A/HRC/15/37 both the international and domestic level, as well as the standard-setting debate currently under way.20 34. Above and beyond their legal status, the various existing instruments and mechanisms clearly reflect the existence of social expectations with regard to corporate responsibility and the need to exercise it in relation to human rights. Current international debate on the subject tends to emphasize that corporate responsibility with respect to human rights is related to but fundamentally distinct from States’ responsibilities.21 Indeed, the conceptual framework drawn up by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General distinguishes between three types of duties: the State duty to protect, the corporate responsibility to respect and the shared responsibility to remedy.22 35. The State has the duty to protect against potential human rights abuses by business enterprises, including transnational corporations, as well as the duty to investigate and punish such abuses.23 36. Companies, for their part, have a general duty to respect international human rights rules, within the framework of the due diligence which must govern their activities.24 As the Special Representative of the Secretary-General has observed, if companies are to exercise human rights due diligence, they must consider three sets of factors. 37. The first is the country context in which their business activities take place, to highlight any specific human rights challenges it may pose. The second is what human rights impact their own activities may have within that context, for example, in their capacity as producers, service providers, employers and neighbours. The third is whether they might contribute to abuse through relationships connected to their activities, such as with business partners, suppliers, State agencies and other non-State actors.25 38. The duty of companies to respect human rights and the concept of due diligence in that regard are reflected in the United Nations Global Compact, the most important international initiative to date aimed at ensuring corporate social responsibility. Principles 1 and 2 of the Global Compact state that businesses “should support and respect the protection of internationally proclaimed human rights” and should ensure that “they are not complicit in human rights abuses”.26 B. International standards relating to corporate responsibility to respect indigenous rights 39. International instruments relating to indigenous rights primarily deal, as do human rights instruments in general, with State responsibility. That is the case of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Convention 169 of the International Labour Organization (ILO) on indigenous and tribal peoples in independent countries. Along with States’ obligations, these instruments also set out rights that both companies and other private stakeholders must respect. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 GE.10-15075 This subject is analysed in detail in the reports of the Special Representative. See, in particular, documents E/CN.4/2006/97, A/HRC/4/35 and A/HRC/8/5, of 2006, 2007 and 2008 respectively. E/CN.4/2006/97, paras. 56 to 69. A/HRC/8/5. See A/HRC/4/35, paras. 10 to 18, and A/HRC/8/16, paras. 27 to 50 and 82 to 103. Ibid., paras. 51 to 81. A/HRC/8/16, para. 19. See www.unglobalcompact.org/AboutTheGC/TheTenPrinciples/index.html. 9