A/HRC/41/49 42. The Human Rights Council, in its resolution 38/13, requested the Working Group to analyse further the role of national human rights institutions in facilitating access to remedy for business-related human rights abuses and to convene a two-day global consultation on those issues, open to all stakeholders, and to inform the Council by its forty-fourth session as appropriate. In preparation for the requested report, the Working Group convened a session to gain a better understanding of the existing mandates, policies and practices of national human rights institutions concerning access to remedy for business-related human rights abuses. Representatives of national human rights institutions from all the regions had the chance to share their mandates and challenges and to learn from peers. Among the main challenges they identified were building trust among the different stakeholders, the need for the adoption of the Guiding Principles into national laws and the need for training and awareness-raising on issues regarding business-related human rights abuses.11 IV. Corporate respect for human rights A. Towards effective human rights due diligence? Challenges and emerging practices 43. A major focus of the 2018 Forum was the requirement set out in the Guiding Principles for companies to carry out human rights due diligence. A key session in the programme, organized jointly by the Working Group, OECD and OHCHR, highlighted the alignment between the concept of human rights due diligence contained in the Guiding Principles and that set out in the OECD Due Diligence Guidance. 44. It was noted that the Guiding Principles make it clear that all business enterprises have an independent responsibility to respect human rights and that, in order to do so, they are required to exercise human rights due diligence to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address impacts on human rights. The introduction of that concept was one of the major contributions of the Guiding Principles. 45. It was further noted that the release in 2018 of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance had provided another important step forward in helping to clarify what human rights due diligence involved, in practical steps. 46. Both the members of the Working Group and representatives of OECD highlighted that the Working Group report on due diligence and the OECD Due Diligence Guidance were fully aligned, both on key elements and their assessment of gaps/challenges in implementation. They noted that convergence was critical, and responded to calls from business for harmonization and removed doubt about what responsible business conduct was in practice. Lack of guidance and clarity could no longer be an excuse for inaction. Importantly, the OECD Guidance acknowledged that human rights due diligence could and should be embedded in strong company management systems and provided practical guidance related to the different steps of due diligence reflected in the Guiding Principles. Applying a human rights lens to policies and due diligence processes embedded across company management systems could be a means of achieving greater operational consistency across different jurisdiction and for staying ahead of the curve regarding regulatory developments across a range of responsible business conduct issues. 47. The members of the Working Group and representatives of OECD explained that there was also close alignment among the descriptive characteristics of the due diligence process. Namely, due diligence: • Is preventive (this was underlined to be the most important point) • Involves multiple processes and objectives • Is commensurate with risk (risk-based) 11 Statements from participating national human rights institutions are available at www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Business/ExecutiveSummaryA73163.pdf. 11