A/HRC/34/47 C. Documentation 6. The working group had before it the following documents: (a) Human Rights Council resolution 26/9; (b) The provisional agenda of the working group (A/HRC/WG.16/2/1); (c) Other documents, including a concept note, a programme of work, a list of panellists and their curricula vitae, a list of participants, and contributions from States and other relevant stakeholders, which were made available to the working group through its website.1 D. Adoption of the agenda and programme of work 7. In her opening statement, the Chair-Rapporteur expressed gratitude for the renewed trust placed in her as Chair-Rapporteur and pledged to maintain transparency and openness to dialogue. In a context of large-scale outsourcing of production and global value chains spanning different jurisdictions, international human rights must play a central role. The initiative of a binding instrument was based on respect for the principles of fairness, legality and justice, which should prevail for the benefit of all in the international context, and the objective of the process was to fill gaps in the international system of human rights and to provide better elements for access to justice and remedy for victims of human rights abuses related to transnational corporations. That objective was in no way aimed at undermining host States or the business sector, but was intended to level the playing field with regard to respect for human rights. 8. The Chair-Rapporteur presented the draft programme of work, which was adopted as proposed. 9. Jeffrey Sachs delivered a keynote message via videoconference, expressing support for an international legally binding instrument under which transnational corporations could be held accountable and their compliance with human rights standards could be promoted and enforced. Noting that the most important locations for the enforcement of human rights and access to remedy for victims were national judicial systems, he underlined the need to incorporate international human rights into national legislation and to facilitate access to justice. Citing weak enforcement of judgments as the biggest obstacle to achieving access to justice, he stressed the international responsibility to honour judgments rendered, including in developing countries, which were often hosts to transnational corporations. Transnational corporations were more powerful than many Governments; therefore they should be accountable and comply with human rights for the decent development of the world economy. An international treaty could strengthen the capacity of Governments to ensure remediation. III. General statements 10. State delegations acknowledged the work of the Chair-Rapporteur and the transparent and inclusive process of consultation, as well as the flexibility demonstrated by States and other relevant stakeholders in the preparation of the programme of work. They recalled that many actors had struggled for more than 40 years to develop effective global standards to hold companies accountable with respect to human rights. 1 4 www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/WGTransCorp/Session2/Pages/Session2.aspx.