I have written about the UN Working Group on the issue of business and Human Rights before (e.g., Outcome
of the second session of the Working Group on the issue of human rights
and transnational corporations and other business enterprises; On the New UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights: Building on the UN Guiding Principles. The Working Group provides an institutional framework for carrying on the work of John Ruggie, who as Special Representative of the UN Secretary General for Business and Human Rights was instrumental in developing and the U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
Working Group released its report to the General Assembly, where it outlines recommendations to States, business enterprises and other stakeholders on implementation of the UN Guiding Principles.
General Assembly 67th Sess, Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises A/67/285 Aug. 10, 2012 (the "Working Group Report"). The Working Group Report is best read alongside the Report of the SG on the contribution of the United Nations system as a whole to the advancement of the business and human rights agenda and the dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights A/HRC/21/21. This post provides a critical summary of the Working Group Report.
As for the rest, my research assistant Nabih Haddad (Penn State SIA expected 2013) prepared this summary of the Working Group Report:
The Working Group Report is meant to provide an overview of strategic developments in the embedding of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights into global governance frameworks and their dissemination and implementation by stakeholders. Also highlighted are the Working Group's efforts at developing criteria for evaluating implementation tools and guidance. The object is to further the project of convergence in interpretation and for maintaining the integrity of the Guiding Principles. The Working Group Report also describes specific projects to be undertaken in support of the effective dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles. Lastly, the Working Group Report includes a set of initial recommendations to States, business enterprises and other stakeholders on the dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles.
The recommendations are interesting for their focus. Starting from the recommendations of the Secretary General in his Report (Report
of the SG on the contribution of the United Nations system as a whole
to the advancement of the business and human rights agenda and the
dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business
and Human Rights A/HRC/21/21) the Working Group Report then focused on capacity building within the non-state sector by actions of states, intergovernmental organizations and businesses. Most interesting is the focus on the need for structures of authoritative interpretation of the Guiding Principles and for discipline grounded on the legitimacy of the interpretation of the Working Group and its efforts. (Paragraph 85). Yet there is a concession here as well, one to the inevitability of independent interpretation. In those cases, the fall back is process. The object is the protection of the integrity of the Guiding Principles, which is in turn an expression of a fear that interpretation may be used to weaken or water down the Guiding Principles in ways that make them ineffective for protecting human rights.
In a sense the recommendations in Paragraph 85 are the most important of the Working Group Report. It begins the conversation on the greatest weakness of the project leading up to the endorsement of the Guiding Principles--the development of an institutional apparatus for the application and elaboration of the Guiding Principles. At the same time, the Guiding Principles cannot acquire traction unless they become naturalized in the everyday behavior of business and civil society. That cannot be commanded. But to throw the Guiding Principles out to the global commons, a necessary step in its development as global common understanding, is to risk that the Guiding Principles will themselves fracture. In the end there will be one Guiding Principles but multiple interpretations that will reflect regional, economic and other sectoral contexts. The Working Group comes as close as it dares to proffering itself as the institutional heartland of Guiding Principle interpretation, but refrains from insisting on the point. As a back up it suggests that interpretation be supported through consensus--another way of ensuring that the Working Group might be involved in interpretative efforts outside of its direct control. If consultation is the touchstone of legitimacy, and the Working Group stands at the center of capacity building (and indeed at the center of training in interpretation), they may be able to achieve indirectly and through control of "soft" process what they could not directly compel.
Civil society ought to tale the Working Group up on the implied invitation to jump into the Guiding Principles and its application. Yet the building of capacity need not depend on the permission or imprimatur of either the Working Group or others who purport to speak with authority. There was a bit of genius in John Ruggie's decision to hurl the Guiding Principles out onto the global governance sphere without a guidance infrastructure or managerial apparatus ot direct the development of the Guiding Principles. The Guiding Principles are up for anyone to claim and for everyone to apply. Unmoored and free of the bailiwick of some coercive apparatus or other, any civil society organ with as sense of the value of application is free to try their hand at formulating either interpretation or implementation strategies that, if they produce results, may by adoption by others, make their own authority. That is true bottom up customary law building of a formidable kind. But to set the Guiding Principles free will require the civil society sector to actually take ownership of the Guiding Principles, free of the need for approval and direction by those little batter able to provide advice. And that is, ironically, where the Working Group best serves it purpose--not by forming views, but by providing a space where civil society and other governance sectors actually implementing the Guiding Principles may meet and seek to develop common positions and strategies to naturalize the Guiding Principles within the behavior norms of economic enterpises.
