1st meeting, 12th Session of Open-ended Intergovernmental Working Group on Transnational Corporations

Good morning, your excellency, respected representatives, colleagues and friends. I declare open the 12th session of the intergovernmental working group of open composition on transnational corporations and other enterprises in the aspect of human rights. My name is Mauriço Llosa, I am the head of the section on the protection of human rights in the OPCW. I am happy to welcome you all to Geneva for these important negotiations, especially those of you who have travelled from afar. Now, we will proceed to the election of the rapporteur, in accordance with the second item on the agenda. я готов предоставить слово желающим выдвигать кандидатуры на должность председателя докладчика нашей рабочей группы я предоставляю слово его превосходительству постоянному представителю барбадоса прошу вас

большое спасибо доброе утро от имени группы латиноамериканских государств и карибского бассейна грлаг имею честь официально представить кандидатуру посла васкиса бермудеса постоянного представителя эквадора при отделении оон и других международных организаций в женеве на должность председателя докладчика двенадцатая сессия межправительственной рабочей группы открытого состава в соответствии с резолюцией по правам человека двадцать шесть делить на девять с мандатом разработать юридически обязывающий документ по транснациональным корпорациям и другим предприятиям aspect of human rights, Ambassador Vazquez Bermudez has enormous experience in multilateral diplomacy, deeply understands international law and the United Nations, his diplomatic experience, his commitment to multilateral diplomacy, his proven ability to promote dialogue and build consensus, будут очень ценны в руководстве работы рабочей группы. Сейчас, когда нам необходимы те, кто наводит мосты, мы уверены, что посол Васкес Бермудес имеет все качества и свойства для этого. Надеюсь и рассчитываю, что кандидатура посла получит широкую поддержку со стороны всех государств в преддверии этого грулак желает послу васки супермуду с всяческого успеха в исполнении своих обязанностей председателя докладчика и в содействии работе и дискуссиям нашей рабочей группы большое спасибо

благодарю вас если нет больше желающих взять слово могу ли я считать что наша рабочая группа As I see no objections, it is so decided.

I have the honor to declare His Excellency, Ambassador Marcelo Vazquez Bermudez, Permanent Representative of Ecuador.

Elected chair rapporteur of the 12th session of the open-ended intergovernmental working group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights.

I would like to invite the ambassador to come to the podium and assume the chair.

Excellencies, distinguished representatives of States, international organizations, national human rights institutions, civil society organizations, workers and employers organizations, indigenous peoples and local communities, the private sector and academia, as well as other relevant stakeholders. Ladies and gentlemen, allow me first of all to express sincere gratitude to the countries of the Latin American and Caribbean group, particularly the ambassador of Barbados, and to the members and observers of the Human Rights Council for the trust placed once more in Ecuador and in me to guide the work of this group. I once more assume this responsibility with the firm conviction that I must preside over our meetings in a transparent, respectful, inclusive and efficient manner. It is an honour for me to welcome you to this 12th session of the working group, established in 2014 by Human Rights Council resolution 26/9. With a mandate to elaborate an international legally binding instrument to regulate, in international human rights law, the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises, I thank all delegations for their presence, and in particular those who have travelled from other countries. I would also like to thank Mr. Lazala for opening the meeting and through him the Office of the High Commissioner, which serves as the secretariat of this working group. In a context marked by the liquidity crisis that the United Nations is going through and by serious budgetary constraints, Its continuous support in the preparation of this meeting and in organizing consultations and other intercessional activities has been crucial in preserving the continuity and predictability of this process. I extend this recognition to the countries that comprise the Friends of the Chair. for their constant accompaniment and contribution to the dialogue between regions, as well as to the legal experts who support this process for their valuable technical contributions. Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, over the years, the existence of a normative vacuum in international human rights law with respect to human rights with respect to business activities, especially those of a transnational nature, has been highlighted, as well as the importance of addressing it in order to ensure effective access to justice and reparations for victims of human rights violations and abuses linked to such activities and to promote their prevention. In this regard, the purpose of the process has, since its inception, been to clarify and facilitate the effective implementation of the obligations of states to respect, protect and promote human rights in the context of business activities, as well as the responsibilities of companies in this matter, to prevent the occurrence of abuses, to guarantee that victims have access to adequate, timely, effective reparation mechanisms. and to strengthen mutual legal assistance and international cooperation, which are essential to ensure that justice does not stop at borders. All victims, including in particular those who are also individuals and groups at higher risk, are ultimately the reason for the existence of this collective effort. The mandate of resolution 26/9 is part of a long history of multilateral efforts dating back to the debates of the 1970s and 1980s, and the work of the former Commission on Human Rights, and including the mandate of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General established in 2005, whose work led to the adoption in 2011 of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, as well as the relevant instruments of the International Labour Organization and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. On this basis, and in line with the idea of a smart mix of national and international voluntary and mandatory measures, it is clear that a legally binding international instrument on the subject could help to clarify the obligations of states and the responsibilities of companies in terms of prevention, respect, protection and redress. to provide greater legal certainty to states, companies and right holders, and to promote a greater level playing field in the business sphere. In that regard, it should be recalled that the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr. Volker Turk, from whom we will hear a video message, has pointed out in the past that an instrument of this nature can contribute to establishing a global standard of conduct, ensuring that no state or company is disadvantaged for doing the right thing, and ensuring better access to justice for victims. We also recognize developments at the national and regional levels through laws, legislative proposals, public policies, and judicial decisions on human rights and environmental due diligence, transparency, and responsible business conduct. These experiences, which reflect different approaches and realities, constitute valuable inputs for the construction of a coherent, realistic, effective international framework in line with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Similarly, an increasing number of companies recognize that respect for human rights contributes to the sustainability of their operations and to stability along their value chains by reducing legal and reputational risks and legal uncertainty, strengthening consumer and investor confidence and fostering stable, transparent and predictable business environments. Having clear and common criteria and standards therefore benefits not only rights holders, including victims and affected communities, but also companies and states. Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, This process has gradually acquired greater institutional consolidation from the presentation of the Zero Draft in 2018 and its successive versions. through the textual suggestions proposed by a range of States and other relevant actors in relation to the version of the legally binding instrument presented in July 2023. The adoption by consensus of Human Rights Council decision 56/116 in July 2024 with the co-sponsorship of a significant number of countries from different regions and levels of development marked a watershed, a turning point in this journey, and was positively valued by the High Commissioner and by a significant number of states and other relevant actors as an important step forward and as a shared recognition of the need to move towards completion of the mandate. This decision gave the Working Group a set of tools that today allow us to move forward with greater structure, predictability and technical support. The Friends of the Chairperson Rapporteur mechanism, the support of the Working Group's legal experts, the inter-sessional thematic consultations and the annual roadmaps for their implementation. On that basis, the 11th session held in October 2025 was attended by nearly 90 states and made it possible to complete the comprehensive reading of the upgraded, updated draft document. with the consideration of articles 12 to 24 and to initiate an interactive dialogue on 13 proposals for the reformulation of the Chair relating to articles 4 to 11. At the conclusion of that session, the Working Group adopted by consensus its conclusions and recommendations, including the roadmap for 2026, the report of which was presented to the Human Rights Council at its 61st regular session last March. The growing participation of States from different regions with substantive and increasingly technical proposals is an encouraging sign of the will to find solutions to the divergences that still persist in pursuance of that roadmap. This year, three thematic intersessional consultations were held on 7th to 9th April and 28th and 29th May, dedicated to Articles 12 to 24, Articles 1 to 3, and the Preamble, as well as an overview of the text of the way forward. Because of the liquidity crisis, The available resources allowed for only five days of consultations, and I reiterate my thanks to all delegations for their flexibility and for the commitment that they demonstrated at that time. As in 2025, each consultation was preceded by informal documents or non-papers prepared under the responsibility of the Presidency with the support of legal experts. As a result of this work, and in keeping with decision 56116, on 21st September, the summary report of the 2026 intersessional thematic consultations was circulated. It was contained in document and on 25th September an annex document was circulated containing that was CRP 2 containing 22 proposals by me for the reformulation of selected provisions of articles 12 to 24 and 1 to 3. As last year These proposals do not have any legal status and do not replace the updated draft instrument. Their sole purpose is to reflect possible areas of convergence, solutions or options for consideration by this working group. Thus, in September, an informal consultation on the programme of work and methodology of this session was also held. and its comments and suggestions were duly taken into account. Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, this 12th session is of particular importance in the broader context of the process. By the end of this week, the working group will have completed full consideration of the updated draft instrument at two distinct complementary levels. The formal level of direct intergovernmental negotiation developed during the 9th, 10th, 11th and 12th sessions, and the level of intercessional technical dialogue through the six thematic consultations held in 2025 and 2026 under decisions 56/116. As I had occasion to point out at the end of the 11th session and once again at the end of the third thematic consultation of this year, the closure of the full consideration of the text in the regular sessions and in the intersessional thematic consultations, as well as the discussions around the proposals that I have presented for this and the previous session of the working group, have created sufficient objective conditions so that the accumulated work can be reflected in a systematic and coherent manner in a new version of the draft instrument that reflects the advances, convergences and contributions identified throughout this process. In any case, as always, it will be for States themselves to decide on the next steps and the conclusions and recommendations of this session, including the 2027 roadmap. That is the year in which the Human Rights Council will also have to consider the continuity of the measures provided for in decision 56/116. To this end, and in accordance with the programme of work that I will submit for your consideration under item 3, this week we will devote as much time as possible to the interactive dialogue on the Chair's proposals, starting this afternoon and on Tuesday on articles 12 to 24, and on Wednesday and Thursday mornings on articles 1 and 3. On Thursday afternoon, there will be space for delegations to comment on any other elements of the text and on the way forward. On Friday, in accordance with the practice of this working group, there will be informal consultations held on the recommendations of the chair and the conclusions of the working group, with a view to their adoption. In that context, I invite all delegations to examine and comment on the proposals, not from their respective positions of maximum, but in terms of how much they reflect or do not reflect possible convergences or solutions to the various proposals already presented, and to identify, as far as possible, specific adjustments that could facilitate further rapprochement. I would also like to reiterate that the work of this presidency is not intended to reflect the position of Ecuador or any other specific country alone, but is conducted on behalf of the Human Rights Council with a mandate to facilitate and guide the work of the working group in the most technical, impartial and transparent manner possible, and with the same commitment to independence and inclusiveness that have guided our work, taking duly into account the differing realities, legal complexities and sensitivities of all involved in this process, and in particular the rights and the legitimate aspirations of the victims of human rights abuses and violations linked to business activities. Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, after more than a decade of sustained efforts and in a complex international situation, this working group today has a more informed and mature understanding of the text with substantive proposals accumulated over the years and with consensual tools that can and should be used in a pragmatic, balanced, collaborative manner. All of this represents an opportunity that I encourage you to take advantage of in order to move forward towards completion of the mandate of resolution 26/9 within an adequate and reasonable period of time. This objective does not depend solely on the presidency. From my part, I reiterate my determination to accompany and guide this collective effort with responsibility and openness. aware that it will ultimately be the political will and active participation of states and other relevant actors that will make it possible to achieve a legally binding instrument that is in full conformity with existing human rights obligations, contributes to a level playing field in business protects rights holders and guarantees access to justice for victims. I wish you all a constructive and fruitful week of work. Thank you very much. A continuation.

We can now hear the introductory statements from the High Commissioner for Human Rights and from the Chair of the Working Group on Business and Human Rights. It is an honour for me to invite Mr. Volker Turk, High Commissioner for Human Rights, to make his introductory statement. This will be a video message.

