歐盟技術(shù)政策簡(jiǎn)報(bào) 2023年9月 eu tech policy brief -september 2023

GuidinGPrinciPlesonBusiness

andHumanriGHts

Implementing theUnitedNations“Protect,RespectandRemedy”Framework

GuidinGPrinciPlesonBusiness

andHumanriGHts

Implementing theUnitedNations“Protect,RespectandRemedy”Framework

NewYorkandGeneva,2011

Note

ThedesignationsemployedandthepresentationofthematerialinthispublicationdonotimplytheexpressionofanyopinionwhatsoeveronthepartoftheSecretariatoftheUnitedNationsconcerningthelegalstatusofanycountry,territory,cityorarea,orofitsauthorities,orconcerningthedelimitationofitsfrontiersorboundaries.

SymbolsofUnitedNationsdocumentsarecomposedofcapitalletterscombinedwithfigures.MentionofsuchafigureindicatesareferencetoaUnitedNationsdocument.

HR/PUB/11/04

?2011UnitedNations

Allworldwiderightsreserved

iii

contents

I.THESTATEDUTYTOPROTECTHUMANRIGHTS3

A.FOUNDATIONAlPRINCIPlES3

B.OPERATIONAlPRINCIPlES4

II.THECORPORATERESPONSIBIlITYTORESPECT

HUMANRIGHTS13

A.FOUNDATIONAlPRINCIPlES13

B.OPERATIONAlPRINCIPlES16

III.ACCESSTOREMEDY27

A.FOUNDATIONAlPRINCIPlE27

B.OPERATIONAlPRINCIPlES28

iv

Thispublicationcontainsthe"GuidingPrinciplesonBusinessandHumanRights:ImplementingtheUnitedNations‘Protect,RespectandRemedy’Framework",whichweredevelopedbytheSpecialRepresentativeoftheSecretary-Generalontheissueofhumanrightsandtransnationalcorporationsandotherbusinessenterprises.TheSpecialRepresentativeannexedtheGuidingPrinciplestohisfinalreporttotheHumanRightsCouncil(A/HRC/17/31),whichalsoincludesanintroductiontotheGuidingPrinciplesandanoverviewoftheprocessthatledtotheirdevelopment.

TheHumanRightsCouncilendorsedtheGuidingPrinciplesinitsresolution17/4of16June2011.

1

GENERAlPRINCIPlES

TheseGuidingPrinciplesaregroundedinrecognitionof:

(a)States’existingobligationstorespect,protectandfulfilhumanrightsandfundamentalfreedoms;

(b)Theroleofbusinessenterprisesasspecializedorgansofsocietyperformingspecializedfunctions,requiredtocomplywithallapplicablelawsandtorespecthumanrights;

(c)Theneedforrightsandobligationstobematchedtoappropriateandeffectiveremedieswhenbreached.

TheseGuidingPrinciplesapplytoallStatesandtoallbusinessenterprises,bothtransnationalandothers,regardlessoftheirsize,sector,location,ownershipandstructure.

TheseGuidingPrinciplesshouldbeunderstoodasacoherentwholeandshouldberead,individuallyandcollectively,intermsoftheirobjectiveofenhancingstandardsandpracticeswithregardtobusinessandhumanrightssoastoachievetangibleresultsforaffectedindividualsandcommunities,andtherebyalsocontributingtoasociallysustainableglobalization.

NothingintheseGuidingPrinciplesshouldbereadascreatingnewinternationallawobligations,oraslimitingorundermininganylegalobligationsaStatemayhaveundertakenorbesubjecttounderinternationallawwithregardtohumanrights.

TheseGuidingPrinciplesshouldbeimplementedinanon-discriminatorymanner,withparticularattentiontotherightsandneedsof,aswellasthechallengesfacedby,individualsfromgroupsorpopulationsthatmaybeatheightenedriskofbecomingvulnerableormarginalized,andwithdueregardtothedifferentrisksthatmaybefacedbywomenandmen.

3

I.THESTATEDUTYTOPROTECTHUMANRIGHTS

A.FOUNDATIONAlPRINCIPlES

1.Statesmustprotectagainsthumanrightsabusewithintheirterritoryand/orjurisdictionbythirdparties,includingbusinessenterprises.Thisrequirestakingappropriatestepstoprevent,investigate,punishandredresssuchabusethrougheffectivepolicies,legislation,regulationsandadjudication.

