|IMPORTANT: The information contained here is only a guide to what we have heard states say during the session and in no way reflects an official record of what they said. The TA or it's individual allies are not responsible for the accuracy of what was said by states. For an official version of what States said in the IGWG, please refer to the UNTV Webcast of the event: http://webtv.un.org/meetings-events/|
|PLEASE FILL IN NOTES FROM EACH SESSION IN THESE COLUMNS BELOW THE NAME OF THE RELEVANT SESSION|
|NOTE TAKER||Fernando Ribeiro Delgado <email@example.com>; Noreli Noreña <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Maha Abdallah <email@example.com>|
|Inna Michaeli and Felogene Anumo, AWID (firstname.lastname@example.org , email@example.com ) morning||Lydia and Mariette from SOMO, firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Dom Renfrey |
|Swann Bommier <email@example.com>|
|Tessa Cerisier <firstname.lastname@example.org> |
|Pau (email@example.com) afternoon||Lia, Friends of the Earth Germany (firstname.lastname@example.org)|
|Gabriela Martins (email@example.com)|
|States, Regions & Corporate Representatives|
|Albania||Human rights abuses by large multinationals will be targeted while domestic will noit, it is clearly the priority. It should read "business activities of domestic and transnational character". In relation to Article 9, the government of Albania supports the establishment of victims fund and support they have a real opportunity to bring it to court, but it would make the convention lacking between day it is enforced and the commencement of the fund. Legal aid constraints are much of a problem in a developed and developing world. Article 8-7 should be integral part of the convention and should come into operation immediately. Re Article 8-5 0- insuffuciently defined concepts, begging the delay what is unnessecary. Where should line be betwene procedural requirement of particular state party and unnesary delay. What is unnesary in internatonal, could be necesary in internal procedure, so without further guidance it is meaningless. There is currently no vaxation mentioned, the inclusion of explicit reference to the right of states to implement such rules will add the draft.|
|Algeria||supports the statement by the african group. congratulates election. full support. remains commited to the resolution. pleased iwth the developments of the draft treaty. the activities of TNCs requires further legal and institutional oversight at an int'l level to be in line with human rights standards. it's crucial to include adequate access to remedy for victims, so TNCs are subject to accountability. supports the idea that TNCs should participate more constructively towards economic, social and ethic concepts. the binding treaty will have an important impact on freedom to do business and obligations addressed with states to protect HRS, esp ESCRs.|
|Antigua and Barbuda|
|Argentina||General comments: we should move ahead on the basis of the work already achieved. Many resolution are already being approved for UNGPs and Access to Remedy project We must also bare in mind the OECD guidelines that established the principles for business operations. These principles try to provide responsible corporate behaviour. In the draft instrument there is no mention of this guidelines. This could lead to problems because of the international personality of legal entities and ... The draft will try to introduce another concept of criminal responsibility of legal and natural perosns. The concept of universal jurisdiction is nor applicable univesally because of the territorial character of jurisdiction on criminal case. 3) the reference to amendment of trade, there is a rquirement of compatibility with the treaty limiting their capacity of negociation 4) there is a lack of detail and difficult to understand the scope of the definition of victim. under this definition an undefined group of individuals could be considered as a victime allowing actions that might deviate from objective of the system 4) Statute of limitations may depend depending on the legal arsenal of every state. Any initiative to strengthen HR is positive but is clear that we must proceed carefully. Argentina recognises the importance of the treaty this kinds of proposal cause for cautioun as they might also impact the field of trade. // We read the instrument form July. Multiples resolutions have been approved, including UNGPs. Complementarity of this initiative, to avoid superimposition. Draft instrument do not mention a series of issues (long list: refer back to recording). International juridical personhood in international law is not without controversy. Criminal liability: Imposition of obligation on states to exercise jurisdiction goes beyond boundaries of national law. International investment treaties: Should in the future be harmonized with this treaty. Definition of victim: Lack of precision in definition. Inability to know precise boundaries. Group of undefined victims, including those assisting victims. Risk of obfuscating victimhood|
In conclusion, all efforts to strengthen human rights is welcome, but clearly it is important to advance with caution. We recognize the efforts of 26/9. We need to deepen legal analysis of how the current process would affect human rights as well as commercial relations