VI. Recommendations
74. The United Nations should examine the feasibility of establishing a global multi-stakeholder fund on business and human rights to support building the capacity of stakeholders to implement the Guiding Principles. Resources are urgently needed to address the gap in the capacity of stakeholders in all regions to implement the Guiding Principles.
75. The United Nations should consider supporting the establishment of a global electronic platform for stakeholders through which they may share information about dissemination and implementation efforts, so as to facilitate the identification and sharing of lessons learned and good practices.
76. The United Nations system should follow the recommendations of the Secretary-General on how the United Nations system as a whole can contribute to advancing the business and human rights agenda and disseminating and implementing the Guiding Principles. This includes embedding the Guiding Principles across the activities of United Nations system entities and building capacity both inside the United Nations and among relevant external actors, including States, business enterprises and civil society organizations. Finally, the United Nations should take the Guiding Principles into account in all relevant internal and external policies and procedures.
77. International intergovernmental as well as private standard-setting entities and governance frameworks that issue policies, guidance or regulations for States and business enterprises in the field of business and human rights should engage and cooperate with the Working Group in identifying synergies and ensuring coherence and alignment with the minimum standards contained in the Guiding Principles.
78. Intergovernmental organizations, including regional bodies, should include business and human rights and the implementation of the Guiding Principles in the agenda of their institutions, and support dissemination, capacity-building and implementation efforts at the regional level, with all stakeholders. This is particularly necessary in regions where there is less awareness and fewer national initiatives for disseminating and implementing the Guiding Principles. Regional bodies should further engage in cross-regional dialogue so as to ensure the exchange of experience and coherence in efforts and guidance between regions.
79. States and business enterprises should scale up and sustain efforts to implement the Guiding Principles, including by dedicating sufficient resources and taking concrete measures for their implementation, and by establishing measurable and transparent indicators to assess their effective implementation. In doing so, they should consider actions that other States have successfully taken when beginning implementation, including efforts to disseminate the Guiding Principles, raise internal awareness, build capacity of national stakeholders, map and coordinate required actions across Government departments so as to ensure policy coherence, and engage in multi-stakeholder consultations for the purpose of discussing and agreeing on steps to implement the Guiding Principles at a national level.
80. National human rights institutions should continue and enhance their current efforts to support the dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles, including through capacity-building of relevant national actors, promoting multi-stakeholder dialogue and initiatives at the national level, and monitoring the implementation of the Guiding Principles at the national level, and in so doing, help to identify gaps and challenges in this regard.
81. In implementing the Guiding Principles, States and business enterprises should take particular care to address the heightened risk of vulnerability, discrimination and marginalization of certain groups of rights-holders, so as to ensure that business enterprises identify and address potential and actual adverse human rights impacts on such groups, through exercising human rights due diligence, and provide effective remedy when negative impacts occur. These groups include children, older persons, indigenous women and men, workers with precarious employment conditions, migrant workers, journalists, human rights defenders, community activists and leaders who protest against or raise allegations concerning the impact of business activities, and marginalized rural and urban communities, as well as minorities that are subject to discrimination and marginalization.
82. Business organizations in sectors that have not yet engaged with business and human rights issues should deploy efforts to identify sector-specific human rights issues and initiate steps to raise awareness, build capacity and implement the Guiding Principles within each sector, in dialogue with other stakeholders.
83. States, business organizations and transnational corporations should engage in enhanced efforts to raise awareness of the Guiding Principles, raise capacity and promote efforts to implement the Guiding Principles by small and medium-sized enterprises.
84. States and business enterprises should ensure that access to effective remedy is integrated within their efforts to meet the State duty to protect, and the corporate responsibility to respect, human rights, and engage in efforts to enhance access to effective judicial and non-judicial remedies by the Working Group and other stakeholders.
85. Stakeholders that develop tools and guidance on implementation of the Guiding Principles should follow the Working Group’s forthcoming criteria on how to ensure that tools and guidance are aligned with the Guiding Principles and follow a multi-stakeholder process. All stakeholders should refrain from unilateral interpretation of the Guiding Principles and from the development of guidance and tools without meaningful consultations with other stakeholders. Guidance and tools should not undermine the integrity of the Guiding Principles or encompass standards that are weaker than the Guiding Principles or international human rights standards. Initiatives to develop tools and guidance should coordinate with similar efforts by other stakeholders, so as to prevent duplication of efforts, ensure coherence and avert divergences in guidance. Guidance developed for one geographical context or sector should take into account relevant guidance and lessons learned from other contexts and sectors.
