A/HRC/31/50 empower local communities to take charge of their own development. They argued that communities must be able to participate in the working group, and that feedback was needed at each stage of the drafting process 29. Several delegations noted that the Guiding Principles were complementary and not in contradiction to a legally binding instrument, and that adoption of such an instrument could help to protect the most vulnerable. Some NGOs underlined that the principles were based on self-regulation and that such an approach was illusory, as shown by the recent economic and financial crisis. It was also noted that a treaty should focus on the indivisibility and universality of human rights and therefore should have an extraterritorial scope. Most NGOs argued that a legally binding treaty should provide for companies to be held liable. 30. Many NGOs noted that the conduct of all business enterprises should be regulated, while also noting that a treaty should provide specific measures to address the particular challenges of transnational corporations, without imposing a one-size-fits-all approach. Another NGO stressed the potential for a hybrid approach for a treaty, covering all enterprises while focusing in particular on addressing the specific challenges of transnational corporations. Other NGOs stressed that this was a historic opportunity to address impunity for corporate-related human rights abuses in international human rights law. It was noted that, while transnational corporations benefited from strong enforcement mechanisms, such as investor-to-State arbitration tribunals in international investment treaties, no international mechanism existed to ensure access to justice for the victims of those abuses. The need to redress this asymmetry in international law was highlighted. 31. Most NGOs voiced concerns about the scope of a treaty being limited to gross human rights violations, as they would not cover most corporate human rights abuses. Likewise, they stressed that the objective of the instrument should be to prevent and remedy violations before they became gross abuses. 32. Some NGOs pointed out the need to cover all rights, particularly the right to food and nutrition. They also noted that evictions, the depletion of fish stocks and forests, harm to health and the destruction of food, crops, animals and seeds had an impact on the right to self-determination and ability to achieve an adequate standard of living. One NGO noted that the protection of indigenous territories should be taken into account in relation to their right to subsistence. 33. Some NGOs noted that a treaty needed to protect workers’ rights and that a legally binding instrument should clearly outline the duty to ensure their rights to a safe and healthy working environment, and that it should strengthen the work of ILO. 34. A number of NGOs noted that a gender-sensitive approach should be adopted throughout the process, as women were particularly affected by working longer hours and receiving lower salaries, and were often subjected to domestic abuse and gender-based violence. 35. Some NGOs highlighted that the use of obsolete technologies and bad environmental practices had caused environmental damages that had affected individuals’ human rights to food security, life and health. They also highlighted that the use of pesticides by transnational corporations had short- and long-term detrimental effects on the environment and the quality of life of local communities and populations. 36. Several NGOs stressed the need to protect the negotiation process from corporate capture and ensure an effective participation of victims and affected communities. 8