|Art 9: we'd like to highlight that it introduces on states the obligation to ensure that companies carry out a wide range of due diligence activities, and also to contribute financially to prevention. In practice it is difficult to imagine how this would work, when we think about how contracts are made and used. There should be a due diligence for each actor. The zero draft should take into account the reality of economic activities. Art 9 (3) considers all contractual activities. In other words, this clause should be more considerate and detailed about the economic realities. Art 9 (5) creates the possibilty to be exempt from some obligations. There would also be bureaucratic aspects, which would go against the implementation..||Art 10: introduces the concept of legal entities liability, requiring changes to legal orders. This is controversial. It is concisder limited normally. In Arg we have this for a small number of crimes, limited to corruption, so this idea related to human rights violations should be restricted to natural persons together with legal entities. The concpet in point 11 is not unviesally recognised.|
|Azerbaijan||Hopes to engage in substantial negotiations. Respect for sovereignity is key for any engagement and business is no exception. TNCs and OBEs are merging global players. We are deeply alarm of corporate abuses in particular in conflict and non conflict situations, natural disaster and terror acts sometimes used by TNCs and OBEs to profit. We may not be able to eliminate all corporate abuses but will give victins the instrument, remain engaged in the process. // Congratulations to the Chair and thanks to you and delegation of Ecuador. Respect for sovereignty is preconditions for any success of any initiatives, including efforts at issue today. We are deeply alarmed by corporate abuses. Already miserable situation of victims may be abused by TNC-OBEs to profit. Ultimate goal is to eliminate corporate abuses. Seek justice and effective remedy. Reiterate support for binding instrument and remain commited to the process||Would like to see more differentiation between host and owner state in this document as to avoid confusion and misinterpretation. Would like to see more reference to obligations of TNCs in Article 2, and seek your advice and expertise on how to do that. Article 8 - the fund should be in a different article, look for examples from international prctice of existance of such funds and how it can be applied.||Concerned by UJ concept. |
Violations of TNCs are taking place in places of conflict. Which state is resp for violations taking place on contested land?
Business activities of Transnational character needs clarification.
|refrain from providing a tool to question principles of sovereignty and territoriality of States, concerns over occupied territories of States. Conflict and post-conflict situations should be considered in this instrument.||Preamble: Para.3. make reference to int. humanitarian law.|
Para.7. include the principle of sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Para.8. make reference to int. humanitarian law.
15.5. we welcome it. Do not have specific comments.
Will submit a written contribution.
|Belgium||Belgium aligns with EU, victims should be at the heart of any initiative, Belgium has legal and non-legal instruments to ensure that victims, Belgium aware that there are obstacles, this needs to be tackled, Belgium as part of NAP published study on this, analysis in different report analysed obstacles and came up with political reccomendations, Belgium stands ready to share and discuss this|
|Bolivia||El estad de Bolivia apoya el mandato de GTIG esta es una tarea de gran importancia a fin de cerrar el vacío legal que existe en caso donde las estructuras transnacionales evaden las obligaciones. Bolivia acoge a inversion y no existe contradicción entre la adopcion de reglas claras que contribuyen a la seguridad legal. Destacamos la apertura del borrador que tiene en cuenta diferentes proposiciones preliminares. El instrumento necesita incluir un mayor enfasis en las responsabilidades de las empresas de respetar los derechos humanos y contribuir a la reparación. Alentamos a todos los paises a proponer sus experiencias y propuestas para enriquecer. // Bolivia supports the efforts for a binding treaty. Filling legal vacuum. Transnational violators use structure to perpetrate|
Development is key goal. At the same time, need to respect national and international standards. There is no contradiction here. Stimulating investment that complies with clearly articulated binding standards is consistent. Binding treaty needs to include greater emphasis on transnational corporations’ responsibilities for human rights and responsibility of host countries of transnational businesses
