Strengthening Human Rights Due Diligence in Indonesia’s Gig Economy

This chapter looks at the concept of human rights and environmental due diligence and at its possible translation into a legally binding requirement at the national level and at the European Union (EU) level. After presenting its general definition, the chapter deals with the environmental and climate change dimensions of human rights due diligence, which are not explicitly addressed in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). It then presents the existing legislative initiatives at the national level, distinguishing between ‘transparency’ legislation focusing on reporting obligations and legislation on mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence, whose most recent examples were adopted in 2021. Finally, it illustrates the EU plans for a directive on mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence. While the European Commission’s proposal has been delayed several times, it might see the light in the course of 2022. The chapter highlights the possible role of this type of legislation in giving implementation to the UNGPs.Keywords(mandatory) human rights and environmental due diligenceModern Slavery ActFrench law on the duty of vigilanceEuropean UnionEnvironmental and climate due diligenceImpact assessments

This chapter explores the extent to which voluntary sustainability standards (VSS) may or may not contribute to the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and thus have transformative impacts. The first part is a content analysis of formal VSS requirements, based on the ITC Standards Map data, which points to a considerable number of formal correspondences between VSS criteria and all 17 SDGs, albeit some are less covered than others. This formal analysis is then contrasted with findings from impact studies and other reports on the real-life impacts of VSS. Most studies so far have found only modest or inconclusive sustainable development impacts in the context of VSS adoption. What is of greater concern, however, is growing evidence of the failure of social auditing, a procedure also used to certify and verify standards compliance, in uncovering or mitigating human and labour rights abuses in global value chains. Given the mutually reinforcing relationship between the SDGs and human rights, the pitfalls of certification and verification audits may compromise any transformative potential of VSS. Against this backdrop, there is also considerable doubt as to what role VSS can play in supporting corporate human rights and environmental due diligence in line with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, all the more so as the former is essentially about companies internalising respect for human rights rather than "outsourcing" it to an external scheme. Human rights and environmental due diligence across global value chains has been identified as a significant contribution of businesses to SDG implementation.

The link between human rights and environmental due diligence and public procurement has been recognized in soft law, and in a less consistent way in EU hard law. Particularly, it has been an issue of concern in the law-making process for the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. Despite increasing attention, considerable debate remains over the inclusion of human rights and environmental due diligence in public procurement, which is still an underdeveloped topic. This article contributes to enlightening the debate and filling this gap by exploring the link between human rights and environmental due diligence and public procurement, then by analysing whether and how human rights and environmental due diligence can be incorporated into EU public procurement as a contract performance condition and comply with the requirement of the link to the subject matter of the contract.

“Human Rights and Islamic Business: Towards Sustainability” delves into the intricate relationship between human rights principles and Islamic business practices in Indonesia, with a keen focus on the pivotal role played by the Business and Human Rights Risk Assessment (PRISMA) application in fostering sustainable business practices. This study meticulously scrutinizes how PRISMA can serve as an instrumental tool for businesses to meticulously assess and effectively mitigate human rights risks in their operational frameworks, thus harmonizing with Islamic principles and international human rights standards. Indonesia's unwavering commitment to embedding human rights principles within the fabric of business operations is prominently showcased through the issuance of Presidential Regulation No. 60 of 2023 on the National Strategy on Business and Human Rights (Stranas BHAM). This regulation serves as a pivotal cornerstone in the integration of human rights principles into the nation's business landscape.

Global supply chains in the agri-food sector are at risk of violations of human rights as well as labour and environmental standards. To address these risks, the German Due Diligence Act (LkSG for „Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichtengesetz”) was enacted, mandating corporate human rights, labour and environmental due diligence. Despite its significance, there is limited research on the LkSG’s impact on supplier management. This study aims to provide initial insights into how the LkSG affects supplier selection in the agri-food sector. We conducted qualitative analyses of expert interviews with fifteen company representatives from the German agri-food sector. The findings reveal that companies are confident in maintaining their current supply chains without systematically reducing their supplier base. They perceive the LkSG’s legal requirements primarily as a task for supplier development rather than selection. While there was no significant increase in supplier selection criteria related to human rights and the environment, some companies have given these criteria greater importance. Future suppliers to the German agri-food sector will need to provide more detailed information on human rights and environmental risks. Additionally, companies have become more selective in their choice of certification and verification schemes.

Проаналізовано функціонування інституцій системи державного управління України в контексті забезпечення реалізації та захисту прав людини. Доведено, що європейський вибір ставить перед українським публічним управлінням нові завдання, що стосуються передусім подальшої демократизації суспільства, яка передбачає розширення спектру основних прав та свобод громадян. Констатовано, що державне управління в Україні здійснюється з метою адаптації інститутів громадянського суспільства до європейських стандартів: верховенства права, сталого розвитку, забезпечення пріоритетності прав і свобод у всіх сферах державної діяльності, а також зміцнення демократії. Зазначено, що усе це є необхідною умовою інтеграції України до Європейського Союзу.