Excellencies, distinguished chair and members of the working group, dear participants and colleagues, business activity is integral to our societies, allowing us to meet our needs and driving prosperity and innovation. 15 years ago, the endorsement of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights by the Human Rights Council marked an important step in ensuring that this activity does not lose sight of human rights. Since then, momentum towards this goal has grown. Some countries and businesses have taken action to promote human rights, due diligence, and more sustainable practices, including across value chains. We have seen courts hold companies to account for harm caused to communities abroad and for failing to protect workers in foreign subsidiaries. Much of this action, however, remains scattered and comes too late, leaving billions of people at the mercy of corporate whims. A recent study of 2,000 influential global companies found that only one in 10 assesses human rights risks in its supply chains. A global treaty, which this group is tasked with advancing, can help change that. And the urgency of this change is increasing exponentially. Globally, economic and technological power are becoming highly concentrated and intertwined, giving their holders extraordinary influence over people's daily lives. It can affect what people earn, what they buy, what opportunities they have, how they cast their votes, and much more. This kind of power must come with matching responsibility. When it doesn't, the consequences are dangerous. Economic interests are woven into virtually every one of today's wars, from the extraction of critical minerals to arms production and trafficking. Staggering sums continue to flow into fossil fuel corporations as temperatures soar. The near absence of guardrails on social media has pushed several countries and courts to act to protect children from risks to their mental health. Artificial intelligence could help us mitigate these harms, but it too is being misused. to power new tools of destruction, to drill oil and gas wells, and spread disinformation. There is a belief that moving fast and playing rough is a recipe for profit and progress. That belief is wrong. It ignores the damage done, often to the most vulnerable people and communities. And commercial success does not last without human rights. Indeed, human rights make business sense. They make companies more resilient, and they foster trust and stability that attract customers, skilled employees, and investors. Many of these people are already asking questions about the phone in their pocket and the energy used by AI to respond to their prompt. These questions will not disappear. They will only multiply, making the rusty links in supply chains increasingly visible behind shiny slogans. All countries and communities have a stake in slowing climate change, improving safety and security beyond national borders, and steering rapid technological development to the benefit of humanity. This is not simply about duties and responsibilities. It is about solutions to our common problems. The AI race has shown just how quickly entirely new, powerful business models can emerge. We need to be ready with a bold, forward-looking, legally binding instrument that ensures businesses respect human rights and creates a level playing field for transnational corporations and other business enterprises everywhere. An instrument that helps companies recognize human rights as a strategic opportunity. To achieve this, it needs to reflect the perspective of those whose rights are affected and deliver on accountability, access to remedy, and above all, prevention. It also needs to be feasible to implement and take account of how companies operate globally. The guiding principles provide a strong foundation for this work, which my office will continue to support with new tools and knowledge. Our Global Alliance for Human Rights is bringing together a wide range of partners, including businesses, to put human rights at the core of public life and decision-making. One of its flagship initiatives is a help desk providing practical support on business and human rights. These are concrete steps towards a larger transformation. This working group can play an important role in advancing that transformation and making us better prepared for what comes next. I wish you a productive session and hope it brings us closer to an economy where human rights and business success go hand in hand. Thank you.

My thanks to the High Commissioner for his comments and observations, particularly his recognition of the important work done by this intergovernmental working group and the strategic opportunity that it offers to continue to make progress towards an economy where human rights and business profit can go hand in hand. I would now like to invite Mr. Robert McCorkadale, the chair of the working group on business and human rights, to make his statement on behalf of the working group. This will also be a video message. Mr. McCorkadale, you have the floor, sir.

Distinguished Chairperson, Excellencies, representatives of government, civil society, the business community, and all esteemed colleagues. I am Robert McCorkodale, and it is my pleasure to deliver these remarks on behalf of the Working Group on Business and Human Rights at this session of the Open-Ended Intergovernmental Working Group. My sincere appreciation to the Permanent Mission of Ecuador and for all member states, organizations, and individuals, including experts, that have dedicated time, energy, and conviction to this process. You have helped move towards a time when respect for human rights is fully embedded in business conduct and there is state regulation of that conduct. It is important to acknowledge the remarkable progress made since the unanimous endorsement of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in 2011. As you know, the UNGPs are the authoritative international standard governing what responsible states and businesses should do to protect, respect, and fulfill human rights across business operations. Indeed, this year we celebrate the 15th anniversary of its endorsement. In the exercise of our mandate, the Working Group on Business and Human Rights, which is composed of five independent experts supported by our excellent secretariat, has been at the forefront of promoting, clarifying and supporting the global implementation of the UNGPs. We do this in collaboration with civil society, businesses, states and international organizations, as well as all other relevant stakeholders. In so doing, we note that the commentary to Guiding Principle 3 makes clear, and I quote, "States should not assume that businesses invariably prefer or benefit from state inaction, and they should consider a smart mix of measures, national and international, mandatory and voluntary, to foster business respect for human rights." The Working Group on Business and Human Rights sees the process towards a legally binding instrument on business and human rights as part of this smart mix of measures. In fact, voluntary efforts alone and laws without sanctions or enforcement rarely make businesses act to prevent actual or potential adverse human rights impacts, including those impacts arising from environmental damage and climate change. For businesses, clear and effective laws assist them in providing certainty in their decision making, reduce legal risks, assist in the competitive environment so that all businesses act in accordance with the law, and can assist business reputation. This is why the significance of this ongoing effort towards a legally binding instrument is vital, in that it must clarify the responsibility of businesses to respect human rights and require states to introduce and enforce laws, including appropriate incentives for positive action by businesses. in relation to business responsibility to respect human rights. In addition, the Working Group on Business and Human Rights wishes to emphasize the critical need to include effective remedies for victims of adverse human rights impacts of business activities within the legally binding instrument. Victims and their representatives need to feel that this instrument ensures that remedies as one of our reports has made clear, are accessible, appropriate, adequate, preventative, redressive, and timely from the perspective of those seeking them, and where the effective right holders are not victimized when seeking those remedies. This requires positive actions by states and by businesses, as should be reflected in the instrument. Nevertheless, I do acknowledge the reality that progress in relation to the business and human rights agenda remains uneven across different regions. Even more concerning is the pushback underway in certain jurisdictions where human rights commitments are being weakened or deprioritized. When human rights protections are eroded and states retreat from accountability and transparency, This sends the wrong message to business and risk reversing the hard-won advances achieved to move from corporate impunity to corporate accountability. However, the Working Group on Business and Human Rights is pleased with the increased energy and consultations that have occurred in the past couple of years with the legally binding instrument, as well as the actions of the legal experts, which have definitely contributed to this forward process. We hope that all states, businesses, civil society and other relevant stakeholders are willing to participate actively and constructively in the next steps of the negotiations. I would also emphasize the need to continue developing legal and policy frameworks at all levels, including regional and domestic laws and practices. There should also be done within the framework of the UN Guiding Principles, including the domestic implementation of regional and international laws. We note the sustained engagement of the Working Group on Business and Human Rights in its Global Forum on Business and Human Rights and its dedicated regional business and human rights forums and dialogues, where discussions about the legally binding instrument remain important. This current session offers an important opportunity to build on previous work, reflect on the lessons learned, and push forward with concrete actions. It needs innovative solutions, cooperation, partnerships, and determination to face the challenges with a clear commitment to ensure there are strong state obligations, clear accountability for business actions, and effective remedies for victims. It is also essential that the legally binding instrument aligns itself, complements and reinforces the UN guiding principles, as well as implementing existing applicable human rights norms and standards, such as under relevant ILO and OECD instruments. This ensures that the legally binding instrument is indeed a smart measure. Distinguished Chairperson, Excellencies, esteemed colleagues, I thank you very much for your kind attention and wish you all a successful, productive and a smart session. Thank you.

My thanks to Mr. McCorkadale for his statement and for the ongoing support that the Working Group on Business and Human Rights provides to our process. and I thank him for the recognition of the progress that we've made over the past two years. This brings to a close agenda item 2. We can now move on to agenda item 3. I am happy to put to the working group the adoption of the provisional programme of work, based on HRC.WG.16.1. This is the same document that we see every year. It includes the opening of the session, the election of the chair rapporteur, items which have already been adopted. We also have item 3, the adoption of the agenda and the programme of work. And we have an item 4, which is a plenary discussion in accordance with the programme of work. And a final item 5, which is the adoption of the report of the session. I am also pleased to put to you the programme of work that has been suggested for this session. An initial draft of the programme of work was published on 21 August as a basis for the informal consultation that was held on 31 August. The updated version was published on 5 October, taking into consideration all the comments and suggestions that had been made during the aforementioned consultation. Just like last year, the programme of work will go hand in hand with a methodology which reflects previous practice of this working group and that of other intergovernmental working groups established by the Human Rights Council. It also takes into account some of the comments and proposals made by States and other relevant stakeholders during the intersessional meetings, including the relevant implementation of the Human Rights Council decision 56/116. That is a guiding document that is an additional testament to the chairmanship's commitment to the efficiency, transparency, inclusivity and predictability of the whole process that we are engaged in. For this reason, before looking at some operational details, such as the actual development of this session, would like to ask the working group to adopt the provisional agenda and the provisional programme of work, together with its methodology. And I take it that if there are no objections, the agenda and programme of work for the methodology, and the methodology for the session, have been adopted. I recognise the State of Palestine.

Thank you, Mr. Chair Rapporteur. And as this is the first time the State of Palestine is taking the floor, let me start by thanking you and your team for your important work, as well as the secretariat and legal experts, and assuring you of our full support and our unwavering commitment to this process. We have studied the proposed methodology carefully, and we wish to place on record our understanding of how it will operate. We recognize the effort invested in the Chair's proposals, and we are ready to engage with them constructively and in good faith. Your document itself states that it is presented under the Chair's sole responsibility, that the proposals have no legal status, and that they do not replace the updated draft legally binding instrument with the textual proposals submitted by states during the 9th, 10th, and 11th sessions as the basis for negotiations. We fully agree with that statement, and we take it as the governing principle of our work this week. The Chair's proposals may serve as a useful reference and a source of drafting ideas, and in some cases, they may inform the language we put forward. They are not the formal texts under negotiation, and our comments on them should not be read as acceptance of them as a basis for negotiation or as a new baseline. Our participation in the interactive discussions on articles 12 to 24 and 1 to 3 will therefore be based on that understanding. In the same vein, the State of Palestine reserves its position with regard to the new draft that the chair rapporteur has indicated will be prepared in 2027. Our engagement this week, including any comment, preliminary or otherwise, on the chair's proposals, is without prejudice to our position on that future draft. We trust that the preparation of any such draft will be transparent and inclusive and will faithfully reflect the discussions of all delegations on the official texts. And on that basis, the State of Palestine is able to adopt the programme of work. I thank you.

