Use version 1.

I don't know whether this is a legal contract, but in real legal documents commas are taboo, because (in handwritten ones) they can be introduced surreptitiously and thus falsify the content. So legal draughtsmen were trained to write documents that were unambiguous (though often immensely difficult to read) without commas.

Here you needn't have such scruples, but I think you can manage without. But some people, we hear, love commas. They will disagree. It doesn't really matter.

Either way, for my taste; it's your call. I personally might use the commas.

But it needs the subjunctive: It is essential that the rights be accepted ... Some BE speakers now use the indicative in constructions like this, but it sounds horrible to me.

Thank you both sooo much.
I thought it might be a matter of preference. Great to have that confirmed.
Thanks, escoville for the background on legal docs - this isn't one (it's in academic research), but I may be acquiring a new client in the legal field soon.
Thanks hm -- oh my gosh, you are so right! About the subjunctive. It's definitely 3/4 of my brain that has downed tools. Argh! :-)

Strange. Version 2 is exactly what our translator who is specialised on jurisdical texts would prefer. She may easily stuff eight commas or more into one single AE phrase (too much of them for my private taste, but who am I to argue?), so I have always taken this for being correct Legalese. Or have you been talking about BE, escoville?