A/HRC/31/50 IV. Panel discussion A. Panel I. Implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: a renewed commitment by all States 37. The Chair of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises noted that its work could contribute to the openended intergovernmental working group in providing remedies for corporate human rights abuses. 38. The panellist noted that a legally binding instrument may help to advance and strengthen human rights and to reaffirm the call for States to implement national action plans to address business and human rights. He also noted that, in its resolution 26/22, the Human Rights Council had invited the OHCHR to explore legal options for victims of human rights abuses, and that this had led to an accountability and remedy project. 39. Finally, the panellist highlighted the need to create inter-State cooperation and capacity-building as a way to carry the process forward, considering victims as the centre of the process. The European Union reiterated its commitment to concentrate on genuine and effective means to prevent and remedy abuses, to continue working with States across regions to effectively implement the Guiding Principles, to continue to work for the protection of human rights defenders and civil society actors facing risks for their involvement in this sensitive area of work and to continue to encourage European companies to implement the principles wherever they operate. After this intervention, the European Union did not participate in the rest of the session. Several participants considered the importance of taking into account the principles and their role as reference point for the process of an international legally binding instrument, by emphasizing that there was no contradiction among them as they were mutually complementary. Moreover, some of the participants reiterated their engagement for their application and highlighted their efforts to design and implement initiatives in this regard. B. Panel II. Principles for an international legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights 40. One panellist explained that there were ways in which States and intergovernmental organizations could change the rules of the game by having policies that deter and refuse companies with bad human rights records. 41. Another panellist noted that businesses were not opposed to regulation but wanted smart regulation and that, although there needed to be a balance between human rights and attracting foreign investment, there was a need for shoring-up soft law with hard law. The panellist noted that there was a range of common-sense principles that could be adopted for the development of a legally binding instrument — such as being progressive not regressive, being fact and evidence-based, being realistic and feasible, aiming at capacitybuilding to contribute to a change in businesses’ behaviour, being universal in nature, being transparent and inclusive, having good governance principles and being victim-orientated. 42. One panellist noted the importance of continuing to develop international human rights law and highlighted that some international legally binding instruments were first opposed but eventually an important support was reached because of specific needs as part of the development of international law principles. 9