Thank you very much. If I see no objections, I believe we can now move to the adoption of the provisional agenda and the programme of work and methodology for this session. It is so decided. Many thanks. Turning our attention once again to the methodology, let me point out some of the operational considerations for this session. First of all, relating to the general statements section, which we're going to shortly be tackling under agenda item 4, there are some limited speaking times pursuant to practice in this meeting and in the Council. We have two minutes for, two and a half minutes for joint statements and two minutes for statements, two minutes for joint statements, and one and a half minutes for individual statements for non-state stakeholders. This is information which the Secretariat has also published on the portal of the 11th session. I would like to thank all delegations in advance for abiding by these time limits to make sure that we have the greatest time available for the dialogue on the proposals. Secondly, we must remember that at the 11th session, the working group for the first time completed the entire reading of the updated draft of the legally binding instrument. That is why this session has been mainly reserved for an interactive dialogue on the basis of the proposals of the chairs, which are the outcome of the thematic consultations that were held in 2026. We can find that in the summary of document 16/12 CRP2. Once we have concluded our general statement segment today, on Tuesday we will have a session focusing on the presentation of the summary of the intersessional thematic consultation on articles 12 to 24 and of the Chair's proposals resulting therefrom, followed by interactive discussion. During this segment, I will give you a brief oral summary of the key aspects discussed during the first intersessional thematic consultation, which was held in April of this year, as we can see in document A/HRC/WPG.16/12/CRP.1. I will present, one by one, the proposals for articles 12 to 24. On Wednesday and Thursday in the morning, the program of work provides for proposed redraftings or reformulations. relating to articles 1 to 3, based on the summary of the interconsultations that were held in April and May 2026 and the proposals resulting therefrom. In both segments, and following the methods of work that we also used at the 11th session, the proposals will be shown on the screen in the room and delegations and States and then other relevant stakeholders will be invited to make their comments, hoping to have a dynamic discussion. under the guidance of the chair. As we can see in the participants notes, which is on the electronic portal for this session, there will be separate speakers lists for comments on the summary reports and for each of the chairs proposals. And these speakers lists will be closed once the conclusions of the respective discussions have been concluded. During that time, there will be no time for comments from the states. I therefore invite all participants to make concise contributions and to ask for the floor by raising their nameplates. Other relevant stakeholders will have two minutes available for joint statements and one and a half minutes available for individual statements. Once again, let me reiterate that these proposals will have no legal status, nor do they replace the updated draft document. They simply aim to find areas of convergence or solutions or proposals for the consideration of this working group. For this reason, I would urge all delegations to participate. and ensure that we have an open, informal and constructive dialogue that focuses on the elements of the text that are suggested by the chairman-rapporteur, looks to the future and avoids going over proposals that were previously made. Thirdly, on Thursday afternoon, we will have a segment titled "General overview of the text", followed by a dialogue on any additional elements of the text and the way forward. There will be no speakers list for this section. Here, delegations, the States and other relevant stakeholders will be able to make comments on any other element of the text, including the preamble and articles 4 to 11, as well as the way forward, including the roadmap for 2027. And pursuant to the practice followed by this working group, on Friday, 16 October, in the morning, informal consultations will be held in a closed setting. These are consultations on the recommendations of the chair rapporteur and the conclusions of the working group, the aim being to seek consensus so that in the afternoon they can be adopted pursuant to agenda item 5. Furthermore, and pursuant to practice established in this working group and just like in previous sessions, during the interactive dialogue segments, any delegation can seize the opportunity offered by the presence of the legal experts to ask questions, ask specific questions. This possible legal advice is couched in paragraph 6 of the relevant regulation, where the Council emphasised the importance of providing independent, specialised expert advice to this working group to assist it in its work. This is entirely in line with Human Rights Council decision 56/116. It is, in any case, a possibility offered to this working group, and its use will depend on the delegation's view of this. Such requests will go through the chair and rapporteur, and we will make sure that all contributions are respectful of the intergovernmental nature of the whole process. We would also urge any delegation that is able to, to please submit to the Secretariat a copy of their statements to be delivered under the general segment. and any other segment of our meeting. They should be in a Word format and should mention the segment or proposal that they relate to. That is to make the life of our interpreters a little bit easier. Following the practice of previous sessions, Statements which are made and given to the Secretariat by States and other relevant stakeholders will be published on the electronic portal of this working group in January of next year. The session once again is being webcast on UN Web TV and there is direct audio available in all United Nations official languages. And these recordings will be available from the end of each meeting. This means that the session will be accessible to all those who, for various reasons, have not been able to come to the Palais des Nations personally. In any case, I remind you that the methodology is a living document that aims to make more transparent the development and operation of the session. The improvement in future of the whole system will depend, as usual, on each and every participant who is involved in the process. Having said all of this, unless there are any requests of the floor after this lengthy explanation, and having adopted the provisional agenda and the programme of work with its methodology, we can now move on to agenda item 4, the plenary discussions in accordance with the programme of work. Just before this, I want to seize the opportunity to give the Secretariat the floor so that they can make some announcements of their own. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair Rapporteur, and good morning to everyone. First of all, we are fortunate to have simultaneous interpretation into all UN languages for this meeting. For those in the room, you can switch between languages by changing the channel on the headset at your seat. For everyone who will be speaking, I would kindly ask you to bear in mind that these are technical discussions and that the interpreters have a challenging task. It would therefore be greatly appreciated if everyone could speak slowly and clearly, and where remarks have been prepared in advance, you could please share them with speeches@un.org before delivering them. This is purely for internal purposes, and we will not post any statements online if you ask us not to do so. Turning to participation modalities, I would encourage everyone to consult the participation page on the 12th session website carefully. It provides information on who may intervene, how to sign up to speak, and the rules governing interventions. Representatives of states and groups of states are encouraged to sign up for the list of speakers only for the general statements portion. For the remaining segments of the program, they may request the floor by raising their nameplates. Representatives of non-state stakeholders, on the other hand, will need to sign up for lists of speakers throughout the week, with the exception of Thursday afternoon's discussion on a general overview of the text, followed by dialogue on any additional elements of the text and the way forward. All requests to be placed on a list of speakers must be sent by e-mail to ohchr-igwg-intervention@un.org. It is not possible to sign up for a list by asking a member of the Secretariat in the room, so I would kindly ask you to use the e-mail address provided. To help us process requests, please make sure that each e-mail clearly indicates the segment during which the statement is to take place, the organization requesting a speaking slot, the name of the speaker, and whether the statement is a joint statement. For NGOs, please note that for a statement to be labeled as a joint statement, your e-mail must clearly identify at least one other ECOSOC accredited NGO joining the statement. As flagged by the chair rapporteur, there will be separate lists of speakers for each of the 22 proposals in the document containing chair rapporteur suggested redrafting, as well as two lists of speakers for comments on the summary report. To help us prepare the lists, it would be greatly appreciated if you could send a separate e-mail for each list you wish to join. I would also encourage everyone to register their participation through the Indico system, even if you already have a UN badge. This makes it easier for us to verify that participants are entitled to speak. As for the deadlines for signing up, the list of speakers for general statements is now closed. The remaining lists of speakers are open and will close once states have completed their discussion of the relevant segment. Finally, please note that the Secretariat will not disclose the order or position of speakers on the lists, so we kindly ask that you refrain from asking about this. There will be 10 side events happening throughout the week. Please consult the table of side events on the 12th session webpage for information on each event, including its time and location. And before we continue, I would like to flag a practical point regarding room capacity. We may exceed the capacity of room 12. So for the time being, we kindly ask that no more than five people per non-state delegation remain in the room. Those unable to enter the room will be able to follow the proceedings via the webcast on UN Web TV or listen to the live audio stream. both available in all UN languages. This is a temporary measure, and as soon as room capacity allows, non-state delegations will be able to have more than five people in room 12 again. Thank you very much for your understanding and cooperation, and thank you so much for your attention.

Muchas gracias.

I thank the Secretariat. We shall now move to item 4 with the general statements, and I would like to give the floor to the delegations of States to make their general comments, starting with those made on behalf of groups of States.

Start with GCC.

Start with this. Start with GCC. I call on the Gulf Cooperation Council. You have the floor.

Thank you.

This statement is made on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council. The states of the Gulf Cooperation Council are eager to continue to work constructively within this working group in support of a clear, balanced instrument that promotes the protection of human rights in the context of business activities, ensuring that those affected have access to effective remedies. We welcome the efforts to organize intercessional consultations and to prepare redrafting proposals. However, we are disappointed that the substance of the comments and proposals that we made are not reflected in the proposed drafting, despite our on-going participation and the clear textual proposals that we made. We believe that some of the amendments go beyond editorial improvements. raise fundamental concerns about the breadth of the instrument and the obligations under it. The proposals by the GCC states are based on interrelated principles, particularly the mandate under Human Rights Council resolution 26/9, taking into account the transnational nature of activities and respect for the principles of the consent of states to abide by it. We also stress the need for clarity in defining the rights covered so the state does not impose contractual obligations under instruments to which it's not a party and customary international law is respected. We stress the importance of precise definitions and control of legal liability, taking into account cause and effect. We should not presume liability simply because of a trade or investment relationship. We emphasize the need to respect national legal systems and the relevant trade and investment agreements. In this context, we stressed the importance of clarity in mutual legal assistance provisions and the need for fair trial guarantees. We also emphasized the voluntary nature of financial contributions to the Victims Fund. We will reintroduce our proposals during this session, emphasizing that they must be addressed in the framework of specific articles, but they are not limited to those articles. They should be taken into account throughout the text. We look forward to the discussions making it possible to address these concerns objectively so that States' proposals are clearly reflected in any subsequent revision, leading to a widely accepted instrument that, if achieved, effective protection for those affected. Thank you.

Thank you. I thank the Gulf Cooperation Council, and I now call on the European Union. I apologize. I now call on Japan.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We congratulate you on your election as a chair reporter, and we would like to thank both you and all our colleagues for your efforts in organizing this session. Japan remains committed to implementing the UN guiding principles. We formulated our initial national action plan in 2020 and revised it in 2025. and we have been strengthening our domestic efforts in line with this plan. We believe, as we have emphasized in a previous statement, that as long as this draft is being developed as a prospective LBI, it is a primary requirement that it be realistic, effective, and sufficiently well-balanced so that as many countries as possible can agree on its core elements. From this perspective, the discussion should be based on the UN guiding principles, which reflects the broad consensus of relevant stakeholders. In this regard, we consider that the current draft LBI contains some fundamental problems that need to be addressed, including vague definitions of important terms, potentially overly broad jurisdiction, and possible conflicts with the existing international law. As such, we believe that further deliberation is required to refine that text. Let me add that while Japan has been making specific comments on individual articles since the 11th session last year, our comments are non-exhaustive and intended to point out critical issues in the current draft. This should not be interpreted to mean that we endorse this draft. At the same time, not making comments on certain parts does not mean that we agree on those parts either. In closing, we would like to reiterate that Japan places great importance on the UN Guiding Principles and will continue its efforts in this area to promote and protect human rights. I thank you.

I thank Japan, and I call on Brazil.

Thank you, Chair. Mr. Chair, Rapporteur, Brazilian delegation congratulates Your Excellency and Equatorial delegation for your skillful leadership. We reiterate our firm support for this negotiation process, convinced that economic activity and human rights must reinforce one another within a legal order grounded in justice and the rule of law. Our national experience demonstrates why ensuring the prevention of human rights abuses and effective access to remedy are essential. Our engagement is guided by three principles. First, a human rights-centered and victim-oriented approach, prioritizing prevention, clear obligations, and full reparation, with heightened attention to historically marginalized groups and traditional communities. Second, an equitable balance between universality and practical enforceability, maintaining a comprehensive scope while calibrating obligations to operational capacities, particularly to avoid stifling smaller economic actors from developing countries. Finally, normative coherence, ensuring the future treaty reinforces the UN guiding principles and advances in synergy with multilateral commitments to sustainable development and responsible corporate conduct. On methodology, while we appreciate the Chair's proposals as a reference to guide our deliberations this week, Brazil stresses that the basis for the new draft should be the latest text negotiated by this working group, supplemented by delegations' most recent comments to preserve the cumulative nature of this process. Furthermore, a viable instrument must prioritize preventive measures, including human rights due diligence and international cooperation. An inclusive treaty built on broad consensus is far preferable to overly prescriptive rules that create unbalanced obligations. Mr. Chair Rapporteur, we reaffirm our constructive engagement toward a balanced, legally sound instrument.

Thank you.

I thank Brazil, and I call on Portugal.

Thank you, Mr. Chair to you and your team for the work carried out since the last session and for your continued efforts to advance this process in a transparent and effective way. I'm sorry to interrupt.

There is a problem with the microphone.

Can you hear me?

Could the speaker please change microphone?