|Purpose - we suggest to add principles of universality, undivisibility and interpredence of human rights. Important article for rights of victims. Rights have already been included in national legislation of Bolivia. Include the right to compensation, femedy and compensation for damage in case of environmental damage and right to information. Looking at rights of victims as individuals and a group; we csn refer to communities and peoples as rights holders who can be affected as a group. Provisions should refer to states of origin where transnational corporations have headquarters. Important to establish international fund for victims. Merits a standalone article where we can stipulate operational terms. Funding should come from developed countries. Establishing the fund can contribute to financing, state parties should govern the operation, and it could also help to strenghten capacities for developing countries.|
|Bosnia and Herzegovina|
|Brazil||Reiterate our view that limiting the scope to TNCs may create protection gaps. in line with UNGPs should apply to all business enterprises regardless of sixe, sector, structures... Elaborate LBT to business in all sectors. This gives a perception that certain categories of companies do not have to respect HR anc States do not have to regulate their activities. States hold the primary responsibility for the promotion and protection of HR and provide concrete tools for accountability. the curent draft is not clear on how HRDD can be undertakn in case of TNCs as those activities take place abrioad. The definition of appropriate jurisdiction, applicable law and consistency with iternational obligations are central, we understand TNCs impose challenges who merit special consideration, these elements create insecurity and forum shopping risking to have an economic impact, think must proceed cautiously to reach consensus. Convinced the session can provide contributions to improve understanding. // Congrats to the Chair. Application of binding instrument should be according to any businesses, regardless of transnational nature...Support that prevention is strong within treaty. States hold primary responsibility for human rights. Includes duty to ensure due diligence. But it is not clear how states can ensure due diligence of transnational activities, since those happen in other jurisdiction. Also not clear is duties of due diligence for local activities of TNCs. Welcome initiative of Ecuador to publish draft programme of current session as well as next session.. We are ready to engage constructively||Reiterate Brazil accepts the draft as a basis but have a number of questions and concerns and will provide written points. Text overall is ambitious but extremely imprecise. Many disciplines lack /// to be implemented by national courts. Reserve the right to revision our position. Article 2 is critical and sets the scene for many the activities in the scene. We support the general thrust of this article but have a number of questions and proposals. Re scope, we go in more detail as we address article 3, but !a and 1B we read transnational character and propose it to be deleted. Where we see 'victims' we should read "alleged victims" and "alleged abuses" as well. On articles 2A and B, there is a reference to terms in the context that are extremely vvague and national courts would find extreme difficulty to identify case under this convention, we need to be more precise with responsibility of parties. Article 2C, it is a key discipline for us, one of our main objectives is to foster international cooperation, but the text lacks focus. We are talking about state obligations and should focus on the issue at hand, business and human rihts. On Article 8, we appreciate victim-centered approach provided by this Article and commend Ecuador for specific provision on this issue, it is important to place the victim in the center, however the focus of business activities only of transnational nature treats the victims of national violations differently from victims of transnational violtions; there are citizens that need to be treated equally, so we need adjustment in this section. "Alleged victims" should be throughout the text, 'victim' presumed that the person is already presumed to be victim of a violatoin, so it is important to maintain neutrality and presumption, and proved at a court of law, perhaps to look at minimal legal thresshold to file a demand to avoid. Mexico - voluntary fund - we are not convinced of a voluntary fund. Since much of the financial responsibilties would be born either by the enterprises themselves or by national governments, so we would need to be very much convinced on the need for such a fund.||We'd like to suggest that all companies required to apply HRDD. We also suggest to remove the reference to violations and abuses in art. 9 (2)(b) and (c) so we can consider a wider range of abuses. In art. 9 (2)(..) we suggest to remove the word 'meaningful'. We also suggest replacing 'potentially' by 'negatively' when talking about communities being affected. We also suggest deleting 9 (4) which lacks clarity.||no judicial measures should be overlooked, inc. Non-Judicial Mechanisms. |
Delete 'of a transnational character in 10.3,6.8,10 and 12.1.c Add abuses in 10.4,5,8
10.4 - Reversal of burden of proof: Would this apply in criminal cases? If so, when the defendant is a ntural person? There could be a problem with the presumption of innocence.
Delete 10.11 - UJ. Highly controversial. In discussion by the 6th Committ of the UNGA. Wait for the outcome of that discussion.
