A/HRC/28/65 country’s development, the political relevance of which can significantly influence the judicial process.45 45. Implementing national legislation is essential to ensuring that States hold TNCs accountable abroad. Indeed, member countries of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have already made voluntary commitments in this regard by developing a code of conduct. The European Union has also developed a resolution for European corporations operating in developing countries. Under international law, however, States are generally not liable for the conduct of non-State actors, unless the non-State actors are de facto agents of the State, or were acting “on the instructions of, or under the direction or control of, that State in carrying out the [wrongful] conduct”.46 To date, there is no international jurisprudence on the issue of home State accountability for TNC actions. 46. Some States have failed to take vigorous steps to ensure that victims have access to judicial remedies for human rights abuses that have arisen extraterritorially owing to the activities of businesses or their subsidiaries. By creating or allowing these obstacles and barriers to remain, States have failed in their duty to protect human rights by ensuring access to effective remedy through the judicial process. 47 3. Obligation to fulfil 47. Besides being responsible for the activities of TNCs operating abroad, governments have also a duty to support and cooperate in ensuring the fulfilment of the right to food in poorer countries.48 General comment No. 12 suggests that developing States that do not possess the necessary resources for the full realization of the right to food are obliged to actively seek international assistance, and wealthier States have a responsibility to help (para. 38). The Right to Food Guidelines request that assistance be provided by States in situations of emergency or widespread famine. C. Holding transnational corporations accountable 1. Interpretative efforts 48. International obligations with extraterritorial dimensions are enunciated in a number of international treaties49 that emphasize the importance of international cooperation among States to ensure the protection of human rights. At the same time, international human rights instruments refer to how non-State actors have duties to uphold human rights standards. For example, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states in its preamble — and binding provisions in universal and regional human rights documents also indicate 45 46 47 48 49 14 Ibrahim Kanalan, “Horizontal effect of human rights in the era of transnational constellations: on the accountability of private actors for human rights violations”, p. 19. General Assembly resolution 56/83. See also Smita Narula, “The right to food: holding global actors accountable under international law”, Colombia Journal of Transnational Law, No. 44 (2006), pp. 752–753. The Third Pillar case studies include Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. General comments No. 12, paras. 36 and 37, and No. 15, para. 32. See Ziegler et al., The Fight for the Right to Food. The Charter of the United Nations (arts. 55 and 56); the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (arts. 22 and 28); the Covenant (arts. 2, para. 1, and 11, paras. 1 and 2); the Convention on the Rights of the Child (arts. 4 and 24, para. 4); and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (art. 32).