Can you hear me now? Yes. Yeah, perfect. So let me restart. Portugal thanks you and your team for the work carried out since the last session and for your continued efforts to advance this process in a transparent and inclusive manner. The completion of the first reading of the updated draft during the 11th session marked an important stage in the work of this working group. The intercessional consultations held since then have provided further opportunities to examine different provisions of the text in greater depth and to identify areas where further clarification and convergence may be possible. As a friend of the Chair, Portugal remains available to contribute constructively to this process and to support efforts aimed at facilitating dialogue among delegations. We believe that the discussions should continue to be guided by the need for legal clarity, coherence with existing international frameworks, and practical implementation at the national level. In this regard, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights remain an important reference point, particularly in regard to prevention, human rights due diligence, and access to effective remedy to ensure a balanced, encompassing consensus-based and legally sound LBI. Portugal considers important that the discussions adequately reflect the environmental dimensions of business-related human rights impacts, in light of the close relationship between environmental protection and the enjoyment of human rights. At the same time, developments at the national and regional level continue to evolve, which further underlines the importance of ensuring coherence and avoiding unnecessary fragmentation across different legal and policy frameworks. Mr. Chair Rapporteur, we welcome the proposed roadmap and the additional intersessional thematic consultations it envisages. We hope that this work will help narrow remaining differences identify areas of common understanding and provide a sufficient basis for you Mr. chair to prepare a revised version of the current draft I thank you I.

Thank Portugal and I call on the state of Palestine.

Chair, more than 12 years after the adoption of Resolution 26/9, corporate power continues to expand unchecked, deepening global injustice, inequality, and environmental devastation. Businesses of a transnational character continue to profit from conflict, occupation, dispossession, and exploitation, and they do so across borders that the law has not yet learned to cross. Two weeks ago, the High Commissioner's Office listed 214 companies involved in illegal Israeli settlements. Previously, the Special Rapporteur on the OPT has shown how corporations supply the weapons, surveillance technology, and finance that turned an economy of occupation into an economy of genocide. And the ICJ has confirmed that all states must abstain from economic dealings that entrench illegal occupation and prevent trade and investment that sustains it. This treaty must give those obligations force. What happens in Palestine is a warning of what unregulated corporate conduct leads to everywhere. With the whole draft now considered, the next draft must be stronger, not diluted.

The speaker is kindly requested to slow down.

First, a scope of business activities of a transnational character, that is, activities undertaken by TNCs and other enterprises of a transnational character, including through their subsidiaries, affiliates, and value chains. Second, direct binding obligations and civil, criminal, and administrative liability for abuses and violations under human rights, humanitarian, and criminal law, including divestment and termination of activities in conflict-affected areas and.

Could the speaker please be requested to slow down? Sorry to interrupt. The interpreters are asking if you could slow down a little bit. Thank you.

Sure. Apologies for that. Third, justice across borders, extraterritorial and universal jurisdiction, a committee with complaints procedures, and an international tribunal to hold corporations accountable, established in the treaty. Fourth, Protection for those most affected: people exercising their right to self-determination, indigenous people, peasants, workers, women, and defenders of human rights and the environment. Fifth, the primacy of human rights over trade and investment agreements, and a process free from corporate capture. Mr. Chair, attempts to slow or dilute this process must not succeed. We call on all delegations to move from discussion to adoption. We owe it to victims across the world and look forward to working towards a strong, binding treaty that puts people before profit and ends corporate impunity. I thank you.

Thank you, State of Palestine. And I call on Indonesia.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, Rapporteur. Indonesia reaffirms its continued support for the Working Group's mandate and comments your leadership in ensuring a meaningful progress in the elaboration of an LBI. We also appreciate your work and your teams at the Permanent Mission of Ecuador, as well as the legal experts and the Secretariat in implementing the Council's decision 56/116 through this year's intersessional thematic consultations. We hope that the outcome of the consultations will not only enhance legal clarity and foster convergence among states, but more importantly, preserve the original purpose and mandate of this working group under resolution 26/9. Mr. Chair, we also thank for your efforts in preparing the Chair's proposal aimed at identifying possible areas of convergence and options for moving forward. Efforts to achieve convergence must not come at the expense of the principal mandate of this working group. Attempts to extensively broaden the scope of the ALBI to encompass all business activities overlooks the mandate of resolution that guided our deliberation and therefore must be avoided. Our mandate is not simply to transform the voluntary UNGPs into a legally binding instrument. In this regard, we recall the original purpose that prompted the main sponsors to initiate resolution 26/9 12 years ago. The Council established this working group to elaborate binding international norms to address human rights abuses arising from the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises of a transnational character. particularly where their cross-border operations exposed the limitations of domestic legal frameworks. At its core, this initiative seeks to address the discrepancies between the legal protections enjoyed by transnational businesses at the international level and the challenges faced by victims in obtaining protection and effective remedies. The future LBI must therefore strengthen states' capacity to fulfill their duty to protect human rights, including through effective international cooperation mechanisms that address regulatory and remedial gaps across jurisdictions. This original purpose must be firmly reflected in Article 3 on scope, a key provision that will shape the direction, coherence, and effectiveness of the entire treaty. We still observe that the proposed language for Article 3 Point 1 in the Chair's proposal has not sufficiently preserved the solid focus on the transnational character of business activities. Mr. Chair, we underline once again that the future LBI must not impede the development of MSMEs, which is vital to the economic growth in a larger number of States, especially the developing countries. Notwithstanding, our commitment to business and human rights remains firm. At the national level, we are finalising a regulatory framework on human rights due diligence, transitioning from voluntary towards phased mandatory measures. With regard to the working group's deliberation, we will continue to engage constructively and further encourage broader and more active participation of member states. We must safeguard our collective objective to deliver a legally sound, effective and implementable instrument. that closes existing protection gaps arising from transnational business activities in full accordance with resolution 26/9. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Muchas gracias, Indonesia. I thank Indonesia. And I call on the Holy See to be followed by Malaysia, the United Arab Emirates, and Germany. Holy See.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. At the outset, the Holy See delegation would like to thank you for your leadership and to express our gratitude to the legal experts for their work during the intersessional consultations, as well as to all delegations for their constructive engagement throughout the process. The Holy See delegation reaffirms its support for an instrument that places the human person at its center. After all, human rights are not an external addition to the person, but an expression of intrinsic human dignity, which the international community is called to protect and promote. Such an instrument should encompass all business activities, in particular those of transnational character, while providing for proportionate obligations for smaller enterprises. In this regard, the inclusion of robust provisions on the environment and due diligence throughout the value chain is particularly relevant. Although effective remedies are an essential component of the instrument, prevention must be embedded from the very beginning. Indeed, Populio XIV calls for greater transparency throughout supply chains so that no competitive advantage is built upon hidden exploitation. this responsibility cannot be left to goodwill alone. Mr. Chair, the strength of any legal instrument lies in the breadth of the consensus that sustains it. For this reason, the text now under consideration, in our view, should be based on terms that enjoy a shared understanding among States and on sources that have been negotiated and universally agreed upon. The inclusion of certain terms and notions, including those in Article 16, whether in the present text or in certain proposals, remains a contentious issue and cannot be accepted by my delegation. Incorporation of such language would weaken the instrument, rendering it unnecessarily even controversial and diminishing the prospect for its broad acceptance and ratification. In conclusion, the Holy See delegation would like to encourage all members to participate in this session with ambition and in a spirit of constructive dialogue. Following over a decade of work, those who have suffered harm as a result of business-related abuses deserve an instrument worthy of their dignity. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I thank the Holy See, and I call on Malaysia.

Mr. Chairperson, Rapporteur, Malaysia congratulates you on your election and thanks you for your continued leadership and efforts to facilitate our deliberations throughout this important process. We welcome the convening of this 12th session and reaffirm Malaysia's commitment to engaging constructively towards an international legally binding instrument on business and human rights. We value inclusive, transparent, and state-led discussions that build convergence and broad support. Malaysia launched its National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights 2025-2030 in August last year. It is guided by the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. It brings together government agencies and stakeholders across governance, labor, and environment, with priorities including human rights due diligence, capacity building and practical guidance for businesses. Drawing on this experience, Malaysia hopes that the future instrument will complement national implementation efforts and provide clear, workable provisions that take account of domestic legal frameworks, institutional capacities, and development circumstances. The needs of small and medium enterprises should be given careful consideration, as well as effective protection for those affected by business-related human rights abuses. Accountability, access to justice, and responsible business conduct should remain the primary goals of this draft instrument. International cooperation, technical assistance, and capacity building will also be essential to translating commitments into meaningful outcomes. Malaysia looks forward to engaging constructively in this session and working with all delegations towards a balanced and implementable instrument. I thank you.

Thank you very much, Malaysia. I now give the floor to the United Arab Emirates.

UAE aligns itself with the statement made by the GCC. The UAE remains committed to engaging constructively and in a spirit of cooperation in the negotiations. We believe that a number of provisions in the current draft and the suggested redrafting of articles 1 to 3 and 12 to 24 would benefit from further clarification and careful consideration. In particular, we are of the view that definitions and obligations should be formulated with sufficient precision and clarity. The scope of the instrument should remain within the obligations expressly accepted by states and should be consistent with general international law. We also attach importance to ensuring that the instrument takes due account of the diversity of domestic legal frameworks. Provisions relating to jurisdiction, judicial cooperation and interstate assistance should therefore be appropriately qualified and should not be understood as creating automatic or unrestricted obligations. particularly where these may have implications for national judicial systems or established domestic legal procedures. We would also emphasize the importance of ensuring coherence between this instrument and the broader framework of international law. Nothing in the text should be interpreted as prejudicing the legal effect of existing treaties or as establishing an unintended hierarchy between international instruments. The UAE, therefore, stands ready to continue working constructively with all delegations to identify balanced language that provides greater legal certainty. And we believe that addressing these issues will contribute to a clearer and broadly acceptable instrument.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much to the United Arab Emirates. I now give the floor to Germany. to be followed by Egypt, South Africa and Cuba. Germany first.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, rapporteur. Germany aligns itself to the statement delivered by the European Union. We would like to express our appreciation to Ecuador, the Group of Friends of the Chair, and the business and human rights community for their continued engagement and efforts to advance this process. Germany remains strongly committed to the promotion and protection of human rights worldwide and has closely followed the LBI negotiations since their launch in 2014, we also followed the 11th round of negotiation last year. We appreciate the Chair-Rapporteur's continued efforts to advance the negotiations and facilitate constructive dialogue among all stakeholders. We welcome the ongoing engagement in this process and look forward to further discussions aimed at identifying common ground and making progress in the negotiations. We reaffirm that all human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated. Gender equality, non-discrimination and the protection of persons in vulnerable situations remain fundamental to our approach. The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and their three pillars continue to guide our efforts to promote responsible business conduct. The German Supply Chain Act, which has been in place for almost four years now, and the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive both contain due diligence provisions and provisions on access to remedy based on the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. We believe that they can be a source of inspiration for the ongoing LBI negotiations. We look forward to constructive discussions and continue efforts to find common ground and build broad consensus. Thank you, Mr. Chair Rapporteur.

Thank you, Germany. I now give the floor to Egypt.