Art 12: Like to see this provision enhanced in future drafts. How to do this to enforce this in the context of ETOs.
|many delegations have expressed concerns on broad jurisdiction proposed. Delete art. 5 c) substantial business interests for grounds for jurisdiction. Implications in practice of art. 5.3: individuals or groups of individuals, need to clarify that covers alleged victims.||Preamble: Reference to sustainable development is needed.|
Reference to gender perspective would improve the text.
Delete “risk” of para.1.
Delete para.2. since it lacks precision.
14: 14.1.h. add at the end: “through the establish procedures”.
14.4.e. delete the paragraph.
15: 15.5. adding some other groups: LGTB, older, African-descendants
|Central African Republic|
|Chile||For chile the theme of TNCs is fundamental aspect of building our society and meeting requirements for economies to grow. HR are primary principles withi the vision we have, this is a central among that path. UNGPs are the corner stones. tHe NAP is being implemented and the objective to avoid negative impact on HR, Chile is a country that efforts to comply with UNGPs and supports process to strengthen agenda. Appreciate focus on prevention and remedy which are also central to UNGPs. Treaty should focus not in the types of companies but in the violations. text should be broad in providing access to reñedy. Focus not only on TNCs because it obligation of state to ensure compliance with standar. Does not substitues the obligation of States to adopt elements to implement UNGPs and reinforce national legal frameworks. W hope to contribute constructively to the discussion hoping everyone feels represented. This is the best way to have an instrument that can be effectively implemented. reserve the right to make comments on the content. The importance of the theme is incontestable. // Joining Peru’s comments from before. Congrats to Chair. Business and human rights is theme to be worked on in a holistic view of sustainable development|
Chile has elaborated 1st plan of human rights and business. Consultations with businesses and civil society. Designed, in line with UNGPs, to eliminate corporate abuses. In line with these commitments, supports efforts to reach binding treaty. Scope should be guided by nature of abuses, not nature of the businesses. Treaty should include application to businesses beyond TNCs. Complementary process to national processes of national plans and other initiatives to address this issue. We reserve right to make additional comments during the sessions this week. We trust in your leadership to advance this session and take into account different visions
|Article 2- reaffirm we think it's important to mention UNGPs as part of background legacy and language agreed by all. Specify remedies, reaffirm interest in having it include not only enterpreneurial activities of TNCs but cover all companies regardless of origin, it is up to states to ensure all companies not violate rights, so it's an opportunity to cover it. The limintation to TNCs would limit applicability and we should promote broad approach to the debate. We believe that not giving broad application and restricting to TNCs will create a set of difficultieis around defining it. Article 8 - this is one of the central subjects of the instrument. Principle should be formulated as access to justice and effective judicial protection. Focusing on state enterprises or both. International remodiation or ecological -- other typues of remidiation have been left out. We understand general aim but it should be clarfied. i.e. duty of the state to carry out investigation - should be applicable where it would be criminal unlawful act or administrative failing. System governing civil procedures - concerning the burden of proof. Considering remedies, there is no reference to form and time span of these measures and same re measures against presumed perptrators. This can lead to abuse. Precautionary actions? Some points are repeated and can be merged like 5B and 6. We should make explicit re costs - depending on consent, otherwise it can lead to abuse, that third parties could present cases without consent of victims. Para 9 - too much depart.|
- Article 9 should be taken as an opportunity on the complementary with UNGP; the main aspect of the UNGP is prevention through a process of due diligence,
|art 10 - Concept of UJ, we express reservation on this||Risk of forum shopping, parallel proceedings in several States. Risk of conflict between various laws and lack of adequate exceptions. Should request technical assistance from the Hague conference on PRIL.|
|China||Attach great importance to the work of WG. The china delgation makes general remarks on 1) HR and development should be promoted, council resolution mandates this WG to regulat the activities of TNCs from the perspective of internationa HRL ad acknowledge companies have the capacity to imporve economical gowth .... Reognise business as driver for development. Deelopment and HR are both pillars to the UN system, interlinked and mutually reinforcing, We propose that the treaty gives equal treatment to HR and development. Mechanisms of Hr should be stren gthened without affectig the contribution of busines to development. 