A/HRC/29/28 (A/6317, para. 314). In a written submission in support of that mandate, a Member State observed that the lack of transparency in investor-State arbitration was contrary to the fundamental principles of good governance and human rights upon which the United Nations is founded (see A/CN.9/662, para. 20). That work has culminated in two major texts: (a) the rules on transparency in treaty-based investor-State arbitration, which came into effect on 1 April 2014; and (b) a convention on transparency28 (the United Nations Convention on Transparency), which was finalized by the Commission in July 2014 and opened for signature on 17 March 2015. The Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises welcomes these new transparency rules. 33. Both the Guiding Principles and the UNCITRAL work on transparency back procedural and legal transparency and take a practical approach to achieving that aim. The new UNCITRAL rules on transparency seek to address a regular concern with investorState dispute settlement cases – namely that their typically confidential and nonparticipatory nature does not allow for involvement by affected stakeholders, or for an adequate balance between the need for States to ensure that they retain adequate policy and regulatory ability to protect human rights and provide investor protection, as clarified in Guiding Principle 9. With the new UNCITRAL rules and the United Nations Convention on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration, States have a practical means to promote good governance and respect for human rights with a broader policy framework that is aligned with the Guiding Principles. 29 34. These rules, when they apply, provide a transparent procedural regime under which investment treaty arbitrations are conducted. They can be used in investor-State arbitrations initiated under UNCITRAL arbitration rules, as well as under other institutional arbitration rules or in ad hoc proceedings. States can now incorporate them into investment treaties concluded on or after 1 April 2014, but for the rules to apply to disputes arising under the more than 3,000 investment treaties concluded before that date, the States parties to a treaty, or disputing parties in an investor-State arbitration, would need to agree to apply the rules under that treaty or to that dispute. This highlights the importance of the Convention on Transparency, which provides an efficient, multilateral mechanism by which States can agree, subject to relevant reservations, to apply the rules to all arbitrations arising under their investment treaties concluded before 1 April 2014. The Working Group welcomes the rules and considers that an obvious step for States to remedy incoherence between current modes of investment with norms for good governance and human rights considerations, including those set out in the Guiding Principles, would be to sign and ratify the Convention. 35. The Working Group is pleased to have had the opportunity to engage with UNCITRAL, including at its forty-seventh session in July 2014, and to note that in the report of that session the Commission agreed that the UNCITRAL secretariat should monitor developments in the area of business and human rights, in cooperation with relevant bodies within the United Nations and beyond and inform the Commission about developments of relevance to UNCITRAL work (see A/69/17, para. 204). 10 28 A/CN.9/812 and www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/arbitration/transparency-convention/ Transparency-Convention-e.pdf. The Working Group chairperson was invited to speak at the March 2015 signing ceremony. 29 http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/investment-and-human-rights/portfolio-items/transparency-in-investment-treatyarbitration-and-the-un-guiding-principles-on-business-and-human-rights-the-new-uncitral-rules-andconvention-on-transparency/.