A/HRC/44/56 III. State action 31. Participants reiterated the call to States to step up efforts and emphasized that the ambition and political will to improve human rights records on the ground should be demonstrated by the development and enforcement of strong regulatory frameworks on business and human rights. It was highlighted that, in some cases, States themselves violated human rights, either in collaboration with corporate actors or with the means provided by companies, often in the name of national security or development. 32. States were given the opportunity to present opportunities, challenges and lessons learned from recent regulatory and policy developments, including in relation to the development and implementation of national action plans. States played a key role in leading by example in ensuring respect for human rights by State-owned enterprises. A. Regulatory and policy developments to fulfil the State duty to protect human rights 33. Different stakeholders acknowledged the importance for States to adopt a smart mix of measures, as clarified in the Guiding Principles, including national and international, voluntary and mandatory, measures. Discussions on what a smart mix of measures meant in practice included the following aspects: (a) Conceptualization and implementation of new legislation, or strengthening of existing legislation, on business and human rights, with several participants stressing the critical importance of developing effective mandatory human rights due diligence legislation; (b) Establishment of processes to develop and update national action plans; (c) Establishment of monitoring bodies to oversee the implementation of national action plans; (d) Creation of dialogue and peer-learning platforms linking States to businesses and civil society; (e) Dissemination of guidance and of training and capacity-building tools; (f) Ratification of international conventions and agreement to international standards, including the ILO Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190); (g) Reform of legal frameworks for improving access to remedy. 34. Investment agreements (or investment chapters in trade agreements) concluded by States can adversely affect business respect for human rights in several ways. In follow-up to previous sessions of the Forum and with the aim of providing information on the work of the Working Group on providing practical guidance to States on negotiating investment agreements compatible with the Guiding Principles, a session dedicated to this topic was held during the eighth session of the Forum. Challenges and emerging practices were shared among participants with the clear message that ensuring access to remedy was a key priority and necessary for providing a counterbalance in the current environment, where investors had the tools to sue Governments in international arbitration courts. 35. Another session focused on multi-State global initiatives and their potentially adverse impact on human rights, with a particular focus on the Belt and Road Initiative. Participants spoke about the human rights and environmental impacts of such projects and the need for them to be aligned with the Guiding Principles and other international human rights standards. They discussed such potentially negative human rights impacts as forced evictions, loss of livelihoods, bad working conditions and damage to the environment, and the need for accountability, access to public information and, especially, constructive dialogue with local communities. Moreover, participants highlighted the need to collaborate to identify options for developing sustainable infrastructures, paying particular attention to 8