A/HRC/43/55 their views,6 followed by a general debate. At the end of each session, the Chair-Rapporteur provided some preliminary reflections and answers to several of the questions raised. A. Preamble and articles 1 and 2 21. The Chair-Rapporteur noted that, in response to the contributions that had been submitted, the preamble now included more explicit reference to international instruments and standards, such as the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and international humanitarian law, as well as to human rights defenders and groups disproportionately affected by business-related human rights abuses, such as women and girls, children, indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities, migrants and refugees. He emphasized how crucial the five definitions contained in article 1 were to understanding the rest of the text, drawing attention to the new definitions of the terms “human rights violation or abuse” and “contractual relationship”. He noted that there had been no significant changes to article 2. 22. It was noted that the preamble and articles 1 and 2 set a foundation for the whole instrument, and there were calls for more precision in their formulation. Some delegations called for greater reliance on the language of Council resolution 26/9, suggesting that the revised draft make greater use of the term “transnational corporations and other business enterprises” as defined in the resolution. 23. One delegation proposed replacing all references to “business enterprises” in the preamble with “transnational corporations and other business enterprises”. Another delegation called for more consistency and accuracy throughout the preamble. 24. A few delegations noted that the preambular paragraph recalling the nine core international human rights instruments of the United Nations and the eight fundamental Conventions of the International Labour Organization lacked flexibility and could potentially be problematic for those States that had chosen not to ratify all of those instruments. It was suggested that the more flexible language found in principle 12 of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights be adopted. Another delegation suggested employing a general reference to “human rights instruments” throughout the preamble, instead of trying to list all the relevant instruments. Additionally, one delegation proposed moving the reference to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to the first preambular paragraph, given the importance of that document. 25. Two delegations suggested merging the preambular paragraphs referencing Article 2 and Articles 55 and 56 of the Charter of the United Nations. Regarding the paragraph citing Article 2 of the Charter, one delegation welcomed the emphasis on sovereign equality and territorial integrity, whereas another delegation recommended adding a reference to the principle of non-interference. Yet another delegation recommended simply referring to the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, rather than listing a subset of the principles referenced in that document. 26. Regarding the preambular paragraph underlining the responsibility of all business enterprises, one delegation proposed referring to “abuses” rather than “adverse human rights impacts” to harmonize the text. A business organization noted a discrepancy between that paragraph and the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, as the paragraph referred to “the responsibility to respect all human rights”, whereas the latter referred to the responsibility to respect internationally recognized human rights. 27. Several delegations and non-governmental organizations appreciated the reference in the preamble to human rights defenders. 28. Delegations had various suggestions with respect to the preambular paragraph recognizing the distinctive and disproportionate impact of certain business-related human rights abuses on different groups of people. One delegation recommended that it would be more appropriate to refer to the groups’ situations of vulnerability rather than the groups’ 6 6 See annex III for a summary of the statements made by experts.