A/HRC/38/20 Part II. Improving the effectiveness of individual State-based non-judicial mechanisms relevant to the respect by business enterprises for human rights Policy objective 5: State-based non-judicial mechanisms are effective mechanisms for dealing with business-related human rights harm. 5.1 The State adopts and implements laws and/or policies with regard to the establishment and administration of State-based non-judicial mechanisms that are aligned with the effectiveness criteria set out in Guiding Principle 31. 5.2 State-based non-judicial mechanisms operate in a manner that is consistent with the recommendations of relevant oversight bodies, and take into due account the recommendations of other entities concerned with monitoring and evaluating their performance, such as peer review mechanisms. Policy objective 6: State-based non-judicial mechanisms are legitimate. 3 6.1 The State has made the structural, institutional, administrative and resourcing arrangements needed to (a) provide each State-based mechanism with a degree of operational autonomy from government functions that is appropriate in the light of its specific mandate and functions; (b) minimize the risk of conflicts of interest for the Statebased mechanism (or any of its personnel) with respect to the discharge of its powers and/or functions; and (c) minimize the risk of any undue influence of any one actor or group of actors. 6.2 Where they are vested with powers to investigate allegations and/or complaints on their own initiative, State-based non-judicial mechanisms exercise such powers in an equitable, rights-compatible, predictable, transparent, timely and professional manner. 6.3 State-based non-judicial mechanisms have adopted and implemented appropriate procedures in the light of their mandates and functions to enable rights holders and other stakeholders to raise concerns or complaints about the manner in which such mechanisms have discharged specific functions or powers, such as the way they have responded to, investigated, adjudicated or resolved complaints and/or disputes. 6.4 The State has made appropriate arrangements to provide for the possibility to review a State-based non-judicial mechanism’s decisions, actions or non-action in certain circumstances, such as where there is evidence of a possible conflict of interest, a procedural irregularity or other impropriety. 6.5 State-based non-judicial mechanisms are subject to periodic review by a suitable oversight body or peer review mechanism, which can offer advice as to how their performance and effectiveness might be improved. 6.6 State-based non-judicial mechanisms have adopted and implemented appropriate policies and procedures to detect, avoid and respond appropriately to conflicts of interest (both actual and potential), including those that may arise where the relevant mechanism has had conferred upon it a range of functions, such as education and awareness-raising, in addition to addressing complaints and resolving disputes. Policy objective 7: State-based non-judicial mechanisms are accessible. 4 7.1 State-based non-judicial mechanisms work proactively to raise awareness among rights holders of their mandates, functions and activities, including through targeted outreach activities. 7.2 The State takes such steps as are reasonable and appropriate in the light of the mandates and functions of the State-based non-judicial mechanism concerned to enable and 3 4 12 A/HRC/17/31, principle 31 (a) and commentary. Ibid., principle 31 (b) and commentary.