Thank you, Excellency Chair-Rapporteur. I wish to join other previous speakers in congratulating you on your re-election as Chair-Rapporteur. Your re-election reflects the confidence placed in your leadership and in your ability to guide our deliberations with wisdom and impartiality. Egypt reaffirms its full support to the mandate of the working group established by HRC resolution 26/9, While recognizing the important contribution of transnational corporations to global investment and development, we remain firmly convinced that the elaboration of a legally binding instrument to regulate their activities would strengthen the universal, interdependent and indivisible nature of human rights. Such an instrument would foster an appropriate balance between legitimate private interests and public interest, thereby contributing to equal, inclusive, and sustainable development. In our view, notwithstanding the significant contribution of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, voluntary and non-binding frameworks alone are insufficient. They are insufficient to ensure effective accountability for activities of transnational corporations. This is particularly evident where transnational corporation business operations may be complicit in human rights violations in context of armed conflict, foreign occupation, and in situations where governmental oversight, regulatory capacity, and rule of law are unable to provide adequate protection. A legally binding instrument is therefore essential to help address existing gaps and promote consistent standards of accountability. Regarding the scope, Egypt reiterates its long-standing position, expressed consistently during previous sessions, that the instrument should remain faithful to the mandate set forth in the Human Rights Council resolution establishing it, to remain focused on the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises of transnational character, and not to be extended to local, small, and medium-sized enterprises. We also thank you, Mr. Chair Rapporteur, for circulating the paper containing suggested revisions of selected provisions. Egypt is continuing to consider these proposals and recognize that a number of them may make a valuable contribution to bridging divergent views on certain provisions of the instrument. At the same time, we believe that the updated draft should remain the basis of our formal negotiations Any proposals advanced by the chair rapporteur may be incorporated into the draft once consensus has been reached. In our view, this approach best preserves the considerable work and progress achieved over the past 12 years while allowing the process to move forward constructively. Finally, Egypt underscores the importance of safeguarding the state-led nature of this intergovernmental working group. We remain committed to supporting its work and engaging constructively with all delegations. I shall not forget to thank colleagues from the permanent mission of Ecuador, the legal experts, and the secretariat for their incessant, valuable work in supporting our progress. Thank you, Mr. Chair of the.

Thank you very much, Egypt. I now give the floor to South Africa.

Thank you, Mr. Chair of the. Just this past Friday, Justice Navi Pillay was announced as the recipient of the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize. A dedication to human rights, survivors of international crimes, and defenders of international criminal justice should encourage us to secure effective remedies through these negotiations. We thank you, Mr. Chair, for your textual proposals and efforts to advance this process. As a co-sponsor of the Human Rights Council Resolution 26/9, South Africa remains committed to addressing accountability gaps associated with transnational corporations and other business enterprises of a transnational character. We urge delegations to resolve the scope debate consistently with that mandate, covering activities undertaken through relevant subsidiaries and business relationships within the transnational value chains. We support an agreed common human rights standard, while preserving stronger applicable protections. Our approach must remain victim-centered, addressing barriers faced by women, children, affected communities and persons or groups in situation of vulnerability or marginalization. The instrument must require prevention, ensure accountability, and strengthen international cooperation. We stress the need for heightened protection in conflict-affected areas, including situations of occupation. South Africa also emphasizes the importance of meaningful participation of affected communities, workers, trade unions, civil society, and other relevant stakeholders throughout this process. We recognize that these negotiations raise complex legal and policy questions. Our task is to resolve them through clear obligations that states can implement and enforce through effective instruments that strengthen human rights protection and closes accountability gaps in accordance with state regulatory responsibilities. In this vein, South Africa stands ready to work with all delegations to advance these negotiations towards a legally binding instrument that removes barriers to justice and secures effective remedies for affected people and communities without further delay. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much, South Africa. I give the floor to Cuba.

Thank you very much, Chair. Allow me to begin my statement congratulating you on your re-election, and we reiterate the support of the Cuban delegation during all sessions of this working group. Cuba believes that in the shortest possible terms, we should be adopting a legally binding international instrument regulating the activities of transnational corporations and other business stakeholders in the field of human rights. It is urgent and necessary to adopt such a document. We see a context of increasing globalization where 40 percent of global wealth is concentrated in fewer than 150 transnational corporations. We have to have effective accountability mechanisms by transnational corporations that are responsible or accomplices of human rights violations. We need to guarantee the investigation and prosecution of such corporations, and there must be compensation for damages against individuals, groups, and the environment. Our delegation welcomes the summary report of the intersessional thematic consultations held by the Working Group in 2026. We also welcome the addendum to the document, which includes proposals from the chair on the various proposed elements of the legally binding instrument. As the addendum clearly recognizes, these are proposals that don't have any legal status, nor do they replace the proposed legally binding instrument, which includes texts proposed by states during the 9th, 10th, and 11th sessions, and which are the basis for negotiations. We consider that this text includes positive elements, particularly as regards the access of victims of human rights abuses committed by businesses, the access to effective remedies for them. However, it includes amendments which our delegation cannot go along with, and our position must not be understood as acceptance of any of the provisions of this document. We reiterate that there must be strict observance of resolution 26/9 of the Human Rights Council. The language of this resolution cannot be renegotiated by this group. CUBA continues to believe that we must foster the participation of civil society organizations in this whole process. Their valuable contribution from the inception of this process have given new life to this working group, and their proposals must be listened to and heeded. Cuba will continue to make a constructive contribution to this session of the working group, and I thank you.

Thank you, Cuba. I now give the floor to the European Union, followed by China, Mexico and Pakistan.

The EU has the floor first. The EU and its member states would like to thank you and the Office of the High Commissioner for organizing this session. As we mark this year the 15th anniversary of the UN Guiding Principles and 50 years since endorsement of the OECD Guidelines on Multinational Enterprises, we reaffirm our strong commitment to ensure that business activity goes hand in hand with the respect for human rights, including labor rights, as well as environmental protection. In the last couple of years, the EU has progressively advanced the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles through a broad and complementary body of legislation, with the aim of preventing and addressing harms, protecting victims, and providing legal certainty for businesses. Legislation includes directives on human rights and environmental due diligence and reporting, and a regulation banning products made with forced labour from the EU market. These are complemented by legislation on protecting consumers from social and greenwashing, as well as on the sustainable sourcing of critical raw materials. Some of these instruments have recently been revised under the so-called sustainability omnibus adopted on 18 March 2026. While simplification work is still ongoing in other areas, the objective is clear. to preserve ambitious sustainability and responsible business conduct goals while making sure that the rules remain proportionate and workable for companies, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises. Continuous alignment with international frameworks of the UN, ILO, and OECD have been a key consideration. Besides promoting respect of human rights, it is increasingly recognized that responsible business conduct helps companies to build resilience, manage risks, and attract talent and investment. Economic evidence also points to the financial benefits for companies that strengthen their human rights performance. The EU is now steadily moving into the implementation phase of this ambitious body of legislation. We have stepped up our dialogue with stakeholders. Information is now easily accessible to the EU due diligence navigator, operational since March 2026. Mr. Chair, rapporteur, we would like actually to thank you for organising these intersessional consultations. They allow for deeper conversation, including on issues where views continue to differ. We commend your efforts to put forward compromise proposals on that basis and look forward to receiving the revised draft LBI in 2027. As we have stated in previous sessions, the EU supports efforts to develop an international legal framework that strengthens 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, it 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 established international frameworks, be developed in an inclusive manner, be clear, balanced and practically implementable. Its due diligence obligations should follow a risk-based and proportionate approach, enhancing the protection for victims while avoiding unnecessary burdens on companies, especially small and medium enterprises. An international instrument would help reduce regulatory fragmentation, facilitate due diligence by companies operating across borders and contribute to level playing field for companies that already follow the international standards but face competition from companies that actually do not. The EU stands ready to continue working with you, Mr. Chair Rapporteur, and with all other partners to support the development of legally sound, balanced, and effective rules on business and human rights capable of delivering meaningful prevention, protection, and remedy at international level. We remain fully committed to engaging constructively in this process and ready to share our own approach and experience. You can count on us. I thank you.

Thank you very much, the European Union. I now give the floor to China.

Mr. President, I would like to congratulate you on your election as the chair. On behalf of the Chinese delegation, I would like to express our appreciation for your work and secretariat over the past year. Our delegation will actively participate in the work under your leadership. China attaches great importance to the promotion and protection of human rights and integrates human rights protection into the entire process of advancing Chinese modernization. This year marks the fifth anniversary of China's proposal of the Global Development Initiative and the first anniversary of its proposal of the Global Governance Initiative, which has always Advocating the safeguarding human rights through security, promoting human rights through development, and advancing human rights through cooperation, we stand ready to work with all countries to continuously improve global human rights governance and jointly advance the cause of human rights throughout the world. Chair. The Chinese government has always attached great importance to safeguarding human rights in transnational business activities and has taken proactive and effective measures to promote the implementation of the three pillars of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Regarding the state duty to protect human rights, between 2021 and 2025, China fully implemented its fourth national human rights action plan. completing all the 181 targets and achieving comprehensive improvements in human rights protection. In June this year, guided by the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, and relevant international human rights conventions, while taking into account China's actual national context, the Chinese government formulated and issued its fifth National Human Rights Action Plan, covering the period 2026 to 2030. The plan sets out tasks and measures for respecting, protecting, and promoting human rights. Regarding the state's corporate responsibility to respect human rights, promoting corporate fulfillment of human rights responsibilities has been incorporated into our national human rights action plan. Since last year, the Chinese government has issued policy documents requiring the companies to respect the host country's customs and laws, actively fulfill their social responsibilities, and strengthen compliance systems for their overseas operations. In March this year, China adopted the Ecological Environment Code. which is the first code bearing the name ecological environment in the world. It explicitly stipulates that companies have obligations to protect the environment and ecosystems, conserve resources, and pursue low carbon development, thereby better safeguarding public health and people's environmental rights. With regard to access to remedy, China continues to improve its legislation and strengthen obligations to provide remedies and assume liability for compensation in cases where business activities have infringed labor rights. China effectively safeguards workers' rights to seek mediation, arbitration, and to bring legal proceedings. Chair, this year marks the 20th anniversary of the establishment of the UN Human Rights Council and the 40th anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration on the Right to Development. Development and human rights are both important pillars of the UN. The international community should give prominence to the right to development on the multilateral human rights agenda and translate the vision of SDGs into tangible and accessible realities for everyone. As the world's largest developing country, China has always regarded the rights to subsistence and development as the foremost basic human rights. China welcomes the positive role played by transnational corporations in poverty alleviation, economic development, improving people's livelihoods, and accelerating progress towards the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. At the same time, we note that certain transnational business activities have negative impacts on human rights. China supports negotiations within the UN framework towards a legally binding instrument to coordinate regulation and compatibility among countries and promote and protect all human rights. China believes that negotiations on the legally binding instrument must adhere to the principle of fairness and take due account of rights to development alongside other human rights. while effectively safeguarding human rights and ensuring adequate protection and remedies for victims. The instrument must also fully respect the judicial sovereignty of states, conform to internationally recognized legal principles, and enhance its compatibility with international law and domestic legal systems, thereby providing transnational corporations with a stable and predictable business environment. The working group should always uphold the principles of state ownership and consensus, fully respect the concerns of all countries, and build the broadest possible consensus to ensure that the future legally binding instrument will enjoy widespread support and universal compliance. On core issues, including the scope of application of instrument, the working group should strictly adhere to the mandate set out in the Council Resolution 26/9. We look forward to working with all parties to achieve positive progress at this session. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you very much. And I'll give the floor to Mexico.