Commentary

States’internationalhumanrightslawobligationsrequirethattheyrespect,protectandfulfilthehumanrightsofindividualswithintheirterritoryand/orjurisdiction.Thisincludesthedutytoprotectagainsthumanrightsabusebythirdparties,includingbusinessenterprises.

TheStatedutytoprotectisastandardofconduct.Therefore,Statesarenotperseresponsibleforhumanrightsabusebyprivateactors.However,Statesmaybreachtheirinternationalhumanrightslawobligationswheresuchabusecanbeattributedtothem,orwheretheyfailtotakeappropriatestepstoprevent,investigate,punishandredressprivateactors’abuse.WhileStatesgenerallyhavediscretionindecidinguponthesesteps,theyshouldconsiderthefullrangeofpermissiblepreventativeandremedialmeasures,includingpolicies,legislation,regulationsandadjudication.Statesalsohavethedutytoprotectandpromotetheruleoflaw,includingbytakingmeasurestoensureequalitybeforethelaw,fairnessinitsapplication,andbyprovidingforadequateaccountability,legalcertainty,andproceduralandlegaltransparency.

ThischapterfocusesonpreventativemeasureswhilechapterIIIoutlinesremedialmeasures.

2.Statesshouldsetoutclearlytheexpectationthatallbusinessenterprisesdomiciledintheirterritoryand/orjurisdictionrespecthumanrightsthroughouttheiroperations.

Commentary

AtpresentStatesarenotgenerallyrequiredunderinternationalhumanrightslawtoregulatetheextraterritorialactivitiesofbusinessesdomiciledintheir

4

territoryand/orjurisdiction.Noraretheygenerallyprohibitedfromdoingso,providedthereisarecognizedjurisdictionalbasis.WithintheseparameterssomehumanrightstreatybodiesrecommendthathomeStatestakestepstopreventabuseabroadbybusinessenterpriseswithintheirjurisdiction.

TherearestrongpolicyreasonsforhomeStatestosetoutclearlytheexpectationthatbusinessesrespecthumanrightsabroad,especiallywheretheStateitselfisinvolvedinorsupportsthosebusinesses.Thereasonsincludeensuringpredictabilityforbusinessenterprisesbyprovidingcoherentandconsistentmessages,andpreservingtheState’sownreputation.

Stateshaveadoptedarangeofapproachesinthisregard.Somearedomesticmeasureswithextraterritorialimplications.Examplesincluderequirementson“parent”companiestoreportontheglobaloperationsoftheentireenterprise;multilateralsoft-lawinstrumentssuchastheGuidelinesforMultinationalEnterprisesoftheOrganisationforEconomicCo-operationandDevelopment;andperformancestandardsrequiredbyinstitutionsthatsupportoverseasinvestments.Otherapproachesamounttodirectextraterritoriallegislationandenforcement.Thisincludescriminalregimesthatallowforprosecutionsbasedonthenationalityoftheperpetratornomatterwheretheoffenceoccurs.VariousfactorsmaycontributetotheperceivedandactualreasonablenessofStates’actions,forexamplewhethertheyaregroundedinmultilateralagreement.

B.OPERATIONAlPRINCIPlES

GENERAlSTATEREGUlATORYANDPOlICYFUNCTIONS

3.Inmeetingtheirdutytoprotect,Statesshould:

(a)Enforcelawsthatareaimedat,orhavetheeffectof,requiringbusinessenterprisestorespecthumanrights,andperiodicallytoassesstheadequacyofsuchlawsandaddressanygaps;

(b)Ensurethatotherlawsandpoliciesgoverningthecreationandongoingoperationofbusinessenterprises,suchascorporatelaw,donotconstrainbutenablebusinessrespectforhumanrights;

(c)Provideeffectiveguidancetobusinessenterprisesonhowtorespecthumanrightsthroughouttheiroperations;

(d)Encourage,andwhereappropriaterequire,businessenterprises

tocommunicatehowtheyaddresstheirhumanrightsimpacts.

5

Commentary

Statesshouldnotassumethatbusinessesinvariablyprefer,orbenefitfrom,Stateinaction,andtheyshouldconsiderasmartmixofmeasures–nationalandinternational,mandatoryandvoluntary–tofosterbusinessrespectforhumanrights.

ThefailuretoenforceexistinglawsthatdirectlyorindirectlyregulatebusinessrespectforhumanrightsisoftenasignificantlegalgapinStatepractice.Suchlawsmightrangefromnon-discriminationandlabourlawstoenvironmental,property,privacyandanti-briberylaws.Therefore,itisimportantforStatestoconsiderwhethersuchlawsarecurrentlybeingenforcedeffectively,andifnot,whythisisthecaseandwhatmeasuresmayreasonablycorrectthesituation.

ItisequallyimportantforStatestoreviewwhethertheselawsprovidethenecessarycoverageinlightofevolvingcircumstancesandwhether,togetherwithrelevantpolicies,theyprovideanenvironmentconducivetobusinessrespectforhumanrights.Forexample,greaterclarityinsomeareasoflawandpolicy,suchasthosegoverningaccesstoland,includingentitlementsinrelationtoownershiporuseofland,isoftennecessarytoprotectbothrights-holdersandbusinessenterprises.

Lawsandpoliciesthatgovernthecreationandongoingoperationofbusinessenterprises,suchascorporateandsecuritieslaws,directlyshapebusinessbehaviour.Yettheirimplicationsforhumanrightsremainpoorlyunderstood.Forexample,thereisalackofclarityincorporateandsecuritieslawregardingwhatcompaniesandtheirofficersarepermitted,letalonerequired,todoregardinghumanrights.Lawsandpoliciesinthisareashouldprovidesufficientguidancetoenableenterprisestorespecthumanrights,withdueregardtotheroleofexistinggovernancestructuressuchascorporateboards.

Guidancetobusinessenterprisesonrespectinghumanrightsshouldindicateexpectedoutcomesandhelpsharebestpractices.Itshouldadviseonappropriatemethods,includinghumanrightsduediligence,andhowtoconsidereffectivelyissuesofgender,vulnerabilityand/ormarginalization,recognizingthespecificchallengesthatmaybefacedbyindigenouspeoples,women,nationalorethnicminorities,religiousandlinguistic

6

minorities,children,personswithdisabilities,andmigrantworkersandtheirfamilies.

NationalhumanrightsinstitutionsthatcomplywiththeParisPrincipleshaveanimportantroletoplayinhelpingStatesidentifywhetherrelevantlawsarealignedwiththeirhumanrightsobligationsandarebeingeffectivelyenforced,andinprovidingguidanceonhumanrightsalsotobusinessenterprisesandothernon-Stateactors.

Communicationbybusinessenterprisesonhowtheyaddresstheirhumanrightsimpactscanrangefrominformalengagementwithaffectedstakeholderstoformalpublicreporting.Stateencouragementof,orwhereappropriaterequirementsfor,suchcommunicationareimportantinfosteringrespectforhumanrightsbybusinessenterprises.Incentivestocommunicateadequateinformationcouldincludeprovisionstogiveweighttosuchself-reportingintheeventofanyjudicialoradministrativeproceeding.Arequirementtocommunicatecanbeparticularlyappropriatewherethenatureofbusinessoperationsoroperatingcontextsposeasignificantrisktohumanrights.Policiesorlawsinthisareacanusefullyclarifywhatandhowbusinessesshouldcommunicate,helpingtoensureboththeaccessibilityandaccuracyofcommunications.

Anystipulationofwhatwouldconstituteadequatecommunicationshouldtakeintoaccountrisksthatitmayposetothesafetyandsecurityofindividualsandfacilities;legitimaterequirementsofcommercialconfidentiality;andvariationsincompanies’sizeandstructures.

Financialreportingrequirementsshouldclarifythathumanrightsimpactsinsomeinstancesmaybe“material”or“significant”totheeconomicperformanceofthebusinessenterprise.

THESTATE-BUSINESSNExUS

4.StatesshouldtakeadditionalstepstoprotectagainsthumanrightsabusesbybusinessenterprisesthatareownedorcontrolledbytheState,orthatreceivesubstantialsupportandservicesfromStateagenciessuchasexportcreditagenciesandofficialinvestmentinsuranceorguaranteeagencies,including,whereappropriate,byrequiringhumanrightsduediligence.

7

Commentary

Statesindividuallyaretheprimaryduty-bearersunderinternationalhumanrightslaw,andcollectivelytheyarethetrusteesoftheinternationalhumanrightsregime.WhereabusinessenterpriseiscontrolledbytheStateorwhereitsactscanbeattributedotherwisetotheState,anabuseofhumanrightsbythebusinessenterprisemayentailaviolationoftheState’sowninternationallawobligations.Moreover,thecloserabusinessenterpriseistotheState,orthemoreitreliesonstatutoryauthorityortaxpayersupport,thestrongertheState’spolicyrationalebecomesforensuringthattheenterpriserespectshumanrights.

