 In addition, adaptation to the climate change already underway and expected is essential and requires assessing vulnerability and possible impacts, building resilience, and planning for the consequences. Key Findings on the Obligations of States (APF & GANHRI, CIEL, ClientEarth, ELAW, Maastricht Principles Drafting Group, Our Children’s Trust, Plan B)     Human rights norms clarify how States should respond to climate change. Human rights law imposes wide-ranging obligations upon States to protect the human rights of individuals from infringements by third parties, including corporations. States’ obligation to address environmental harm that interferes with the full enjoyment of human rights extends to harm caused by climate change impacts. International law requires States to protect persons within their jurisdiction against human rights abuses as a result of the conduct of corporate actors headquartered outside of their territory. Key Findings on Responsibility/Accountability of Companies (APF & GANHRI, CIEL, ClientEarth, Plan B)         Corporations have the responsibility to respect human rights, as described in the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). The UNGPs require enterprises to assess, address, and take responsibility for the climaterelated human rights impacts of their products and operations. Consistent with this obligation, corporations have a duty to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions: o at a minimum, in line with the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement (ClientEarth); and/or o to a level that avoids or minimizes dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system as evidenced by the best available science (CIEL, Hansen). The Commission should take a purposive and holistic approach to applying human rights standards in its investigation. In assessing the Carbon Majors’ responsibility for the impacts of climate change on the people of the Philippines, the Commission should take into account fundamental principles of legal and moral responsibility, including respondents’ knowledge or notice of potential harms, including whether it was reasonably foreseeable, the opportunity to avoid or reduce those harms, and whether the harm was caused by their actions. The Carbon Majors have long known that the production and use of their products contribute substantially to climate change, which continues to have significant impacts and adverse consequences for people, especially vulnerable populations. The Carbon Majors knowingly advanced or promoted deliberately misleading information, casting doubt on the connection between fossil fuels and climate change. The “Polluter Pays” Principle is widely accepted and should be applied to the Carbon Majors who reap vast profits from their polluting activities. 10