Thank you very much, Chair-Rapporteur. Mexico echoes the congratulations to you on your election as Chair-Rapporteur of this 12th session of the Intergovernmental Working Group. We trust in your skills and in your experience to steer our work into a safe harbor, just like you did in previous sessions. We welcome the convening to this session. And, uh, the thematic consultations that were held during the intersessional period by you and your team with OHCHR were very welcome, uh, as they were held throughout 2026 pursuant to decision 56/116. Such consultations yielded deeper, more in-depth discussions and were able to tackle technical and legal considerations. As we said previously, Mexico is convinced about the need to promote the respect and promotion of human rights in the context of business activities. We are aware that there are business practices that can have a direct or indirect impact on the full of human rights, particularly of those persons that find themselves in a vulnerable situation. For this reason, we have always supported the initiatives on such issues that have been held at regional and international fora. The Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights adopted 15 years ago are one of the best examples of this cooperation. The guiding principles are a solid basis and guidance that have had a significant impact on the respect of human rights in business activities, but despite that, they are not enough. We have to have clear rules at national and global level to make sure that national and transnational corporations conduct their activities in a way that is more respectful of human rights and avoiding the negative impact of their works. This is something that would benefit not just the general population and victims, but also the states and the corporations themselves. That is why we say once again that a legally binding instrument, hand in hand with the guiding principles, can lead to better human rights protection in business activities. It would strengthen legal certainty and ensure that victims of human rights violations would have access to justice and to remedies. particularly when faced with transnational corporations that are operational in different countries with different legal systems. Throughout the different sessions of this working group and the thematic consultations held pursuant to decision 56/116, we've made significant progress in revising the content of this draft instrument. We welcome the proposals made by the chair rapporteurship to include different comments into the various elements of the draft binding instrument. And we look forward to the discussions that will be had on all these proposals, hoping to have full transparency so that we can include these proposals within the draft text. As you said in your introductory statement, at the end of this week, we will have fully considered all of the different elements of the draft binding instruments. We believe it is time to have a new draft including the different positions expressed throughout our discussions and which will be something that we can have as a basis for our discussions in 2027. We trust that this session will be held in a transparent manner, bearing in mind all the comments that have been made throughout the work of the intergovernmental working group. Finally, we commend the contributions made by the legal experts who have supported us throughout the process, and we welcome their being here for this session. We also commend the contribution of civil society organisations that have actively participated in our discussions. Chairman, rapporteur, as always, you will be able to count on Mexico's constructive participation in this process. Thank you.

Many thanks to Mexico. I now give the floor to Pakistan, followed by Costa Rica and Iran. Pakistan has the floor first.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, rapporteur. Pakistan congratulates you on your re-election and thanks your Excellency for your continued stewardship of this process. My delegation also thanks colleagues at the Permanent Mission of Ecuador and the Secretariat for their support, as well as input from the legal experts. Pakistan's long-standing support for this working group's mandate remains consistent with the recognition in Human Rights Council Resolution 26/9 of the existing gap in international law on regulating the human rights impact of TNCs and other business enterprises of a transnational character. Mr. Chair, rapporteur, we affirm that while States have the primary responsibility to promote and protect human rights, all stakeholders, including transnational corporations, must respect and contribute to safeguarding human rights. The elaboration of this LBI should not be a vehicle for translating the UN Guiding Principles into a binding framework, but to ensure that economic activity across borders does not come at the expense of human dignity and that victims have access to remedy. Pakistan has consistently emphasized the scope of this legally binding instrument must be clearly limited to the mandate entrusted by resolution 26/9. It is necessary to differentiate between TNCs and other businesses of a transnational character on the one hand, and small and medium enterprises or local businesses on the other. Without such distinction, the proposed LBI would risk creating compliance burdens that fall disproportionately on those least able to bear them, without addressing the structural accountability gap that motivated this process. Mr. Chair, the development of a new draft should build on negotiations of the draft text during recent sessions of the working group and remain focused on the mandate that was entrusted to the council. We note that the conference room paper that was presented offers useful food for thought, and we thank you for presenting it. It contains elements that could potentially add value to the updated draft, but only after deliberation and consensus within the working group. I assure you of our constructive support, Mr. Chair, and I thank you once again.

Thank you, Pakistan. I call on Costa Rica.

Thank you, Chairperson, Rapporteur. Costa Rica also welcomes the representatives of the indigenous peoples, civil society, academia, the business world, trade unions and human rights defenders. as well as environmental human rights defenders and other stakeholders here with us today. My country is happy to participate in this 12th session and thanks the chairperson and the secretariat, as well as the delegation of Ecuador for its leadership and for the draft text with clear proposals that will allow us to make good progress. We recognize the positive impact of human rights in business activities, be they TNCs or not. For us, human rights are a positive tool which provide protection for all, be they workers or impacted communities, and bring verifiable value in terms of the economic, social and environmental contribution of businesses. Working in compliance with human rights means more stable operations, less conflict, better risk management, more solid relations with local, regional and global communities, and greater trust of investors, consumers and the states. Incorporating human rights in business activity is intelligent and responsible in terms of long-term sustainability. So having clear shared standards is to the benefit of all and this must provide access to justice for those affected. States have the need to legislate and business must act with responsibility and have clear rules. We welcome the process and the goals established in these sessions, which are transparent and accessible to all states, civil society, indigenous peoples, academia and the business world. And this allows us to pursue a result. We welcome the methods and practices established by the presidency, which set out a clear process with proposals seeking balance and impartiality, with human rights at their core. Chairperson, Rapporteur, Costa Rica emphasizes the importance of the environmental dimension being fully reflected in the discussions on the instrument. since a clear, healthy, sustainable environment is crucial for human beings and for international law. Otherwise, humans cannot enjoy the right to life, health, water, work, food, education and culture. A large part of the environmental impact is related to business activity. sometimes transboundary and more affecting vulnerable communities. Incorporating and mainstreaming the environmental approach is legally entirely justifiable. The ICJ, in an advisory opinion on climate change, confirmed that states must act with due diligence, governing the actions of private actors as well. In the American context, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, in advisory opinions, which are binding on Costa Rica, established a link between environment and human rights and the state obligation to prevent and manage damage caused by business. emphasizing the importance of the human right to a clear, clean, healthy, sustainable environment. Finally, Chairperson, Rapporteur, given that we will be concluding the reading of all of the articles, we emphasize that the Chair, in this 12th session, we'll need to prepare an updated draft based on the discussions of this week and the relevant inputs discussed at the informal consultations of the previous sessions. Allow me to assure you of the constructive support of Costa Rica, Chairperson. Thank you.

Muchas gracias.

I thank Costa Rica and I call on the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Iran would like to congratulate you on your re-election as chair rapporteur and express its appreciation to you and the permanent mission of Ecuador for your continued effort in advancing these negotiations. and preparing the proposed text. We believe that a balanced and effective instrument must respect the sovereignty of states, their national law and legal systems, while taking into account the different capacity of development country. It must also reflect the reality on the ground and address the main challenges affecting its implementation. In this regard, ignoring unilateral coercive measures, particularly sanctions and blockade, means overlooking major obstacles faced by affected countries. These are real challenges. Their negative impact on human rights, international cooperation and access to essential resources have been documented in the reports of the Special Rapporteur on unilateral coercive measures, in particular article 13. on international cooperation should explicitly address the obstacle arising from unilateral coercive measure. Mr. Chair, we also believe that particular attention should be given to the situation in the occupied Palestinian territory, especially the involvement of business enterprises in illegal Israeli settlements and their impact on the human rights of the Palestinian people. These issues should be adequately reflected in the instrument. We hope this important issue will be considered in the further development of the text. Iran stand ready to engage constructively in the negotiations with a balanced and cooperative approach.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Muchas gracias.

I thank Iran, and I call on Saudi Arabia to be football France, the UK and Kenya. Saudi Arabia.

Thank you, Mr. President.

The delegation of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia would like to express its solidarity with the Council of Cooperation of the Gulf Arab States.

Mr. Chair, we align ourselves with the GCC statement. We would like to express our gratitude to your continuous efforts in leading the work of the working group, and namely your efforts in drafting the report for our consultations for 2026, and also the document with your proposals for a number of obligations of this LBI. This is a useful basis for our dialogue. in this session. We hope that this session will allow us to achieve progress towards a balanced LBI that promotes human rights in the sake of transnational business activities in a manner that takes into account the interests of all countries and consecrates the principles of justice, sovereignty, and legal stability. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia would like to mention that its observations and proposals during this session are submitted in a preliminary manner without prejudice to our final decision vis-a-vis the draft LBI in its totality. We appreciate the proposals to improve the text, especially to link the definition of human rights abuses to the activities of business enterprises, and also the importance of distinction between abuses linked to business activities and abuses linked to the activities of the state and to eliminate the definition of concerned country mechanisms and to abandon the guiding lists in defining business activities and to keep some flexibility in distinction between various business enterprises according to the size, the context and business activity. We think that a number of proposed formulations require more study, more examination and amendment, and we mentioned the most important ones. First, regarding the context of the LBI, it is very important for us to observe the mandate as per HRC resolution 26/9 and to limit the obligations to trends transnational corporations and other business enterprises without including local business enterprises, and that the rights should be linked to the commitments observed by the countries in the treaties they joined. According to the rules of international law and principles of international law, we cannot compel countries to fulfill something that they did not commit to. This LBI is about business activities and should not be extended to the activities, uh, undertaken by countries in exercising their government authorities, and this, uh, should, uh, could be, um… Contrary to the immunity system, as to the business-owned enterprises, they are linked to the obligations of the LBI if their business activities are under the LBI on an equal footing with the private sector. Second, regarding the clarity of definitions and their accuracy, we confirm that main definitions, namely the definition of victim, negative impact on human rights, human rights abuses, business activities, business relationships, and right to remedy. All these definitions should be based on clear criteria with the possibility to consider the possible impact. The LBI should also, uh, and the definition should also be able to dis- distinguish between the state responsibility and the behavior of business acti- uh, uh, enterprises and that investors should not bear the brunt of activities they do not control. Third, regarding the respect of, uh, the mandate and independence of the judiciary, we think that the… promotion of mutual legal assistance should be based on the internal laws of the countries, and this is also regulated by national legislations and ad hoc agreements. Fourth, regarding observance of international commitments, we reiterate that any text should not bring prejudice to existing international agreements. namely for also countries that are not part of the LPI, namely in two fields, trade and investment, according to the Vienna agreement on the law of the conventions. And we need to work on preserving the legal stability, legal certainty, and to support investment climate. Fifth, regarding the voluntary character of cooperation and financial arrangements, international cooperation should be based on a voluntary agreement, a balanced one, according to the priorities of the countries, their development needs. including the International Fund for Victims. All this should be voluntary. Finally, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia supports responsible commercial activities and to have also access to remedies. However, the success of any LBI is linked to the balance between the interests of all relevant stakeholders, respect of the state sovereignty, independence of their judiciary and regulations and to take into account the various levels of development and national circumstances. We will submit, respectively, our proposal to the various articles during the interactive dialogue, and our objective is to achieve balance and to achieve a more, a clearer LBI. We reiterated our, we reiterate our positive interaction and constructive engagement with the working group And we aim for a dialogue that aims to be based on a greater consensus to achieve our common goal, that is to protect human rights under the activities of TNCs and OBEs.

I thank Saudi Arabia. And I call on France.

Thank you, Chairperson. France aligns with the European Union statement. We are very committed to businesses identifying risks, preventing and remedying human rights violations and violations of fundamental freedoms, health and environment. We have adopted since 2017 a law on vigilance by businesses and prevention of serious harm to human rights. At the European level, we supported the adoption of essential texts and simplification through the sustainability omnibus adopted in March 2026, which makes it possible to address human rights and the environment without placing too heavy a burden on small businesses. We are now addressing reporting for larger businesses at the national level, we conform with the guiding principles and the ILO standards, and we support the global compact, which seeks to align businesses on 10 principles arising from core treaties of the United Nations. We fully support the draft LBI. on transnational corporations and other businesses in the context of human rights. As the EU stated, we would wish a balanced approach in this group to ensure that the instrument allows reasonable competition with respect for human rights and the environment without placing a disproportionate burden on SMEs. It must be realistic and clear in order better to protect rights holders and to allow victims to have remedies. We welcome the new language on certain provisions. And like the group of Friends, we also welcome the presence of other stakeholders here. I thank you.

Muchas gracias.

I thank Friends. And I call on the UK.

Congratulations on your re-election. The United Kingdom would like to thank.

You, your team and OHCHR for the preparations for this session, and all delegations and stakeholders for their continued engagement.

