99 There may be more glaring bases of legal liability for fossil fuel companies. Here we cite the case of Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.,466 where an oil company was implicated, in complicity with State agents, for extra-judicial killings and other human rights violations committed against community leader who opposed the laying of oil pipelines within their village. The case, however, was settled, also extra-judicially. Continuing Climate Denial The Commission sadly notes that, to this date, climate change denial and efforts to delay the global transition from fossil fuel dependence still persists. Sadder still is that these obstructionist efforts are driven, not by ignorance, but by greed. Fossil fuel enterprises continue to fund the electoral campaigns of politicians, with the intention of slowing down the global movement towards clean, renewable energy. D. The Carbon Majors Have the Corporate Responsibility to Undertake Human Rights Due Diligence and Provide Remediation For the Carbon Majors within Philippine jurisdiction, they may be compelled to undertake human rights due diligence and to provide remediation. 1. The UNGP-BHR may be Resorted to for Exacting Standards of Responsibility for Corporations within Philippine Jurisdiction The non-binding nature of the UNGP-BHR under international law notwithstanding, some of the principles enunciated therein may individually be considered under Philippine domestic law as constitutive of generally accepted principles of international law. Article II, Section 2 of the Philippine Constitution states that, “The Philippines… adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations.” Philippine jurisprudence provides for a wide latitude of what constitutes generally accepted principles of international law that are automatically 466 Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 569 U.S. 108 (2013).