A/HRC/38/20 performance standards and the status of relevant certifications; and (c) other information likely to be important to rights holders, such as information about the average duration of complaint handling and/or dispute resolution processes and the likely costs in different scenarios. 10.2 State-based non-judicial mechanisms have put in place procedures to ensure that parties to a complaint and/or dispute are kept informed of key developments and requirements, including through online accounts, telephone helplines or dedicated case workers, as appropriate. 10.3 State-based non-judicial mechanisms publish and take proactive steps to disseminate periodic reports on their activities and performance that set out in a readily understandable format information likely to be useful to relevant rights holders, such as (a) the types of complaints and/or disputes referred to the mechanism in a given period; (b) the percentage of cases successfully resolved, and in what time period; (c) the percentage of cases rejected by the mechanism, and on what grounds; and (d) common challenges. 10.4 Information with respect to the activities and performance of State-based nonjudicial mechanisms that are overseen by or operate within government departments is accessible to members of the public pursuant to domestic regimes on freedom of access to governmental information. Policy objective 11: State-based non-judicial mechanisms are rights-compatible.8 11.1 The State adopts and implements laws and/or policies with regard to the administration of State-based non-judicial mechanisms that are consistent with the State’s obligations under international human rights law, including the rights to equality of treatment and to non-discrimination. 11.2 State-based non-judicial mechanisms exercise their mandates and functions in a manner that promotes (a) equal and effective access to justice; (b) adequate, effective and prompt reparation for harm suffered; and (c) access to relevant information concerning violations and reparation mechanisms.9 11.3 State-based non-judicial mechanisms have, with a view to achieving prompt, adequate and effective remedial outcomes for business-related human rights abuses, adopted and implemented procedures and practices designed to ensure, within the framework of and subject to their mandates and functions, that (a) complaints and/or disputes are addressed and concluded without undue delay; (b) in cases of severe or irremediable harm, the mechanism can take pre-emptive action to mitigate the harm; (c) rights holders are properly consulted with regard to the elements of an adequate and effective remedy in their specific case; (d) rights holders are properly consulted about and given an opportunity to comment on (and, where appropriate, provided with opportunities to take further or corrective action prior to) any decision by the mechanism to reject, defer, abandon or settle a complaint or dispute; and (e) following conclusion of a complaint handling and/or dispute resolution process, rights holders are provided with information regarding their options for further action, including on the steps that they should take in the event of non-compliance by a party with the terms of a remedial outcome of a non-judicial process. 11.4 In deciding whether to reject, defer, abandon or settle a complaint handling or dispute resolution process, State-based non-judicial mechanisms give due regard to the availability (or non-availability) of remedies under alternative mechanisms (including judicial mechanisms). 11.5 State-based non-judicial mechanisms take steps to ensure that members of their staff with responsibility for receiving and/or handling complaints and/or adjudicating and 8 9 Ibid., principle 31 (f) and commentary. Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, art. IX, para. 18. 15