86. States, business enterprises, civil society organizations and other stakeholders should, prior to the Forum on Business and Human Rights, engage in dialogue on national implementation of the Guiding Principles, so as to identify national opportunities and challenges to the effective implementation of the Guiding Principles; and should, after the Forum, to ensure that priorities for global action identified at the Forum are acted upon in the national context. Other initiatives on business and human rights should engage and coordinate with the Forum on Business and Human Rights to ensure greater synergies.
(Pix (c) Larry Catá Backer 2012))
As for the rest, my research assistant Nabih Haddad (Penn State SIA expected 2013) prepared this summary of the Working Group Report:
Human rights and Transnational Corporations and OtherBusiness Enterprises[1]Sixty-seventh sessionItem 70 (c) of the provisional agenda[2]Promotion and protection of human rights: humanrights situations and reports of special rapporteursand representativeDate: 10 August 2012A/67/285Summary for Professor Larry Catá BackerBy Nabih HaddadGeneral Framework:This report, prepared by the Working Group,[3] is a general summary in regards to the aims of “embedding” the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights-- drafted by John Ruggie-- through various international governance frameworks, both public and private. The report details the current progress on integrating the Guiding Principles (GP) into various international governance frameworks and other societal organs, ranging from states, international organizations, private entities, governments, and so on. It highlights the current developments of the criteria developed by the Working Group for evaluating and implemental GP. The Working Group has created tools and offered guidance in order to maintain the integrity and robustness of the GP. The report concludes with the Working Group providing policy recommendations to every level of governance - global, regional, and national- on methods to further integrate the GP.IntroductionAt the seventeenth session, the Human rights Council “unanimously endorsed” the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The Human Rights Council then established the “Working Group” to take on the issues emphasized by the GP, transnational actors within the context of human rights.The Working Group was created with the purpose of promoting the effectiveness of the GP, through a comprehensive dissemination and implementation strategy, including:· Good Practices for States and Private Entities· Lesson Learned· Recommendations implementation· Used the GP to provide recommendations to domestic policiesThe first report to the Human Rights Council by the Working Group was presented in June 2012, which described the initiatives that were undertaken by stakeholders on operationalization the GP.The strategies comprised of 3 main work streams:· Promoting dissemination of the GO· Promoting the implementation of the GP· Embedding the GP in various global governance structure, especially the UN System as a whole· Reinforce convergence around the GP· Enhance accountability and transparency· Building a receptive environment for the GO to operateThe second session announced that “in order to promote convergence and integrity in the interpretation of the Guiding Principles, it would issue clarifications and guidance on specific aspects of the Guiding Principles, and develop process and quality criteria that should be taken into consideration by all stakeholders in their implementation. During the interactive dialogue with members of the Human Rights Council, delegations from all regional groups took the floor and expressed broad support for the Working Group’s strategy.”[4] [emphasis added]Contextual BackgroundThe report first discussed some of the historical aspects of the Ruggie Framework, i.e.:· six years of aggregate research· the developments· The aims of the Ruggie Framework (See p.4 para,1)· Described the aims of the GP in more detail and the various methods of implementation:o What steps States need take in order to further protect human rightso Provide blue prints for companies to know how to implement and respect human rights,o Ways to reduce the risk of human rights related harmso Steps needing to be taken to ensure effective remedy for those whose rights have been adversely affected by business activity.The Working Group and its Report to the Human Rights Council“As outlined in its report to the Human Rights Council, the mandate of the Working Group inscribes itself in the global financial, economic, environmental and social context, in which governance gaps and deep crises continue to have a negative impact on the human rights of individuals across the world.” [5] [Emphasis added]The report stressed that “However, current events illustrate that the actions of business enterprises, in the absence of stronger global governance mechanisms and preventive measures by States, have also actively contributed both to initiating such crises and to perpetuating their negative impacts.”[6] [Emphasis added]There is consensus that business enterprises are now part of the global context.· This Point has been made by Ruggie in other publications and others· The working Group is committed to the goals of the GP and believes that respecting human rights is a must, and it should be the foundation to any suitable solution to the contemporary challenge presented by transnational globalization.Global Capital and Standardization· “Several countries currently in a period of political transition are receiving orare about to receive large amounts of private investment.” [7]· Without the benchmarks and international standards or normative expectations in place, these projects could have negative human rights impacts on vulnerable sectors which would “result in limited developmental benefits to the population as a whole.”