The UK.

Remains firmly committed to promoting responsible business conduct, preventing business-related human rights abuses and supporting access to effective remedy.

We are also committed to ensuring that businesses respect human rights, support sustainable development and contribute to more resilient and inclusive economies.

We will continue to engage in the process constructively. We recognise the potential value of an instrument that strengthens international co-operation and supports better outcomes.

For those who are affected by business-related human rights abuses. However, for any instrument to secure broad support and be effective in practice, it must be clear, legally.

Coherent and workable for states, businesses and right holders alike. As we discuss the chair's suggested redrafting of certain articles.

This week, we will focus on ensuring that the proposed provisions complement existing legal frameworks and can be.

Implemented in practice.

As others have said, we consider it important that the draft.

Treaty under negotiation remains aligned with established and consensus international standards, including the UN guiding principles on business and human rights, with their emphasis on prevention, responsible business conduct and effective remedy.

We will continue to intervene on general points of principle, but given the relatively short time to consider the chair's.

Proposals, we are continuing to assess them in greater depth and we will reserve our position where appropriate.

The UK remains committed to working constructively with all.

Delegations to build consensus where possible and to identify practical solutions to the issues that remain under discussion.

We look forward to a productive week.

I thank the UK, and I call on Kenya, Qatar, Peru, Uruguay, and Algeria. Kenya, please.

Mr. Chair-Rapporteur, Kenya congratulates you on your election as Chair-Rapporteur of the Working Group and welcomes the convening of its 12th session and assures you of our delegation's full cooperation throughout the deliberations. Kenya recognizes the important contribution of business enterprises to economic growth, employment creation, and sustainable development, while emphasizing the needs to ensure that business activities are conducted in a manner that respect human rights. At the national level, Kenya has undertaken measures to promote responsible business conduct, including through its National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights 2020-2025, which seeks to advance the implementation of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The plan is anchored on the state's duty to protect human rights, the corporate responsibility to respect human rights, and access to effective remedies. Kenya takes note of the progress made through the intersessional thematic consultations and looks forward to constructive discussions on the provisions under consideration during this session. In this regard, Kenya emphasizes the importance of an inclusive and transparent negotiation process that takes into account the different legal frameworks and national circumstances of States while seeking to strengthen the protection of human rights in the context of business activities. Kenya remains committed to engaging constructively in the deliberations of the working group. I thank you.

I thank Kenya and I call on Qatar.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The State of Qatar would like, at the beginning, to express its sincere gratitude to the efforts deployed within the session. And we would like to thank the presidency, the legal experts, the secretariat, and all those who supported the work of the working group. The State of Qatar would like to align itself with the statement on behalf of the GCC, as well as the statement of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. and we support their positions and observations regarding the LBI. Mr. Chair, we would like to reiterate the importance of pursuing constructive dialogue and promoting cooperation between countries in order to achieve an LBI that is balanced, clear, and takes into account the various national legal systems, respect the state sovereignty, jurisdiction in a way that promotes human rights and business activities. In this context, the state of Qatar reiterates the importance of having an LBI based on human rights norms, namely respect of sovereignty and staying away from any obligations that would extend jurisdiction beyond national borders or to impose things that are not respective of international law. It is also important to take into account the various different legal system traditions as well as jurisdiction and others. We need to have a stable and clear legal environment for business activities. It is important also to have an interactive dialogue based on consensus, taking into account observations of the countries in order to have an LBI based on a wider consensus and to achieve the goals that we are all aiming for under this working group. Thank you.

I thank Qatar, and I call on Peru.

Thank you, Chairperson. At the outset, I echo the congratulations on your election and leadership, and we recognize your efforts and those of your delegation to have a negotiating process that's inclusive and transparent. We also welcome the intercessional work, which meant we could keep examining the proposals for the draft instrument. My country believes that it is crucial to ensure that business activity is out in compliance with human rights, and that there are adequate prevention and due diligence, accountability and reparations mechanisms when violations take place. Peru reaffirms its commitment to the guiding principles on business and human rights. These are a cornerstone of state action, those of business and the work to be carried out. Five years ago, we adopted the first national plan of action on business and human rights in Peru, and the third in Latin America, developed with 132 state institutions, as well as business and civil society, trade unions, indigenous peoples, and other actors. We welcome their presence here today and the active participation in these meetings. We believe that progress in drawing up an LBI must contribute to strengthening this framework and to build on the guiding principles, as well as bringing added value with a more coherent application of the existing standards. In these negotiations, my country believes it is crucial to continue working to add clarity to the text and ensure that definitions are clear. We must ensure that the legalities are compatible with states' international obligations and with international systems. It is crucial to continue building on the dialogue for prevention and due diligence, as well as access to justice and reparations. And for developing countries also, international cooperation is an important aspect. I reiterate that my country will continue to participate constructively in these negotiations. I thank you.

Muchas gracias al Peru. I thank Peru, and I call on Uruguay.

Thank you, President. Uruguay welcomes the holding of the 12th session and reiterates its commitment to making progress towards an LBI on business and human rights. After several years of work, it is time to achieve substantive results that reflect the complexity of business activities and make it possible to address their impact on human rights. The value of the instrument will also depend on its ability to contribute to ensuring that business activities and human rights violations are duly addressed and that affected persons can have effective access to justice and reparations. The instrument must clearly reflect the obligations of states on human rights. and the responsibility of business to respect these and contribute to building the state's capacities to prevent and address impacts arising from business activity. We welcome in particular the work done in the intercessional period and the efforts made by the Chair to facilitate dialogue among delegations, identify convergences and promote an increasingly substantive exchange on the remaining issues. We welcome the preparation of the proposals by the chair-rapporteur, which are a useful tool to guide this session's discussions and explore possibilities for progress in the negotiations. Finally, we reaffirm our commitment to continue contributing constructively to the negotiations, convinced that it is possible to achieve an LBI which is solid, effective and able to strengthen the protection of human rights in the context of business activity. I thank you.

I thank Uruguay. And I call on Algeria, to be followed by Colombia.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, Rapporteur.

The Algerian delegation congratulates you

on the organization and conduct of the work of this 12th session of the Open-ended Intergovernmental Working Group. and reaffirms its constructive commitment to the process of elaborating an international legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights. My delegation takes note with interest of the presentation of the document entitled "Addendum to the Summary Report of 2026 Inter-Session Thematic Consultations".

We welcome the spirit of listening and the synthesis efforts deployed during

the 2026 intersessional consultation in order to clarify the text and bring the perspectives of delegations closer together. Mr. Chair, Algeria approached this session in a constructive spirit of dialogue. Our approach remains grounded in the respect of the mandate under Human Rights Council resolution 26/9, with shared commitment to achieving an effective international legal framework to regulate the activities of transnational corporations and ensure adequate protection throughout value chains.

For my delegation, the success of this process hinges on maintaining a fundamental balance between guaranteeing the right of

victims and respecting states of sovereignty, preserving their policy space, and taking into account the diversity of our national legal systems. Mr. Chair, Algeria affirms full readiness to participate actively and constructively in the thematic discussion of this session and in the detailed examination

of the proposals contained in the addendum

in order to support your efforts toward consolidating a consensual, solid and operational text.

I thank you.

Thank you very much, Algeria. I give the floor to Colombia.

Thank you, Chair Rapporteur. Allow me first of all to congratulate you on your election and to say that Colombia very much trusts in your guidance during this process. We also welcome the informal consultations which were held in the intercessional period. These were useful opportunities for exchange. And we also commend the efforts of the pre- of the chairmanship to find areas of common ground to bring positions nearer and make proposals which can act as a basis for this and future negotiations. Colombia is reviewing the Chairman's text and proposals very closely, and we're doing the same with all the documents for these negotiations, looking to future participation as well. We will be completing our consideration during this session. We will monitor closely and follow the developments of discussions. restating our commitment to protecting human rights in the context of business activities. We wish you well in your work, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you, Colombia. Are there any other delegations from states wishing to make a general statement?

If there are no

requests for the floor, I am happy to give the floor to other stakeholders who wish to make general statements. As always, I remind everyone of the importance of holding this session in an environment that will promote efficacy and co-operation. and I thank everyone for their cooperation, States and other relevant stakeholders. Particularly ensuring that the statements focus on the documents which have been prepared and circulated for this session and that they are relevant to the stage we are in the process, thinking forward to the way we'll conduct our work throughout this week of work. I now give the floor to the International Chamber of Commerce.

Hello? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As the institutional representative of companies worldwide, ICC recognizes the critical importance of ensuring that businesses have the knowledge, skills, and tools to respect human rights. ICC is a global organization founded over 100 years ago, the only business organization holding permanent observer status at the UN. ICC champions international trade and multilateral cooperation as vital instruments for the greater good, specifically driving sustainable development and ensuring global peace. Ensuring that people whose lives are impacted by corporate activities are treated with respect is a core tenet of ICC's vision. We acknowledge the efforts being put in place behind the work to develop a legally binding instrument on business and human rights. In terms of the draft treaty negotiations, while the technical discussions have been more focused and there's a clearer timetable for the revision, The prospects for substantive agreement depend on whether governments can resolve their differences, including on important issue of scope. For any instrument to succeed in this area, it needs to have the engagement of a critical mass of countries. We would like to respectfully underscore our concern, notwithstanding the considerable work being put into the development of the draft, on the continuing lack of traction and participation from many states over 10 years on from the adoption of the resolution, the UN resolution to develop this instrument. ICC continues to believe that the UN guiding principles on business and human rights represent a transformational roadmap to a future where people and businesses can thrive together. And the work of embedding the UNGPs has been spreading throughout corporate practices worldwide. It's imperative that we continue to work together to accelerate these trends. We'd like to take the opportunity to emphasize that any frameworks, future frameworks, be internationally consistent and align fully with the standards embodied in the UNGPs. And we underscore our view that any potential standard for business activities need to apply to all businesses, not just international business. We value the importance of meaningful consultations where different views are taken into account, including the views of business that, after all, is a key stakeholder group concerned by the proposed instrument. I thank you.

Muchas gracias.

Thank you very much. I give the floor to the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions.

Mr. Chairperson Rapporteur, this statement is submitted by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions, GANHRI, comprising 119 national human rights institutions. GANHRI reiterates its strong support for the adoption and implementation of a legally binding instrument on business and human rights. Such an instrument could address gaps in protection and accountability within global value chains, particularly with regard to transnational business activities and their impact on human rights and the environment. During the 11th session, GUNRIH submitted a position paper outlining its views on the updated draft, inviting member states to consider its recommendations. GENRI welcomes the progress made in this regard, including the growing recognition of both judicial and non-judicial access to remedy mechanisms under Article 7 and the need to allocate appropriate support and resources to these mechanisms under Article 12. GENRI welcomes this recognition and calls for the role of Paris Principles-compliant NHRIs as independent monitoring mechanisms to be recognized explicitly in the draft. NHRIs can monitor the human rights impacts of cross-border business activities along value and supply chains. They can also address transnational complaints and facilitate access to effective remedies for rights holders. States should engage NHRI's throughout the negotiation process and invite them to contribute their expertise at national level meetings. GANRI believes that NHRI's are well positioned to support technical cooperation and capacity building among relevant stakeholders, particularly with regard to international cooperation. As independent institutions mandated to promote and protect human rights, including in business contexts, NHIs play an important role in preventing abuses and fostering access to remedy. Through their daily engagement with States, businesses and other relevant stakeholders, such as national contact points, NCPs, for responsible business conduct, NHRIs provide guidance and raise awareness of the human rights impacts of business activities. They also facilitate bottom-up participation, enabling the voices of marginalized rights holders to be heard. SCANRI is fully committed to contributing its expertise to strengthen international normative action on business and human rights and ensure the LBI strengthens protection, accountability, and the rights of all. I thank you.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the National Advisory Commission on Human Rights.