2) legality is central to the LBI. The current draft is victim oriented, provide effective remedy to victims of violations perpetrated by TNCs, this will provide most robust mechanisms of accountability. This should be guided by the principle of legality to ensure security, this includes the need to define the scope of obligations and liability in line with costumary international law and treatues and in line with principle of reasonableness and proportionality, maximum consunsus should be sought. the IGWG sessions have been conducted in transparent and inclusive manner. Resolution 26/9 defines clearly the IG nature of this group therefore consensus among its members is key to securing universal support of the future ILB. We supporrt the intervention of Brazil regarding the importance of consensus. We note in previous statement elegations cmmented on the vast range of issues involved. It will depend on many coutries for its implementation. Our countries are signatories to international treaties. It is necessary to study the vast an complex issues and make efforts to coordinate the position of member states for a common solution. We encourage coutries and delegations to take a cooperative approach. The china delegation ready to work with other delegations for the success fo working groups. // Congratulations to Chair. Thanks to Ecuadorian mission to promote discussion. First, human rights and development should be promoted. Resolution 26/9 mandates working group to regulate TNCs from perspective of human rights law. Recognizes that TNCs can foster economic well being and wealth. World Summit document: development and human rights are both pillars of international system. They are interlinked and mutually reinforcing. Equal treatment should be given to both human rights and development. Mechanism for human rights remedy and protection should be strengthened without affecting positive role business can play in development. Legality should be a guiding principle. Current zero draft is victim’s oriented. Aimed at providing effective remedy for violations. However, according to general principles of laws, such a mechanism should be guided by principle of legality to ensure clarity and certainty. Embody justice. This includes need to define scope of relevant obligations and legal liabilities in accordance with international treaties, customary international law and reasonableness and proportionality. Maximum consensus should be sought. Consultations have thus far been conducted in transparent manner. Civil society have provided professional and respectable contributions. This WG is intergovernmental. Therefore consensus is key to securing legal support of instrument and for its effectiveness, as noted by Brasil. Vast range of issues involved in current instruments. Dependent on many countries. Regarding implementation, we are bound by various frameworks. It is necessary to study those vast and complex issues to make a great effort to coordinate common effort of nation states. Recognize and encourage Chair’s efforts to build consensus. China is ready to join in joint effort||Article 8 should not create new rights, but instead reiterate rights already recognized in other international instruments|
Article 8.1.b should be removed
Will submit written statement because of time limitation
|Thanks experts. |
Art 10, 11, 12 - A lot of legal issues that require detailed discussions.
General views: Art 10, Legal liability. Basic concept of legal framework. Reflects respect for domestic laws. Can be basis for discussion. How do we decide upon the legal liability? Depends on specific provisions, inc. art 9, and 3 and 4. Art 10: Concern is that in art 11 it mentions universal jurisdiction in para. 11. This concept has been used very often. But when we talk about UJ, we think about different understandings. We will require a lot of time to consider this. But, one issue is very clear for all experts - From 2009 until now the 6th Commtt of the General Assembly, the scope and application of UJ is discussed without specific and substantive progress because the countries have differences on the two basi elements - scope of crimes and apllication conditions. From the perspective of positive Int Law, UJ is not commonly recognised. It is not a jurisdictional rule. Because there is no common rule is concept has often been abused in the courts of developed courts. They launch frivilous cases against officials of developing countries. The African Union has specific concerns about this. We support this.
We understand that the other countries have different positions on this issue, but even the 6th Commtt of the GA cannot solve this problem, so how can we solve it in our working group. Besides, UJ concept is not directly related to the concept of legal liability contained in Art 11. Therefroe we believe that in this draft to use a vague and easily abused concept would not be appropraite for consensus, so it should be eliminated. If other delegations want to discuss jurisdiction more broadly we can discuss it when we discuss art 5, rather than focus on UJ which would lead to controversy.
Art 11: Legal assistance. THis art is based on International treaties and general national practices. But there's a problem. The legal assistance in criminal cases, esp. when it concerns mandatory measures, this is made on the concept of dual criminality - the act should concstitute crimes in both countries - we suggest adding this language in the text.
|1: No need to mention Resolution 26/9.|
Positive role of business in development (more accurate and balanced preamble).
14. Committee: avoid overlapping with the functions of other Human Rights Treaty Bodies, since they are also dealing with TNC. In addition, consider financial implications.