Ever since the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) be-gan to take off in the 1970s, multinational corporations (MNCs) and international organizations have attempted to implement a variety of voluntary initiatives to detect and prevent human rights and environ-mental abuses within corporate supply chains. Despite these voluntary initiatives, however, human rights violations and environmental dam-age have continued to occur frequently within the supply chains of MNCs, leading to increased calls for binding, “hard law” remedies. The adoption of the United Nations’ Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) in 2011 catalyzed efforts to adopt domestic mandatory human rights due diligence (mHRDD) laws, and since 2017, a growing number of nations have passed more comprehensive human rights and environmental due diligence (HREDD) laws that recognize the connection between human rights and the environment. The most ambitious HREDD proposal thus far is the European Union’s proposed Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CS3D), which, when enacted, will impose mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence requirements on corporations that conduct business in the European Union. This Note assesses the feasibility and desirability of adopting domes-tic HREDD legislation in the United States based on the framework provided by the EU’s proposed CS3D. The predominant reliance in the U.S. on voluntary CSR initiatives and limited disclosure regulations is insufficient to prevent human rights and environmental abuses in the supply chains of US-based MNCs. This Note argues that the proposed CS3D provides a promising model for how Congress could take strong-er action in this area. Although it would not completely prevent adverse impacts and could be initially challenging to implement because of the ambiguity surrounding its scope, comprehensive federal HREDD legislation based on the CS3D framework would be a significant step towards filling in the gaps in U.S. corporate accountability.

The last decades are indicative of an increasing global attention on the negative externalities that come from business operations: human rights violations and environmental harms related to business operations. Globalization has led to increasingly complex, dynamic and non-transparent global supply and value chains, thus making the burden of protecting human rights and environment even more difficult. The concept of mandatory human rights due diligence has been increasingly endorsed and proclaimed as a necessary solution to address these issues. This research aims to assess the ability of such a regulatory tool to serve as an instrument to protect human rights and the environment throughout the supply chain. The first part dives into examining recent developments in human rights due diligence adopted in the European Union. The second part of the research comprises an indepth assessment of the most recent legislative Draft proposed by the European Commission which aims to introduce an EUwide mandatory sustainability due diligence corporate duty. The last part is a doctrinal analysis of Corporate Governance which proves its important role in addressing human rights and environmental issues, as it is a tool for integrating the mandatory due diligence into the organisational culture of a business. The assessment of current national mandatory due diligence regulations shows that companies are not incentivized to develop a holistic approach but rather to focus on specific issues that are targeted through legislation. Moreover, they often apply only to certain categories of companies based on domicile or country of operation and number of employees or turnover which leads to fragmentation and discrepancies between states. The European Proposal is revolutionary in many aspects as it introduces a comprehensive human rights due diligence mechanism for companies. However, the provisions of the current draft have many weaknesses and loopholes that are likely to jeopardize the Directive’s effectiveness

The connection between the environment and human rights is not a surprising one. The enjoyment of human rights depends on a person’s ability to live free from interference and to have his or her rights protected. The interdependence of human rights and the protection of the environment is manifested in the full and effective enjoyment of the right to a healthy environment. This article argues that in order to protect vulnerable persons and communities facing environmental harm, a human rights framework—specifically the right to a healthy environment—must be applied. A human rights approach complements environmental justice work, recognizing that individuals and communities affected by environmental harm are rights-holders entitled to protection. Such communities are left out of important decisions about their environment and the effect of environmental harm in their lives. Individuals most vulnerable to environmental harm are often members of poor, rural, and disenfranchised communities. The destruction of the environment disproportionately affects these communities, preventing them from accessing basic natural resources, clean water and sanitation, adequate housing, food security, and access to health and medical assistance. Additionally, intersecting forms of discrimination exacerbate exclusion and marginalization. A human rights approach to environmental justice emphasizes the need to protect affected communities and holds the State responsible for recognizing their vulnerability and providing heightened protection. This article seeks to show that while the human right to a healthy environment has not been widely recognized, a robust juridical framework enables environmental justice advocates and affected communities to vindicate the rights of vulnerable communities. The case study of coal-ash contamination in Puerto Rico and the harms suffered by affected communities there anchors the argument for why advocates should use a human rights framework to protect the rights of the most vulnerable. The case of Puerto Rico is illustrative of so many poor, disenfranchised, and vulnerable communities around the world, affected by environmental harm and in need of a human rights-based framework.

