Human Rights Due Diligence and the Root Causes of Harm in Business Operations : A Textual and Contextual Analysis of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

Following John Ruggie’s UN mandate (2005-2011) the notion of human rights due diligence (HRDD) has become widely used by policymakers, corporations, NGOs and professionals. The question is whether this HRDD concept, as developed in the UN Guiding Principles (GPs), adequately addresses the deeper causes of human rights infringements in business operations. This article provides a textual and contextual analysis of the GPs and related documents with a focus on the concepts of mitigation and root causes. The GPs contain provisions that open the door for HRDD to be interpreted for a less demanding result. There are also drafting imperfections. The GPs refer repeatedly to mitigation of impacts which introduces redundancy and ambiguity in an instrument prized for its clarity and simplicity. This analysis of the GPs addresses concerns that the GPs propose an overly process-oriented and risk-management approach that leaves business too much flexibility and discretion. A closer look reveals that mitigation in the GPs entails multiple meanings, functions and organizational contexts. A surprisingly multifaceted concept is placed at the center of HRDD. To realize its human rights protection potential, the notion of HRDD must impress with utmost clarity that HRDD cannot be merely about reducing abuses and applying bandaids on symptoms, but should aim for not less than elimination of infringements of human rights from a company’s operations and should address the underlying, deeper causes of abuses. Clarifying mitigation will ensure the internal consistency of the GPs and present HRDD as a rightholder-centered risk management approach suited to the human rights context

Three baselines for business and human rights

After endorsing the UN Guiding Principles on business and human rights (UNGPs) in 2011, the UN began in 2014 work on a possible treaty on business and human rights. This brief explains the progression of legal reasoning around corporate human rights responsibilities during the last two decades. One can identify three stages, or “baselines”, that were drawn in the mid-2000s, in 2011, and post-2014 on how to regulate the activities of multinational enterprises (MNEs). The argument here is that the third legalization baseline should not instinctively revert to the first legalization baseline. Instead, it is imperative for the third legalization baseline to reflect a more complex regulatory understanding of legalizing the BHR field and use the leverage of multiple transnational policy channels to find new protective pathways

Business and Human Rights in Cambodia 2021 : A compendium of instruments and materials, volumes I-III

The compendium is an aid for lecturers to prepare classes and seminars on business and human rights in Cambodia. Teachers from several academic disciplines – law, management, political science, social science, and media – will find carefully selected materials and numerous aspects on which to build a rewarding classroom experience. The compendium has three parts. Part I covers the policy frameworks for ‘human rights and business’. Part II is a deep dive into the systems companies set up to ensure responsible business conduct. Part III further contextualizes what the corporate responsibility entails regarding specific human rights

Voluntary Reporting: The Global Compact

The presentation of the United Nation’s (UN) Global Compact (hereinafter “GC” or “Compact”) in a book dedicated to monitoring mechanisms requires an urgent clarification: the GC itself is not a monitoring mechanism meant to deliver corporate accountability. Still, the Compact is an important hub in a broader network of initiatives dealing with responsible business practices and corporate accountability. Furthermore, the GC has reporting requirements that have recently been strengthened. The initiative began as a personal initiative of Secretary-General Kofi Annan in 1999, as an attempt to address imbalances of economic globalisation; his aim was to enrol companies in a renewed push by the United Nations to achieve its goals of peace, development and poverty-reduction. By inviting businesses to the table, the UN has embarked with the Global Compact on a controversial journey through uncharted territory. The article begins with a description of the initiative itself. The provisions of the Compact regarding corporate reporting will be detailed as well as the GC’s relationship with the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), which is a scheme dedicated solely to sustainability reporting. After that some broader observations on corporate reporting from a human rights perspective will follow

The Effects of CSR for the Protection of Human Rights

This article addresses the relationship between transnational corporations (TNCs) and human rights (HR) in the third world. My focus will be on three aspects: first, the rise of an informal norm (the norm of effectiveness) which I perceive as a new and more pragmatic approach to complex human rights issues; second, the possible systemic effects of corporate voluntary initiatives; and third, the necessity of a more holistic view of the link between TNCs and HR. The understanding of the interplay between voluntary corporate initiatives and law/policy is essential in making sense of the link TNCs-HR from a legal perspective. I propose that this is a way of approaching TNC-HR issues in the tradition of human rights, as they are institutionalised in international law, while remaining in touch with the political, social and economic realities of the time

Regulating transnational corporations at the United Nations – the negotiations of a treaty on business and human rights

The United Nations is the arena for a renewed push to regulate transnational corporations (TNCs) and their supply chains. This article analyses the ongoing efforts of a multilateral organization to strengthen the human rights legal framework, especially the design choices posed by the treaty negotiations as well as the role of the UN Human Rights Council in the broader regulatory ecosystem around TNCs. Is there complementarity or conflict among on-going initiatives to regulate TNCs? Is there continuity or fracture in the successive waves of UN attempts to legalize TNC responsibilities? The analytical lenses are human rights due diligence with an emphasis on root causes, which is a gateway for exploring more systemic interventions. Thus, deeper causes of harm identifiable in global supply chains operations are identified and systematically compared to see how public and private norm-setters take them into account or downplay them. For this purpose, the article draws on treaty drafts and reports from the UN Intergovernmental Working Group and materials from four other areas: responsible business conduct, due diligence laws, the UN Guiding Principles, and the UN’s earlier efforts at TNC regulation