WhereStatesownorcontrolbusinessenterprises,theyhavegreatestmeanswithintheirpowerstoensurethatrelevantpolicies,legislationandregulationsregardingrespectforhumanrightsareimplemented.SeniormanagementtypicallyreportstoStateagencies,andassociatedgovernmentdepartmentshavegreaterscopeforscrutinyandoversight,includingensuringthateffectivehumanrightsduediligenceisimplemented.(Theseenterprisesarealsosubjecttothecorporateresponsibilitytorespecthumanrights,addressedinchapterII.)

ArangeofagencieslinkedformallyorinformallytotheStatemayprovidesupportandservicestobusinessactivities.Theseincludeexportcreditagencies,officialinvestmentinsuranceorguaranteeagencies,developmentagenciesanddevelopmentfinanceinstitutions.Wheretheseagenciesdonotexplicitlyconsidertheactualandpotentialadverseimpactsonhumanrightsofbeneficiaryenterprises,theyputthemselvesatrisk–inreputational,financial,politicalandpotentiallylegalterms–forsupportinganysuchharm,andtheymayaddtothehumanrightschallengesfacedbytherecipientState.

Giventheserisks,Statesshouldencourageand,whereappropriate,requirehumanrightsduediligencebytheagenciesthemselvesandbythosebusinessenterprisesorprojectsreceivingtheirsupport.Arequirementforhumanrightsduediligenceismostlikelytobeappropriatewherethenatureofbusinessoperationsoroperatingcontextsposesignificantrisktohumanrights.

8

5.Statesshouldexerciseadequateoversightinordertomeettheirinternationalhumanrightsobligationswhentheycontractwith,orlegislatefor,businessenterprisestoprovideservicesthatmayimpactupontheenjoymentofhumanrights.

Commentary

Statesdonotrelinquishtheirinternationalhumanrightslawobligationswhentheyprivatizethedeliveryofservicesthatmayimpactupontheenjoymentofhumanrights.FailurebyStatestoensurethatbusinessenterprisesperformingsuchservicesoperateinamannerconsistentwiththeState’shumanrightsobligationsmayentailbothreputationalandlegalconsequencesfortheStateitself.Asanecessarystep,therelevantservicecontractsorenablinglegislationshouldclarifytheState’sexpectationsthattheseenterprisesrespecthumanrights.Statesshouldensurethattheycaneffectivelyoverseetheenterprises’activities,includingthroughtheprovisionofadequateindependentmonitoringandaccountabilitymechanisms.

6.Statesshouldpromoterespectforhumanrightsbybusinessenterpriseswithwhichtheyconductcommercialtransactions.

Commentary

Statesconductavarietyofcommercialtransactionswithbusinessenterprises,notleastthroughtheirprocurementactivities.ThisprovidesStates–individuallyandcollectively–withuniqueopportunitiestopromoteawarenessofandrespectforhumanrightsbythoseenterprises,includingthroughthetermsofcontracts,withdueregardtoStates’relevantobligationsundernationalandinternationallaw.

SUPPORTINGBUSINESSRESPECTFORHUMANRIGHTSINCONFlICT-AFFECTEDAREAS

7.Becausetheriskofgrosshumanrightsabusesisheightenedinconflict-affectedareas,Statesshouldhelpensurethatbusinessenterprisesoperatinginthosecontextsarenotinvolvedwithsuchabuses,includingby:

(a)Engagingattheearlieststagepossiblewithbusinessenterprisestohelpthemidentify,preventandmitigatethehumanrights-relatedrisksoftheiractivitiesandbusinessrelationships;

9

(b)Providingadequateassistancetobusinessenterprisestoassessandaddresstheheightenedrisksofabuses,payingspecialattentiontobothgender-basedandsexualviolence;

(c)Denyingaccesstopublicsupportandservicesforabusinessenterprisethatisinvolvedwithgrosshumanrightsabusesandrefusestocooperateinaddressingthesituation;

(d)Ensuringthattheircurrentpolicies,legislation,regulationsandenforcementmeasuresareeffectiveinaddressingtheriskofbusinessinvolvementingrosshumanrightsabuses.