[8]· The Working Group, and other stakeholders, are providing additional guidance on how to implement the GP to various global contexts.The working Group aims at addressing the gap between dissemination and implementing the GP, and addressing the issue in a greater and sustained effort presented to all relevant stakeholders in order to prevent, reduce, and address adverse impacts on human rights that are linked to business activities.Institutionalization of the GP in the Global Governance FrameworksThe strategy of the Working Group is simple:· it aims to embed the Guiding Principles into current key international governance frameworkso In the hopes that it will levee power to encourage transnational private actors to implement the GP.(see, A/HRC/20/29 , and A/HRC/21/21)Key Global Governance Structures it Aims to and is working with“At its second session, the Working Group announced that in order to promote convergence and integrity in the interpretation of the Guiding Principles, it would issue clarification on interpretation of the Guiding Principles, as appropriate, and would also establish a set of simple criteria.” p.17o Criteria will address the need for guidance to be elaborated on the basis of multi-stakeholder engagement and dialogue.o Implementation and guideline tools meant for widespread domestic or international use that have not been the subject of meaningful consultation and may lack legitimacyInternational Systems of Governance: Inter-systemic Harmonization· The United Nations Systemo The Report Calls on the UN “as the foundation of the global governance system” (p.7) must leaded the dissemination implementation process of the GP.· The Working Groups engaged the UN’s Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) on the integration of the GP within its programmed.o The Work Group Welcomed the 20120 UNCTAD Investment Report [9]“which presents a comprehensive Investment Policy Framework for Sustainable Development, consisting of a set of core principles for investment policymaking, guidelines for national investment policies, and options for the design and use of international investment agreements.”[10]· The Working Group notes that the United Nations Committee on World Food Security endorsed the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forestso This was endorsed within the context of national food security in Rome on 11 May 2012o Incorporated due diligence and other aspects of the corporate responsibility to respect human rights in alignment with the Guiding Principles.· The Working Group noted the recognition of the responsibility of business to respect human rights, and the human rights due diligence requirements, in the revised Sustainability Framework of the International Finance Corporation (IFC).· Ongoing elaboration by the Committee on the Rights of the Childo Comment to child rights and the business sectoro Made a submission calling for alignment of the general comment with the Guiding Principles.The Working Group also takes note of the statement of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights on the obligations of States parties to the Covenant regarding the corporateOther International Organizations· Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have been substantially aligned with the Guiding Principles.o The working Group continues to regularly engaged with the OECD through effective exchanges on information and lessons learnedo It welcomes the OECDES the recommendations, as stated by the Working Group:§ “The Working Group also welcomes the recommendation of the OECD Council on common approaches for officially supported export credits and environmental and social due diligence issued by the Export Credit Group to its members (adopted by the Council on 28 June 2012). The recommendation highlights the need for members of the Export Credit Group to take the Guiding Principles into account and carry out human rights due diligence in order to identify how project related human rights impacts are being addressed, prior to approving such credits.”· Also appreciated the OECD network of national contact points for the Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.· The OECDo Investment Committee will also launch a Global Forum on Responsible Businesso Conduct in 2013, to support dialogue between OECD and non-OECD economies]o The Working Group has agreed with the OECD Investment Committee to formalize collaboration around efforts towards implementation of the Guiding Principles and the OECD Guidelines so as to ensure complementarily.· The OECD has advanced the Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-affected and High-risk Areas· EUo The Working Group has engaged extensively with the European Union (EU) in connection with its multiple initiatives on business and human rights, and reverences the GPo The Steering Committee for Human Rights of the Council of Europe has also stressed the central place of the Guiding Principles as an authoritative reference point· Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rightso Contacted the ASEAN on its baseline thematic study on the current state and practice of business and human rights towards the establishment of a common regional framework which will reference the Guiding Principles.· The Working Group notes that the General Assembly of the Organization of American States has recently adopted (on 4 June 2012) a resolution on the promotion of corporate social responsibility.STATES· The Working Group calls on Member States to integrate the Guiding Principles in the preparations and negotiations towards the United Nations development agenda beyond 2015. (P.10)· As stated in the Working Group strategy, dissemination of the Guiding Principles is not an end in itself, but rather a necessary means of achieving their comprehensive and effective implementation.