish. Since voluntary frameworks are clearly ineffective, we urge the committee to abide by the guiding principles and move towards a robust, effective, binding treaty. Thank you. IWG · Chair-Rapporteur [47:20]: Thank you very much, distinguished delegates from states and representatives of other stakeholders. Reaching the end of this 12th session, I want to express my sincere gratitude to all States, to civil society organizations and social movements, to union and professional organizations, to national human rights institutions and other stakeholders. Thank them for their active, constructive participation throughout this week. Many thanks to all those who have followed our work via the UN webcast. Many thanks also for the kind words to myself from delegations and organizations who have spoken in this final segment. I've taken due note of all observations made, both those expressing support to the process as well as those that raised concerns as to the content of the text or on the working methodology. They have all enriched our work and will be duly taken into account by the chair rapporteur. During this session, based on the report of intersessional thematic consultations of 2026 and its addendum. We have considered the 22 proposals for reformulation from the chair rapporteur regarding articles 12 to 24 and articles 1 to 3, as well as additional elements of the text, including the preamble. We have maintained a dialogue over the general vision of the text and the way forward. With that, as I said yesterday, the working group has completed its consideration of the whole updated draft LBI, both through direct intergovernmental negotiations in the ninth, 10th and 11th sessions, as well as in the intersessional thematic consultations of 2025 and 2026 and during the current session. This is a collective achievement that belongs to all those who participated in the process. Twelve years have come and gone since the adoption of resolution 26/9. This session has shown once more the willingness of the international community to continue moving forward in drawing up an instrument that can help bridge the existing gap in international human rights law in this sphere, and which provides greater legal security to affected persons and communities and to business, and which strengthens access to justice and reparation. The conclusions of the working group and the recommendations of the chair-rapporteur that we have just adopted set the stage for next year. On that basis, This chair-rapporteur will be preparing a new, updated version of the draft LBI, which will seek to reflect progress achieved and areas of convergence identified, and which will serve as a basis for intersessional thematic consultations in 2027. As per the proposed road map for 2027, this version will be tentatively published in February 2027 and will be followed by informal consultations on the methodology in the second-half of April and by intersessional thematic consultations between the end of April and the end of May, with the flexibility necessary to adjust to effective availability of resources. I would like to reiterate, moreover, the significant possibilities offered by implementation of decision 56/116 of the Human Rights Council. Next year, the council will receive, during its 64th regular session, the report on progress made in implementation, together with the report of this 12th session. is due to consider during its 65th regular session renewal of that decision through a draft text of a strictly procedural nature. I trust that that exercise will allow the working group to continue to rely on financial resources and other necessary tools to keep moving forward in delivering on its mandate. In that context, I call for broad, inclusive participation of States from all regions, as well as from civil society and other stakeholders, in the inter-Sessional Thematic Consultations in 2027 and in the 13th session of this working group. The process is not free of challenges, that is for sure, and divergences persist that will require time, flexibility and a willingness to understand. Nevertheless, the experience of these last two years has shown that candid, respectful and results-based dialogue is possible. It constitutes the most robust way of bringing positions closer together and building consensus, without losing sight of the fact that the ultimate purpose of our work is the effective protection of human rights in the context of business activities. My special gratitude goes to the friends of the chair rapporteur for their unswerving support, as well as to the legal experts for their valuable and prudent contributions. which are at the disposal of States and of other participants in this working group. I'd like to also thank the secretariat of the OHCHR, in particular Ben, Omer, Dominika and the whole team for their dedication in preparing and organizing this session. Our thanks also go to the interpreters. I much appreciate their flexibility. Thanks also to these conference services and the UN webcast team in Geneva, and of course to my own team here under the chair rapporteur. Before concluding, let me make a brief reference to the venue in which we've been working this week. I'd like to recall that the original decorations of this Chamber 12, also known as the Italian, Rome Italian Chamber, All that is left is the mural of Massimo Campilli, which shows the persons who built this Palais des Nations. Subsequently, when the room was completely renovated, it was decided to preserve this image of collective work, which made it possible to have a house aimed to achieve understanding between nations. This image, I think, is particularly appropriate in this 12th session. Like with the building of this palais and of any building, the development and negotiation of international instruments do not result just from the will or capacities of a single delegation or power group, but rather from the patient shared efforts of many actors, session after session, with a bottom-up approach. with the aim of lasting long past the time of those who start the process. In that same spirit, I trust that we can move forward together in building an instrument that contributes to guaranteeing access to justice and reparation for affected persons and communities and in preventing human rights violations and abuses. We conclude this 12th session with the satisfaction of having delivered on the programme of work that we proposed and with the responsibility to continue moving forward. Once again, I reiterate my gratitude to all of you for your constructive participation, and I wish you all a safe return to your capitals and homes, as well as to your regular work. We have reached the end of the 12th session of the IWG. The open the International Working Group on Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises and Human Rights. With that, I adjourn the session. Thank you very much to all of you.