Commentary

Someoftheworsthumanrightsabusesinvolvingbusinessoccuramidconflictoverthecontrolofterritory,resourcesoraGovernmentitself–wherethehumanrightsregimecannotbeexpectedtofunctionasintended.ResponsiblebusinessesincreasinglyseekguidancefromStatesabouthowtoavoidcontributingtohumanrightsharminthesedifficultcontexts.Innovativeandpracticalapproachesareneeded.Inparticular,itisimportanttopayattentiontotheriskofsexualandgender-basedviolence,whichisespeciallyprevalentduringtimesofconflict.

ItisimportantforallStatestoaddressissuesearlybeforesituationsonthegrounddeteriorate.Inconflict-affectedareas,the“host”Statemaybeunabletoprotecthumanrightsadequatelyduetoalackofeffectivecontrol.Wheretransnationalcorporationsareinvolved,their“home”StatesthereforehaverolestoplayinassistingboththosecorporationsandhostStatestoensurethatbusinessesarenotinvolvedwithhumanrightsabuse,whileneighboringStatescanprovideimportantadditionalsupport.

Toachievegreaterpolicycoherenceandassistbusinessenterprisesadequatelyinsuchsituations,homeStatesshouldfosterclosercooperationamongtheirdevelopmentassistanceagencies,foreignandtradeministries,andexportfinanceinstitutionsintheircapitalsandwithintheirembassies,aswellasbetweentheseagenciesandhostGovernmentactors;developearly-warningindicatorstoalertgovernmentagenciesandbusinessenterprisestoproblems;andattachappropriateconsequencestoanyfailurebyenterprisestocooperateinthesecontexts,includingbydenyingorwithdrawingexistingpublicsupportorservices,orwherethatisnotpossible,denyingtheirfutureprovision.

10

Statesshouldwarnbusinessenterprisesoftheheightenedriskofbeinginvolvedwithgrossabusesofhumanrightsinconflict-affectedareas.Theyshouldreviewwhethertheirpolicies,legislation,regulationsandenforcementmeasureseffectivelyaddressthisheightenedrisk,includingthroughprovisionsforhumanrightsduediligencebybusiness.Wheretheyidentifygaps,Statesshouldtakeappropriatestepstoaddressthem.Thismayincludeexploringcivil,administrativeorcriminalliabilityforenterprisesdomiciledoroperatingintheirterritoryand/orjurisdictionthatcommitorcontributetogrosshumanrightsabuses.Moreover,Statesshouldconsidermultilateralapproachestopreventandaddresssuchacts,aswellassupporteffectivecollectiveinitiatives.

AllthesemeasuresareinadditiontoStates’obligationsunderinternationalhumanitarianlawinsituationsofarmedconflict,andunderinternationalcriminallaw.

ENSURINGPOlICYCOHERENCE

8.Statesshouldensurethatgovernmentaldepartments,agenciesandotherState-basedinstitutionsthatshapebusinesspracticesareawareofandobservetheState’shumanrightsobligationswhenfulfillingtheirrespectivemandates,includingbyprovidingthemwithrelevantinformation,trainingandsupport.

Commentary

ThereisnoinevitabletensionbetweenStates’humanrightsobligationsandthelawsandpoliciestheyputinplacethatshapebusinesspractices.However,attimes,Stateshavetomakedifficultbalancingdecisionstoreconciledifferentsocietalneeds.Toachievetheappropriatebalance,Statesneedtotakeabroadapproachtomanagingthebusinessandhumanrightsagenda,aimedatensuringbothverticalandhorizontaldomesticpolicycoherence.

VerticalpolicycoherenceentailsStateshavingthenecessarypolicies,lawsandprocessestoimplementtheirinternationalhumanrightslawobligations.Horizontalpolicycoherencemeanssupportingandequippingdepartmentsandagencies,atboththenationalandsubnationallevels,thatshapebusinesspractices–includingthoseresponsibleforcorporatelaw

11

andsecuritiesregulation,investment,exportcreditandinsurance,tradeandlabour–tobeinformedofandactinamannercompatiblewiththeGovernments’humanrightsobligations.

9.Statesshouldmaintainadequatedomesticpolicyspacetomeettheirhumanrightsobligationswhenpursuingbusiness-relatedpolicyobjectiveswithotherStatesorbusinessenterprises,forinstancethroughinvestmenttreatiesorcontracts.

