46 human rights.182 The requirements for businesses to respect human rights are typically incorporated at the domestic level.183 2.115. Respondents Cemex and Shell challenge the petitioners’ reliance on the Guiding Principles.184 Respondent Shell erroneously claims that “the Guiding Principles is not a legally binding document; it does not create any legal obligations on States or private actors.”185 The Guiding Principles “clarify and elaborate on the implications of relevant provisions of existing international human rights standards, some of which are legally binding on States, and provide guidance on how to put them into operation.”186 The Guiding Principles “refer to and [are] derived from States’ existing obligations under international law.”187 2.116. Many of the respondent Carbon Majors participate188 in the UN Global Compact. The Guiding Principles “reinforce the Global Compact and provide an authoritative framework for participants on the policies and processes they should implement in order to ensure that they meet their responsibility to respect human rights.”189 2.117. While domestic laws may not always require companies to take specific measures to meet the responsibility to respect human rights, like conducting human right due diligence and the remediation of harm, it is still “necessary if a company is to know and show that it is meeting its responsibility to respect human rights.”190 Further, the “[f]ailure to do so can subject companies to the ‘court of public opinion’—comprising employees, communities, consumers, civil society, as well as investors. [Thus,] there can be legal, financial and reputational consequences if 182 Guiding Principles, Frequently Asked Questions about the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, p. 9, http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FAQ_PrinciplesBussinessHR.pdf, last accessed on 06 February 2017. 183 See e.g. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights, State National Action Plans, available at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/NationalActionPlans.aspx, last accessed on 08 February 2017. [“The UN Working Group strongly encourages all States to develop, enact and update a national action plan on business and human rights as part of the State responsibility to disseminate and implement the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.”] 184 Respondent Cemex’s response, op cit., para. 22-25; Respondent Shell’s response, op cit., p. 50. 185 Respondent Shell’s response, op cit., p. 50. 186 Guiding Principles, op cit., p. 8. 187 Guiding Principles, op cit., p. 8. [“Furthermore, while human rights due diligence and the remediation of harm may not always be legally required, they are necessary if a company is to know and show that it is meeting its responsibility to respect human rights. Failure to do so can subject companies to the “court of public opinion”—comprising employees, communities, consumers, civil society, as well as investors. So there can be legal, financial, and reputational consequences if companies fail to respect human rights as set out in the Guiding Principles.” op cit., p 9. 188 United Nations Global Compact, Our Participants, available at https://www.unglobalcompact.org/whatis-gc/participants, last accessed on 08 February 2017. 189 United Nations Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights, The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Relationship to UN Global Compact Commitments (July 2011; updated June 2014), available at https://www.unglobalcompact.org/docs/issues_doc/human_rights/Resources/GPs_GC%20note.pdf, last accessed on 06 February 2017. 190 See Guiding Principles, op cit., p. 9.