Qatar will realize its decades-long drive to host a mega sporting event when, in 2022, the opening ceremony of the Fέdέration Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup commences. By that time, the Qatari government will have invested at least $200 billion in real estate and development projects, employing anywhere between 500,000 and 1.5 million foreign workers to do so. The scale of these preparations is staggering — and not necessarily positive. Between 2010 and 2013, more than 1,200 labor migrants working in Qatar's construction sector died, with another 4,000 deaths projected by the start of the event. Foreign workers are subject to conditions of forced labor, human trafficking, and indefinite detention. Advocacy groups cite deplorable living and working conditions, coupled with lax legal protections for workers, as the main culprits. Absent significant improvements in worker welfare, Qatar's World Cup will be remembered as a human rights tragedy. This article examines whether it is possible for Qatar's World Cup to forge a different legacy, as an agent of change on behalf of worker welfare reform. In examining the issue, the article takes a two-fold approach. First, it locates the policy problem of worker welfare abuses in the context of the migration life cycle. The migration life cycle represents the range of activities that mediate the relationship between an individual migrant and the labor migration system — from the time the migrant first considers working overseas to his employment abroad to his eventual return to the home country. An understanding of worker welfare abuses in Qatar does not begin or end with reports of migrant deaths. A much broader pattern of abuse exists that, if ignored, will undermine effective policy responses. Second, the article frames worker welfare as a matter that lies at the intersection of business and human rights. Mega events are large-scale, internationally recognized activities that aim to promote regional development and to advance universal values and principles. They also represent an important collaboration between stakeholders across sectors. The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, therefore, offer a framework for understanding how worker welfare reform might be in the interests of governmental and corporate actors alike. Ultimately, this paper outlines four policy proposals that may be undertaken by countries of origin, nongovernmental organizations, international organizations, and Qatari employers: (1) the development of a list of labor-supply agencies committed to ethical recruitment practices; (2) the devising of low-interest, preferential loans for migrants considering employment in Qatar; (3) the establishment of a resource center to serve as a one-stop shop for migrant information and services; and (4) the creation of training programs to aid migrants upon their return home. These options are not meant to diminish the role of the Qatari government in reform efforts, and indeed, the state can — and should — take steps to improve worker welfare, including strengthening worker welfare standards, closing labor law loopholes, and bolstering law enforcement capacity. But these measures are not enough. Therefore, the above four policy proposals put forward a process-specific, rather than actor-specific, approach to reform aimed at capitalizing on the spotlight of the World Cup to bring about lasting, positive change in Qatar's migrant labor practices.

Towards Corporate Obligations for Freshwater? Companies exert substantial pressures on freshwater. They may exacerbate depletion and can be a major source of pollution, adversely impacting human rights and the environment. Recent years have seen the emergence of regulatory instruments that aim to address adverse impacts by corporate activities on people and the planet. These have culminated in the European Commission’s 2022 Proposal for a Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, which seeks to introduce an obligation for large EU companies to conduct human rights and environmental due diligence. Despite companies’ adverse impacts on freshwater, the draft Directive does not explicitly focus on this. Nevertheless, its material scope does contain human rights and environmental standards from which its protection can potentially be extrapolated. In light of this potential, this article answers the question: to what extent does the draft Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive encompass freshwater issues, and how can its role in this respect be improved? It finds that the draft Directive encompasses freshwater protection from the perspective of both human rights and environment but only to a limited extent. It is limited from a human rights perspective due to the reformulation of the human right to water, and from an environmental perspective due to the acritical transposition of international environmental obligations. Given these limitations, the article concludes with some recommendations on how freshwater issues can be more comprehensively included within the draft Directive.

On 25 July 2024, the Directive on corporate sustainability due diligence (Directive 2024/1760) entered into force. According to the European Commission, Member States have to transpose the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (hereinafter «CSDDD» or «Directive») into national law and communicate the relevant texts to the Commission by 26 July 2026. Meanwhile, member states of the UN have been gathering for the 10th time to discuss a potential international treaty on BHR that would, essentially, oblige the states that sign to implement mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence (hereinafter «mHREDD») laws. Potential legislative initiatives on mHREDD are being discussed worldwide, including in Canada, Brazil, Colombia, South Korea, Tunisia and Mexico. This makes it an ideal time to evaluate the experiences of countries that have already implemented mHREDD laws. As BHR practitioners from France and Germany, our analysis highlights the experiences in these two countries: France, the global pioneer with its Duty of Vigilance Law (LdV) enacted in 2017, and Germany with the more recent implementation of its Supply Chain Due Diligence Act in 2021 (hereinafter «LkSG»). We publish a first summary of the most important aspects from our view, based on a larger article we published recently, that will be updated and complemented with new insights.

No Iso-Fix for Human Rights: a Critical Perspective on Iso 2600 Guidance on Social Responsibility

The paper aimed to examine the critical intersection between human rights and environmental law, focusing on the urgent implications of governmental inaction regarding illegal miners threatened and killed by starvation underground at the Stilfontein mine in Klerksdorp, North-West. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (“The Constitution”) protects human and environmental rights. This paper argues that inefficiencies of government regulation increase such destructive practices, resulting in significant ecological harm and systemic human rights abuses. This paper critically examines governmental negligence and the legal obligations of states regarding human rights and environmental issues. Additionally, the paper advocates for a multidisciplinary approach that integrates human rights with environmental legislation. The study found that though there are legal frameworks around mining, there is no monitoring and accountability of these mining companies. The paper advocates for solid legal frameworks that bridge human rights and environmental protections, emphasising the necessity for governmental accountability in addressing the illicit mining crisis and its implications on vulnerable communities. The author recommends robust legal frameworks to address illegal mining and the economic vulnerabilities driving individuals to illicit activities.

Reproductive Injustice at the Southern Border and Beyond: An Analysis of Current Events and Hope for the Future.