A/HRC/15/31 the realization or non-realization of human rights. And while their activities may not have the same repercussions at the global level and they do not get as much attention, they serve more people than the formal private sector. Furthermore, their impact is of a more direct nature as they are not anonymous companies, but often neighbours, friends or family members. 25. The activities of State-owned companies can influence the enjoyment of human rights to an even larger extent.24 At a very minimum, State-owned companies have the same responsibilities as other businesses. Depending on the degree of control the State exercises over such companies, the State may be held responsible for their actions. When Stateowned companies act as arms of Government or implementing agents of Government policy, the State must ensure policy coherence and guarantee that the activities of those companies contribute to the realization of human rights. 26. To be able to respect human rights, non-State actors need to know the actual and potential impact of their activities on the realization of human rights. According to the framework of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, such actors are required to exercise due diligence “to become aware of, prevent and address adverse human rights impacts”.25 Due diligence is understood as “a comprehensive, proactive attempt to uncover human rights risks, actual and potential, over the entire life cycle of a […] business activity, with the aim of avoiding and mitigating those risks”.26 That responsibility is not a mere passive one, but requires active steps to put into place the necessary policies, mechanisms to identify actual and potential harm to human rights, and grievance mechanisms.27 27. In exercising due diligence, non-State service providers have to take into account a variety of factors. They must consider the country and local context where their activities are carried out – such as the institutional capacities of the Government – aiming to identify the specific human rights challenges. A second set of factors turns to the actual and potential impact of their activities. Finally, a third set relates to whether they might contribute to human rights abuses through their relationships with other actors (A/HRC/8/5, para. 57). Thus, the responsibility to respect not only requires service providers to ensure that their own action does not result in human rights abuses, but also includes the avoidance of complicity, which means that they must avoid being indirectly involved in human rights abuses committed by other actors, including the State (para. 73). The concept of due diligence requires contextualization and is sufficiently flexible to determine what is required from non-State providers operating in different contexts. The necessary actions required in the exercise of due diligence will depend on the scale, nature and sectoral and operational specificities of the actor in question. 28. Compared to other business activities, the provision of water and sanitation services is characterized by special features: the services relate directly to the fulfilment of human rights. While non-State actors are well positioned to positively contribute to the realization of the rights to sanitation and water through service provision, the activities of service providers, whether through their direct actions or through failure to live up to the mandate delegated to them, can also potentially result in abuses of the rights to water and sanitation. 24 25 26 27 10 See the 2010 report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises (A/HRC/14/27), paras. 26-27. See the 2009 report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, (A/HRC/11/13), para. 59. Ibid., para. 71. Ibid., para. 59.