A/HRC/14/29 aim at balancing rights and responsibilities, including those of business. Business has fundamental problems with the concept of extraterritoriality and believes that States should refrain from attempts to exercise jurisdiction outside of national borders unless there is a clear, demonstrable and substantive link to the territory. 28. States representatives stressed the primary obligations of States with regard to human rights. It was proposed that human rights treaty bodies should guide States on how to discharge their duty to protect in a comprehensive and coherent manner and that civil society should trigger the monitoring function of the treaty bodies by presenting specific cases. Other stakeholders added that States should report to human rights treaty bodies and the Human Rights Council, through the Universal Periodic Review and regional bodies, such as the African Commission on Human Rights, the measures put in place to protect against business-related human rights abuses. B. Guidance from international mechanisms Summary of expert presentations 29. Luis Gallegos (Ambassador of Ecuador to the United States of America and member of the Committee against Torture) described the type of guidance international mechanisms provide to States. He started by noting that a treaty body is a mechanism to assess and monitor how a State complies with the obligations undertaken by ratifying the treaty. He highlighted that the treaty bodies have spelled out clearly what the State’s duty to protect entails: States are responsible for ensuring adherence to the Convention by third parties. Therefore, if a violation has occurred, the State has to provide remedy and reparation for the victims. He added that the most recent human rights treaties, such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities refer directly to the issue of remedy. Mr. Gallegos concluded by suggesting that treaty bodies should have in place procedures to evaluate and assess the performance of both States and companies in relation to the rights protected by the Conventions. 30. Julie Cavanaugh-Bill (Western Shoshone Defense Project) outlined how the Western Shoshone, an indigenous people living in the United States, have used the international mechanisms to protect their ancestral land against the United States Government, which claimed their territory as public property. Ms. Cavanaugh-Bill explained that numerous mechanisms were employed, ranging from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Working Group on the Indigenous Populations, the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, the Human Rights Committee, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and the offices of several of the United Nations Special Rapporteurs. She particularly mentioned the decision of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which had issued an Urgent Action recommending the State party to “freeze, desist and stop” all harmful activities against the Western Shoshone and their lands until a good faith resolution of the dispute was achieved. However, the State did not comply with the Committee’s decision and granted some important, spiritual and cultural areas to be mined by a gold mining company. She concluded by pointing out that the human rights bodies provided adequate guidance to the State but the State failed to incorporate that guidance domestically. To increase effectiveness and implementation of this guidance, she suggested that the United Nations and regional human rights bodies should conduct site visits that would allow for outreach and education to impacted communities on the role of these mechanisms and an exchange of information. Finally, States and companies should operate on the basis of the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous people. 8 GE.10-12935