A/HRC/39/24 Global Compact. He argued that companies should be supported when they were transparent in order to encourage them to address human rights issues and become agents for change. People who had been affected needed a remedy, and governments were the primary duty bearers to ensure that companies did not violate human rights. Furthermore, national human rights institutions could play a role in mediating disputes where the legal system was not trusted and companies needed to engage with civil society. He provided the example of successful support by trade unions to overcome initial resistance in a local community against the training of women as forklift drivers. 34. Ms. Wendland noted that the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights contained three pillars: (a) the State duty to protect human rights through policies, regulation and adjudication; (b) the corporate responsibility to respect human rights by acting with due diligence to avoid infringement and addressing adverse human rights impacts; and (c) access to effective remedy for victims, through judicial, administrative, legislative or other appropriate means. She compared those three pillars to a three-legged chair, where all the pillars needed to function, because otherwise prevention would not work and abuses would follow. 35. She noted that, even where institutions operated optimally, disputes over adverse human rights impacts from company activities were likely to occur and victims must be able to seek redress. Access to remedy would have a preventive effect, because companies would know about their risks and where they needed to improve over time. The OHCHR Accountability and Remedy Project was aimed at enhancing the effectiveness of remedy mechanisms. Its first phase was focused on judicial mechanisms, with guidance for States (see A/HRC/32/19), and its second phase on State-based non-judicial mechanisms (see Human Rights Council resolution 32/10). The third phase would be focused on non-Statebased grievance mechanisms. 36. The ensuing discussion addressed the question of the capacity of States to live up to their duty to protect and to ensure that companies respected human rights. At the technical level, and in terms of drafting corporate law, there seemed to be a capacity-building challenge. With regard to the issue of women’s rights in various religions, participants stressed the importance of working with religious scholars, understanding how knowledge was produced in a social context, and recognizing that it could be changed because it was subject to human interpretation. D. Planning and monitoring tools for prevention, including human rights impact assessments 37. The session on planning and monitoring tools for prevention, including human rights impact assessments, was moderated by a human rights officer of the Human Rights and Economic and Social Issues Section and by the Chief of the Rule of Law and Democracy Section of OHCHR. The panellists were Manuela Teixeira Pinto, Deputy Permanent Representative of Portugal to the United Nations Office and other international organizations in Geneva; Nicolas Fasel, adviser on human rights measurement at OHCHR; Olivier De Schutter, Professor at the Catholic University of Louvain and member of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; Jennifer Philpot-Nissen, programme executive for human rights and disarmament at the World Council of Churches; and Rasha Abdul Rahim, adviser on arms control, security trade and human rights at Amnesty International. 38. At the outset, Ms. Teixeira Pinto stressed that prevention was a task for the whole United Nations system and for regional and local mechanisms. She noted a growing interest in the Human Rights Council operationalizing its mandate concerning prevention, and said that the 2030 Agenda also provided an opportunity to interconnect human rights with sustainable development. The universal periodic review was a unique tool of the Human Rights Council, as it allowed national policies to be improved, human rights to be mainstreamed and domestic resilience to be built. 39. She also highlighted the important role of national mechanisms for reporting and follow-up, which engaged with international and regional human rights mechanisms and 9