Abstract
AbstractAfter a decade, different businesses adhere to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). Some key commercial entities, however, remain largely outside of the UNGPs universe, including professional service providers (PSPs) who are retained by businesses to provide expert advice and services. These advisors include lawyers, management consultants, architects and others. Some may have specialized units that provide advice on the UNGPs when retained solely for that purpose. But when asked to provide general commercial legal advice, to design a building, or restructure a business, such advisors do not typically appear to apply the UNGPs, to identify negative human rights impacts and tailor their advice in a way that prevents or mitigates such impacts. This article explores the connection between the advice provided by PSPs and negative human rights impacts. It underscores the critical need for these advisors to align their business processes and advisory services with the UNGPs to avoid being enablers of human rights abuses.
Highlights
A global management consulting firm, McKinsey & Company (McKinsey), made headlines in the past couple of years for some of the counsel they had given clients that seemingly flew in the face of business respect for human rights
After a decade, different businesses adhere to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs)
What is the answer? How can professional service providers (PSPs) be seen as advisors who advise on the UNGPs and not as enablers of human rights abuses? This will take a multi-faceted approach and a recognition that experts who provide professional guidance are bound by the UNGPs
Summary
A global management consulting firm, McKinsey & Company (McKinsey), made headlines in the past couple of years for some of the counsel they had given clients that seemingly flew in the face of business respect for human rights. Turning down clients and losing revenue is not a desirable outcome.[16] Lawyers are concerned that mandatory reporting governments may conflict with their duty of confidentiality.[17] Similar inertia may exist when it comes to embracing the UNGPs by PSPs/advisors What would it look like if a consulting firm had to ‘know and show’ its adverse human rights impacts arising from its advisory business relationships?. Part III offers some initial recommendations while recognizing that each profession will be different in terms of how it is regulated and governed, and what ethical and licensing requirements may apply
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