Commentary

EconomicagreementsconcludedbyStates,eitherwithotherStatesorwithbusinessenterprises–suchasbilateralinvestmenttreaties,free-tradeagreementsorcontractsforinvestmentprojects–createeconomicopportunitiesforStates.ButtheycanalsoaffectthedomesticpolicyspaceofGovernments.Forexample,thetermsofinternationalinvestmentagreementsmayconstrainStatesfromfullyimplementingnewhumanrightslegislation,orputthematriskofbindinginternationalarbitrationiftheydoso.Therefore,Statesshouldensurethattheyretainadequatepolicyandregulatoryabilitytoprotecthumanrightsunderthetermsofsuchagreements,whileprovidingthenecessaryinvestorprotection.

10.States,whenactingasmembersofmultilateralinstitutionsthatdealwithbusiness-relatedissues,should:

(a)SeektoensurethatthoseinstitutionsneitherrestraintheabilityoftheirmemberStatestomeettheirdutytoprotectnorhinderbusinessenterprisesfromrespectinghumanrights;

(b)Encouragethoseinstitutions,withintheirrespectivemandatesandcapacities,topromotebusinessrespectforhumanrightsand,whererequested,tohelpStatesmeettheirdutytoprotectagainsthumanrightsabusebybusinessenterprises,includingthroughtechnicalassistance,capacity-buildingandawareness-raising;

(c)DrawontheseGuidingPrinciplestopromotesharedunderstandingandadvanceinternationalcooperationinthemanagementofbusinessandhumanrightschallenges.

12

Commentary

Greaterpolicycoherenceisalsoneededattheinternationallevel,includingwhereStatesparticipateinmultilateralinstitutionsthatdealwithbusiness-relatedissues,suchasinternationaltradeandfinancialinstitutions.Statesretaintheirinternationalhumanrightslawobligationswhentheyparticipateinsuchinstitutions.

Capacity-buildingandawareness-raisingthroughsuchinstitutionscanplayavitalroleinhelpingallStatestofulfiltheirdutytoprotect,includingbyenablingthesharingofinformationaboutchallengesandbestpractices,thuspromotingmoreconsistentapproaches.

CollectiveactionthroughmultilateralinstitutionscanhelpStatesleveltheplayingfieldwithregardtobusinessrespectforhumanrights,butitshoulddosobyraisingtheperformanceoflaggards.CooperationbetweenStates,multilateralinstitutionsandotherstakeholderscanalsoplayanimportantrole.TheseGuidingPrinciplesprovideacommonreferencepointinthisregard,andcouldserveasausefulbasisforbuildingacumulativepositiveeffectthattakesintoaccounttherespectiverolesandresponsibilitiesofallrelevantstakeholders.

13

II.THECORPORATERESPONSIBIlITYTORESPECTHUMANRIGHTS

A.FOUNDATIONAlPRINCIPlES

11.Businessenterprisesshouldrespecthumanrights.Thismeansthattheyshouldavoidinfringingonthehumanrightsofothersandshouldaddressadversehumanrightsimpactswithwhichtheyareinvolved.

Commentary

Theresponsibilitytorespecthumanrightsisaglobalstandardofexpectedconductforallbusinessenterpriseswherevertheyoperate.ItexistsindependentlyofStates’abilitiesand/orwillingnesstofulfiltheirownhumanrightsobligations,anddoesnotdiminishthoseobligations.Anditexistsoverandabovecompliancewithnationallawsandregulationsprotectinghumanrights.

Addressingadversehumanrightsimpactsrequirestakingadequatemeasuresfortheirprevention,mitigationand,whereappropriate,remediation.

Businessenterprisesmayundertakeothercommitmentsoractivitiestosupportandpromotehumanrights,whichmaycontributetotheenjoymentofrights.Butthisdoesnotoffsetafailuretorespecthumanrightsthroughouttheiroperations.

BusinessenterprisesshouldnotundermineStates’abilitiestomeettheirownhumanrightsobligations,includingbyactionsthatmightweakentheintegrityofjudicialprocesses.

12.Theresponsibilityofbusinessenterprisestorespecthumanrightsreferstointernationallyrecognizedhumanrights–understood,ataminimum,asthoseexpressedintheInternationalBillofHumanRightsandtheprinciplesconcerningfundamentalrightssetoutintheInternationallabourOrganization’sDeclarationonFundamentalPrinciplesandRightsatWork.

Commentary

Becausebusinessenterprisescanhaveanimpactonvirtuallytheentirespectrumofinter