A/HRC/20/29 52. Maintaining integrity: The integrity of the Guiding Principles should not be compromised by casual interpretations, conceptual detours or partial approaches. While the Working Group cannot feasibly influence or evaluate all of the current and emerging initiatives relating to the Guiding Principles, it will seek to articulate indicators for processes and outcomes by which all stakeholders may assess for themselves the effectiveness of particular existing and emerging tools, resources and services that may be helpful in supporting implementation by States and companies. 53. Balanced development: The success of the mandate presumes balanced promotion of implementation and dissemination on all three pillars of the Guiding Principles, and by all stakeholders. The Working Group will, when appropriate, engage to challenge and suggest ways to redress asymmetry in implementation as and when it arises. 54. Clarity and simplicity: In all of its activities, the Working Group will encourage clarity and simplicity. The importance of clear and simple concepts and their communication should not be underestimated. In a world of competing demands for the limited attention and resources of States and companies, the precision and brevity of dissemination tools will be a prerequisite for their success. 55. Encouraging results: Comprehensive and effective implementation of the Guiding Principles should eventually result in improvements in the protection against human rights abuse by business enterprises, a reduction in business-related human rights abuse, and improved access to effective remedies for victims of such harm where it occurs. Implementation should remain focused on addressing the most severe forms of human rights impact of business activities, as well as the impact that impinges on the rights of persons living in vulnerable situations. 2. Using the Guiding Principles to enhance accountability 56. Enhanced accountability of companies for involvement in human rights harm is clearly envisaged by the Guiding Principles. In particular, the Guiding Principles set out that providing for adequate accountability of companies for involvement in human rights harm, through judicial, administrative, legislative or other appropriate means, is an integral part of the State’s duty to protect. Initial consultations held by, and submissions made to, the Working Group clearly highlighted the importance of this aspect of the State’s duty to protect. The Working Group also recognizes the important role of enhanced accountability in promoting the uptake of the Guiding Principles, and thus ensuring comprehensive and effective implementation by companies. In this connection, the Working Group notes that it is specifically mandated to explore options and make recommendations at the national, regional and international levels for improving access to effective remedies. This could include, among other things, identifying opportunities to dismantle barriers to justice for victims of business-related human rights harm; identifying success factors in establishing effective judicial as well as non-judicial grievance mechanisms; discussing the consequences for States and businesses that fail to implement the Guiding Principles; and paying particular attention to rights-holders that may be particularly vulnerable to harm, or that may bear the brunt of adverse impact. 57. The Working Group recognizes that some groups and individuals face particularly significant obstacles when seeking remedies for business-related human rights grievances. Such groups may include indigenous peoples, children, women, migrant workers, older persons, persons with disabilities, refugees, ethnic, religious and other minorities. Among these, the challenging nexus between the role of the State, business activities and the situation of indigenous peoples was emphasized by a range of stakeholders. 58. In order to promote enhanced human rights accountability of business enterprises, as well as of States, the further uptake and application of the Guiding Principles by 13