(p10)Metrics and Tools· Other dissemination initiatives include conferences and workshops to raise awareness of the Guiding Principles, and also address specific issues and contexts.· The Working Group acknowledges that there are numerous initiatives aimed at disseminating the Guiding Principles. Despite these initiatives, however, there have been insufficient efforts to disseminate the Guiding Principles across all regions and all stakeholder groups.National Initiatives on the GP and CSR(more focused on the context of the UN Framework rather than general CSR) by States· Hosting by Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and North Irelando All Party Parliamentary Group on Corporate Social Responsibility of the United Kingdom Parliament.· The Working Group also participated in workshops (organized by the Government of the United States of America) with business enterprises[11]· The Government of the Netherlands has carried out a preliminary assessment of how policies across different ministries – aligned with the GP[12]· The European Commission is working with the EU member states for national plans for the implementation of the GP (are currently producing a report in the context of implementation in the EU)o Denmark hosted a EU conference[13] on CSR· The working group has also explored with UNICEF on methods to integrated GP in regards to vulnerably children. [14]· Tools and General Guidenceo The Working Group recognized the important of context and sector- specific guidance for implementation of the GP.o A few examples of general tools and metrics:§ The European Commission’s project [15]§ Guidelines of the GP for oil and gaso UNICEF launched a pilot workbook [16]o How to meet social responsibility to the respect of human rights toward children- Business lead initiatives: Autonomous Private Regulatory Systemso International Council on Mining and Metalso Local networks of the Global Compacto Union basedo Working Grouped engaged with SOMO, the Center for Human Rights and Environment (CEDHA) and Cividep on a draft guidelines in regards to Latin America[18]’- Capacity-Buildingo Efforts include§ Conferences§ Workshops§ Webinars! (GOOD METHODS TO DISSEMENATE A MISSION)§ Guidance materials§ Pilot projects directed to State Officials· Business reps· And Civil societyWorking Group Projects- Based on calculation with all stakeholder since 2011- National Plans of actiono Issues of cross governmental coordinationo Comprehensive Government strategyo Raise awareness of the GP and promote their implementationo Promote implementation and interpretation in regards to effective remedy by developing further guidance- Identify Strategic opportunities to embed the GP into global governance frameworkso State based frameworkso Multi stakeholder imitativeo Transnational private regulation bodies§ International financial sector§ International trade regime§ Establish collaboration and synergies§ Promote integrationRecommendations Made by Working Group- Calls on the UN to systematize the GP within its architectureo “The United Nations should examine the feasibility of establishing a global multi-stakeholder fund on business and human rights to support building the capacity of stakeholders to implement the Guiding Principles.”o The United Nations should consider supporting the establishment of a global electronic platformo The UN should as a system contribute to disseminating and implementing the GP- The leadership roles of private entitieso International intergovernmental and private standard-setting entities and governance frameworks should engage with the Working Group.- IOs ( as LAW MAKERS)o International organizations (IOs) should include business and human rights /GP within their agenda.§ States and Business should scale up the efforts to implement the GPo National human rights institutions should contribute to enhance their efforts to support the implementations of the GP§ States and private entities should take particular care to address the risks of marginalized groups and minorities- There should be more dialogs with relevant stakeholders prior to the Forum on Business and Human Rights
[1] A/67/285[2] A/67/150.[3] “The present report provides an analysis of strategic developments in the field of business and human rights since the submission of the report to the Human Rights Council and further outlines projects that the Working Group will develop in 2013 to put its strategy into practice. This report also sets out initial recommendations of the Working Group to States, business enterprises and other stakeholders on the dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles.” A/67/285[4] A/67/285.p.3[5] A/67/285. p.4, para 3[6] A/67/285. p.4,[7] A/67/285. p.4[8] Id.[9] United Nations publication, Sales No. E.12.II.D.3. Available from http://unctad.org/en/Pages/PressRelease.aspx?OriginalVersionID=78.[10] A/67/285. p.6[11] http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/04/188980.htm[12] Ministries of Foreign Affairs; Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation; and Safety andJustice.[13] http://eu2012.dk/en/Meetings/Conferences/Maj/Foerste-til-femtende/Business-and-Humanrights.[14] http://www.unicef.org/csr/12.htm.[15] http://www.ihrb.org/project/eu-sector-guidance/index.html.[16] http://www.unicef.org/csr/335.htm.[17] http://www.icmm.com/page/75929/integrating-human-rights-due-diligence-into-corporaterisk-management-processes.
[18] http://somo.nl/projects/business-respect-for-human-rights.
No comments:
Post a Comment