Chairman Rapporteur, the National Advisory Commission for Human Rights welcomes the holding of this 12th session. We are following the negotiation process very closely and pursuant to our NHRI mandate, we are advising France As you have emphasised at the third intersession thematic consultation held last May, 2026 should be a watershed in making progress in negotiations. This 12th session should allow us to conclude all of the provisions of the updated draft published in 23. pursuant to the methodology of Decision 56116. And our Commission thanks you for your efforts and thanks the legal experts for their valuable support. Given the urgency to act in order to have human rights respecting value change and respecting the environment, we must pay particular attention to the guiding principles, particularly the third pillar, as recently reminded by the High Commissioners and the Working Group on Business and Human Rights. In a joint statement of June 26, it is more necessary than ever that the European Union have a negotiating mandate, a formal one. It's a matter of their credibility, and our Commission welcomes the efforts of France and other EU member states in this respect. It is essential for the European Union as well as all states be guided by the goals which underlie the intergovernmental working group, and that is the values of respect and protection of human rights as universal, indivisible and interdependence in the context of the business sector. This is a pre-requirement. It is essential if we want a global economy which can meet contemporary challenges, particularly those to the three-fold planetary crisis, a challenge to the very existence of humanity. Chair, rapporteur, our advisory commission is ready, including to work with its peers, to provide support in achieving such an ambition. Thank you.

Thank you. I now give the floor to the International Federation for Human Rights.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and congratulations on your appointment as Chair of the Working Group. I deliver this statement on behalf of the International Federation for Human Rights and 19 of its member organizations and partners. FIDH welcomes the progress made throughout the year by the Working Group and the legal experts to clarify key provisions and improve the draft text. In the context of deregulating trends at various levels, we must accelerate our efforts to fill in the protection gaps for victims of corporate harms. Over the last 12 months, we have seen the sustained rush towards critical minerals pose serious threats to the rights of indigenous peoples, rural communities, human rights defenders, civil society, and the environment. We keep witnessing the persisting business support to armed conflicts, genocide, illegal occupation and civil wars. We have also grown increasingly concerned about the unregulated development of artificial intelligence and tech companies and its negative impact on the rights to information, privacy and freedom of expression. The real cost of low ambition for this LBI is human rights abuses. As we move towards a new draft, the working group must thus ensure that the text remains ambitious. FIDH particularly welcomes the chair's proposals that make the text clearer, that extend the scope of protection, and guarantee effective safeguards from corporate power. We regret, however, the absence of clear references to enhanced due diligence and the respect of international humanitarian law by business enterprises, despite being a well-established concept and an international normative framework in the context of conflict-affected and high-risk areas. We thus encourage states to pursue their constructive engagement during this session, and we remain committed to provide our detailed comments throughout the week. Thank you.

Thank you very much. I give the floor to FIAN International.

I deliver this statement on behalf of ESCRnet, the Feminists for Binding Treaty and the Global Campaign WISH are part of the Treaty Alliance, the broadest coalition of civil society and social movement committed to a strong binding treaty. We thank the Chair and his team for their effort in advancing the draft LPI and acknowledge the contribution of legal experts that reflected the demands of civil society, social movement, trade unions and affected communities. We also welcome the continued engagement of state committed to the process and count on their active participation this week. Amid wars fueled by corporate interests, growing influence of economic elites over government, deepening inequality, and widespread human rights violations, states have a duty to regulate corporate power. As multilateralism and international law come under attack, the treaty must demonstrate that the UN serves the peoples. A treaty that fails to confront genocide, mass atrocities, and corporate involvement in systemic human rights violations would betray its mandate. We therefore call on all States to engage in the process in this decisive stage, with ambition and courage, we need a treaty that establishes clear and binding obligation to respect human rights for transnational cooperation and other business enterprises, effect prevention, robust liability and enforcement mechanism, and comprehensive and gender-responsive remedies for affected peoples and communities, both within, beyond borders. It must address the interlinkages between corporate power, environment destruction, climate injustice, repression and criminalisation of human rights defenders, discrimination and gender inequality, including through repression, sanction and divestment from abusive industries, Many States have engaged in good faith and put time and effort to work towards a treaty reflecting the demands of affected communities. These contributions must not be put aside to appease corporate lobbies and their political allies, which seek to weaken the treaty. We also argue not to rush this process for the sake of political expediency. Ensuring the effective and meaningful participation of civil society, affected communities, human rights defenders, social movements, indigenous people and trade unions must remain in the heart of this process. Their lived experiences and proposals are indispensable. to craft a treaty that responds to realities on the ground. We stand ready to continue engage constructively with the State and other committed Allies, including progressive parliamentarians and scholars, to ensure a treaty that delivers what the world urgently needs: justice, accountability, and the reaffirmation that human rights are non-negotiable and must prevail over profit. I thank you.

Muchas gracias.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the International Organization of Employers.

Chair, distinguished delegates, this statement is delivered on behalf of the IOE and USCIB. For 12 years, IOE has constructively engaged in these negotiations bringing the experience of over 50 million companies worldwide, most of them SMEs. This despite the challenging environment for business representatives. Chair, this session takes place at a defining moment, as a new draft is expected next year. With 15 years of the UNGPs and 20 years of the Human Rights Council, this process carries the responsibility to demonstrate the credibility of the international human rights system. We thank the Chair-Rapporteur and legal experts for their work. Regrettably, the suggested redrafting brings us backwards instead of forward and further diverges from the Guiding Principles, resulting in a text that is more complex, legally uncertain and difficult to implement. We welcome similar concerns raised by various States present today. While every year we hear possible common denominators demonstrating that convergence on a principle-based, non-prescriptive and clear treaty is possible, the proposals continue to go in a different direction. Different elements are needed for this process to get back on track. First, meaningful engagement with business, which has not happened so far. Second, full alignment with the UNGPs with a risk-based approach and one that is not punitive or shifted state duty to protect onto companies or treat them as violators rather than partners. Third, clear definition and respect for well-established legal principles. And fourth, a treaty that does not undermine investment and global trade, pushing companies to cut and run. The business community remains a committed and constructive partner in this process, but without a fundamental change in direction, this instrument will not secure sufficient support for ratification, nor will it be effectively implemented. Chair, allow me to finish with two important points. First, the global business community strongly disagrees with the idea that there is a normative gap in international law. Businesses are bound to comply with applicable national laws, including human rights and human rights-related laws. There is no normative gap. There is an implementation gap. This was recently recognized by the ILO constituents, many of whom are sitting in this room today. We therefore call for policy coherence. Second, we call on Member States to request a regulatory impact assessment as a structured evidence-based policy tool to evaluate the potential economic, social, environmental and administrative effects of the proposal LBI. I thank you.

Many thanks. I now give the floor to Sidse.

of C and its member organization SFA, T, fast action, DKA, Austria, Manos Unidas, Misereor, and CAFOD. We warmly welcome the summary report and your wording proposals as well as the work undertaken through 2026 intercessional consultations. We appreciate the efforts made to identify areas of convergence and to clarify some of the legal and substantive questions. As we begin this 12 session, we would like to reflect briefly on the process ahead. Next year will be critical. With a new draft expected following this session, 2027 will provide an important opportunity to build on the areas of convergence identified so far and to address the substantive questions that remain unsolved. Achieving consensus will require sustained engagement, constructive dialogue, and above all, the political will to find solutions that strengthen the effectiveness of the future instrument. The methodology for the next phase will therefore be particularly important. We kindly ask you, Chair, to ensure that the methodology allows sufficient time for thorough consideration of the new draft, including continued involvement of the legal experts and genuine opportunities for engagement by states, civil society, victims, and affected communities. We would like to emphasize that their participation is essential to ensuring that the future LPI responds to the realities and needs of those most affected. For more than a decade, victims and communities affected by business-related human rights abuses have been waiting for an LVI that ensures justice, accountability, and effective remedy. We therefore encourage states to approach the next phase with a political commitment necessary to bridge remaining differences and to ensure that we can deliver an LVI that is strong, effective, and capable of making a meaningful difference to people, communities, their territories, and the environment. We would also like to use our time to reiterate the importance of constructive and meaningful engagement by the European Union in these negotiations, consistent with its long-standing commitment to the protection and promotion of human rights. The EU has indicated in previous sessions that the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive would provide an important basis for its engagement in these UN negotiations. And now that the directive has been adopted and is being transposed into national law, the EU and its member states should actively support an LBI through a negotiating mandate, ensuring their commitments in their general statement translate into effective negotiation. We therefore urge the EU, its member states and other European states to seize this opportunity and engage meaningfully in these negotiations, to support proposals that advance the protection of human rights and the environment, to help bridge remaining differences and to ensure that the voices, rights and demands of people and communities affected by corporate abuses are at the heart of this process. I thank you.

Thank you very much. I give the floor to Franciscans International.

We note and appreciate the Chair's efforts in moving the process forward and underscore the urgency and necessity of a binding treaty as evidenced by the context faced by our partners throughout the world. In Uganda, the East African crude oil pipeline project will exacerbate climate change and damages the environment. In Hoima, affected communities are still awaiting adequate financial compensation for loss of land and livelihoods. and are subjected to surveillance and intimidation while attempting to raise their grievances. In West Papua, Indonesia, the food and energy related national strategic project has already led to the deforestation and land clearing of approximately 50,000 hectares. Indigenous communities have lost access to their land and traditional food sources, causing conflicts between communities. These projects benefit from international technical cooperation and will feed into various sectoral transnational supply chains. While Indonesia recently indicated that the project will not be expanded further, the termination of the entire project must follow. Even in cases of global milestones and guidance in regard to international law, impunity prevails. Since the International Court of Justice's advisory opinion on climate change, which underscored the state obligation of protecting the climate system, fossil fuel companies have recorded record profits within the past year. Since the ICJ orders on Gaza and advisory opinion on occupation, companies still profit from and facilitate the settlement enterprise and genocide. These examples underscore the need for strong language related to the environment and conflict in the future LBI. We will propose specific language throughout the week in regard to these areas.

Thank you. Thank you very much. I give the floor to ESCR Net, the International Network for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

Thank you, Chair. I speak on behalf of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Net, a network of more than 208 members and FIAN International. For the past five years, fisherpeople in Sri Lanka have faced severe human rights violations at the hands of transnational corporation called Lexus Pearl. Feeders Pvt Ltd, the chemical pollution caused due to excess pearl ship burned in Sri Lanka, which devastated thousands of fisher people's livelihood for months. Also, intensive industrial aquaculture is spreading all over the world. Transnational corporations are destroying ecosystems, mangrove forests, coastal water bodies, which are important fish breeding and fishing grounds. This is happening in violation of environmental laws, basic human rights and livelihoods of most marginalized fishing communities in Chile, Palestine, South Africa, Indonesia, Senegal, Sri Lanka and many more countries over the world. At this critical moment in the treaty process, the state decisions this week will set the stage for a fourth and final draft. These decisions will determine if this process succeeds and if it will produce a groundbreaking legal framework on corporate regulation. To ensure success, states must establish direct corporate obligations with effective liability across value chains and business relationships in the final text. States must ensure that the scope remains focused on transnational corporations and it that it expand access to remedy and reparations for communities affected by transnational corporations. Finally, the text must provide a legal and practical pathway towards an international tribunal to hold corporations under scrutiny and to guarantee accountability. Corporate power is growing, from the extractive industry to the unregulated and dangerous use of AI. arms and surveillance technology. This is the time for a strong treaty to end corporate impunity. We have waited far too long. I thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much. Distinguished delegates, your excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen, this brings to a close this morning's meeting. We will resume our work at 3 p.m. and will continue with general statements. I thank you all for your participation, and I adjourn this meeting.