15. Implementation: it can be separated (not contained in final provisions) 15.3. we respect the views of the delegations, but this risks opposing business to human rights: we have a consensus – development and human rights are mutually benefited.
Our nature is different from the UNFTC. We can promote human rights though development (of course, respecting human rights through its activities). Re-adjust 15.3. (and place it in the Preamble).
|Colombia||welcomes the appointment. it should bring together the different positions presented by states. Each state should develop its own framework based on their needs. it has been fruitful in Colombia. we would encourage other states to develop their NAPs as well. we acknowledge that the binding treaty is with the aim to protect human rights, emphasizing remedy and reparation. it's important to include the three elements (protecting, respecting and remedy). most of the provisions of the draft transfer the responsibilities to the states. it's important to have discussions on ETOs of states, complementarity and court coepartaitons. colombia will continues to make comments throughout the session.|
- They have a definition which is useful;
|Realiza comentarios generales sobre la necesidad de que el proceso continúe.|
Colombia reitera su compromiso con los derechos humanos, muy especialmente en las empresas.
|Congo, Rep. of|
- Due diligence as a result not as a related duty in the treaty;
|Congo, Dem. Rep. of|
|Costa Rica||Has hold interinstitutioan and intersectorial consultations on the draft. Costarica committed to the strengthening of IHRL to implement existing standards or fill new vacuums, Recognize the rality of globalized economy and complex global value chain present a scenario to be addressed to guarantee access to remedy when abuses occur. My coutry has strong framework on labour rights and understand the need to continue strengthening in. CR manifest concern regarding the focus: Hilight the agreements reached already by international community recognizing the role of States and Companies, how is it related to other instruments of human rights and also the arms treaty. ILO says given the viriety of initiatives and standards, the regulatory space has become confusing affecting the capacity of countries to implement their committments, so important to ensure the complementarity with UNGPs, ILO and other instruments 2) one main challenge is to guarantee compliance with IHR standards. if links are developped between TNCs and national companies, limiting the Scope to TNCs would be problematic. The complexity of the challenge important to see if focus to fill procedural gap of intergovernmental cooperation with respect to the prevention to HR violations and access to remedy and justice. These are number of themes that emerge during consultations but will refer to specific articles 1) scope: relation TNCs and OBEs 2) clarification of terminology and legal processes that still appear vague. // Congratulations to Chair and re. Zero draft. We have followed WG work attentively. We are committed to the permanent implementation of international human rights standards. Remedies for abuses in industries and supply chains needs to be realized. When resolution was adopted, Costa Rica stated its worries about the scope. We maintain those concerns|
Responsibilities of states and businesses: How does this instrument relate to human rights, labor rights, arms commerce, investment laws? Existing norms of public and private regulation are becoming confusing. We should advance in this effort with a clear vision of its complementarity and based on UNGPs. Does this effort try to solve all the problems related to this issue, or is it emphasized on creating mechanisms and procedures for prevention and for remedy, including for activities that go beyond state territories.
- It would impose on States to require to companies further commitment;
|Mutual legal asst: This is very complex. Which technical fora are provided by this instrument to deal with these challenges? |
Art 12: Important to draft inspiration from the UNGPs re best practices between mutual support.
