A/HRC/40/48 among many States to be effective. Many NGOs called on States and a regional organization to engage more proactively in the future. 24. Many delegations pledged to engage constructively in the working group’s fourth session and expressed their hopes for an open, frank and productive dialogue. C. General introduction to the draft legally binding instrument 25. The Chair-Rapporteur, explaining the background to the elaboration of the draft, said that the text of the draft had been informed by the voices of thousands of victims, discussions at many bilateral and multilateral meetings and the input of experts of different backgrounds. Following the distribution of the draft instrument on 20 July 2018, the Chair-Rapporteur had received a number of comments from States, civil society, lawyers, academics and other experts. 26. The draft drew heavily on basic principles of international law and human rights and rested on four pillars. 27. The first, and primary, pillar was prevention. It incorporated elements of the Guiding Principles, drew on experiences from national, regional and international systems and took into account discussions held in earlier sessions of the working group. 28. Victims’ rights, access to justice in particular, were the second pillar. The emphasis was on the removal of practical obstacles faced by victims in their pursuit of redress. Inspiration had been taken from working group discussions and regional regulations concerning jurisdiction. 29. International cooperation was the third pillar. The transnational nature of contemporary practices and the need for States to work together to ensure that justice was done were recognized in that pillar. 30. Monitoring mechanisms, which were discussed in the draft instrument and, more prominently, in the draft protocol, were the focus of the fourth pillar. Inspiration had been drawn from other human rights treaties. 31. While the draft instrument was based on four pillars, all of its parts were interrelated, and it should be read as a whole. IV. First reading of the draft legally binding instrument3 32. During each session of the first reading of the draft instrument, the Chair-Rapporteur introduced the relevant article(s). Following his introduction, panellists provided expert views, and there was a general debate (see annex III for a record of the comments made by the panellists). A. Articles 2 and 8 33. The Chair-Rapporteur noted that the primary objectives of the draft instrument were set forth in article 2 (1) (b), which focused on human beings as victims of business-related harm and their effective access to justice and remedy. Article 8, which sought to ensure that many practical obstacles to justice were eliminated, also focused on the rights of victims. 34. Delegations and organizations welcomed the inclusion of articles 2 and 8 and voiced their opinion that articles setting out the purposes of the instrument and the rights of victims were crucial. However, many argued that those provisions would need more precision and clarity, particularly if the instrument was to be applied in national courts. Some delegations also noted that it would be more appropriate if the references to “victims” in both articles 3 The present section should be read in conjunction with the draft instrument, available at www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/WGTransCorp/Session3/DraftLBI.pdf. 7