- There are no uniform criteria to determine the origin of exemption on small size business that might have an impact in other countries;
|Cuba||reiterates its support for this group and the negotiations on a binding instrument. it's important to create effective measures, and to ensure that int'l crimes are investigated. there are many examples around the world for violations of HRs by tNCS that require liability. create an int'l legal framework to protect victims and combat impunity. we will need resolve and constructive exchanges by all states.|
- This instrument should be applicable to all companies;
|Ecuador||This treaty will not harm investment, but allow investment to happen on a playing field, contrary to the situation today. The issue of trying to establish an internationally binding instrument has received wide support. Many states and academics have engaged in the process. The text looks at all the binding instruments in the EU and aims at being usefull on top. Bear in mind that main pillars f the draft is provide remedy and access to justice for victims. Reasonable, usefull and coherent proposal, but need to strengthen some issues, such as scope of business, relationship to UNGPs : both processes are complementary. Believe that the text should be harmonized and more specific in some placed and possibility to receive invidual complaints. Redress for damages should take into account entire value chain. Finally, openness to continue to work with IGWG and the Chair. Invite States to participate in a constructive manner. // Drafting an internationals binding treaty will not affect investment in developing countries. Its to ensure that it happens on an equal playing field. Want to avoid corporate entities benefiting from unequal playing field. International binding treaty is necessary. Thanks European Commission for support for legally binding treaty. Notes EU’s…… Can be used as source for current treaty we are currently drafting at international level. Want to strengthen scope. Text must be harmonized and language needs to be more specific. Proposal on zero draft, the situation of victims and responsibilities of business entities needs to be clear. Needs to be capacity to receive individual claims of victims who believe to be aggrieved||Re Article 2- the purpose is to protect human right in the face of violatoins inthe context of business activity. Acknowledged it is an issue of concern, nevertheless we bewlieve the focus on the type of activitit and not of business could provide aviable solution. Previous instruments like ILO from 1977 or the guidelines for business enterprises 2011 given solutoin. It is not difference of treatment between national and international business, but to recommend advisable practice for everybody, sowe hope TNC and OBEs can adopt the same behavior. We hope that these references can perhaps help facilitate negotiations. Re Article 8 - agree with proposal from the Chair that it's the core of our discussion. Aside a few technical issue, it is important to include a gender based approach when it comes to coming with policies to repearations and remedies to rights of women who sawtheir rights violated. Input of different factors of vulnerability connected to rights of victims. Take attention to para 7 - intenrational fund for victims and established contributions from states but does not stipulate which institution would govern or function or select beneficiaries.||question for clarity: on what basis would one regulate financial security? as for paragraph 5: for my delegation it is contradictory with the preamble. As I see it one could not exempt small companies from respecting HR, what would be the justification for small companies to be exempted of hr obligations?||Art 10, para 3: Right to appeal? How remedy the rights of the vitim without the involvement of the TNCs. |
Art 10.6: Not stipulated which actors participating would be liable
10.6c: What is understood by the shared resp of a TNC and its subsidiaries
10.10: This repeats the content under 10.1.
11: First time we see UJ. Its scope is not explained
|option left open for victim to choose jurisdiction. Clear procedural rules should be set, looking at PRIL regarding link between fact and jurisdiction. TNCs: establishing the domicile is difficult to reflect in treaty but need to look at PRIL. In domestic legal system: also rules regarding choice of jurisdiction. MX’s question important.||14. Muy apropiada la creación de un comité para recibir quejas – permitirá seguir una coherencia con las técnicas de monitoreo (posibilidad de recibir comunicaciones de personas afectadas de manera individual/colectiva - como otros tratados).|
15. Acorde con la práctica de elaboración con los instrumentos de derecho internacional público.
15.12. Considerar un número razonable de ratificaciones para que entre en vigor.
|Egypt||Full support to the IGWG to address the legal back with view of indivisibility and non-discrimination. Mandate will only end with the successful elaboration of LBI. Stress prrimary responsibility to protect HR lies within the State, the drafting of the instrument i paramount and in coherence with UNGPs. My delegation would be interactive positively and in constructive manner to allow victims to defend their rights and protecting promoting HR fr all. Important to reach a balance text to attract investment but ensuring respect of HR by those investors. Reference is necessary to enssure regulation of companies in their territoru. Important to ifferentiate between the obligations of the host and home country of the TNCs. // Congrats to chair, confidence in work. We will be actively and positively engaging in the treaty. Want to balance foreign investments and human rights, notes the important role of TNCs in economic development. The home country of TNCs should frame the human rights obligations of TNCs||preamble section, is not considered one of its part, and should be separated. it needs to be in line with internationally agreed langauge. add reference of the UN references, and reference on the role of TNCs in achieving social-economic. Article 2: para c is not clear and more of a ageneral nature; link it with the activities of TNCs. a separate article should be devoted for the establishment of the fund.||art 10: no conflict with domestic laws and int law. This article is pivotal, we still beleve it needs clearer drafting. For e.g., it is widely recognised that the burden of proof is the resp of the litigant. Art 10.4 is in conflict with this. Art 10.11 - requires states to include UJ in its domestic laws. This might require a change of domestic laws while there is a controversy of this. Art 11: Legal asst - Para 12, might be in conflict with domestic laws of privacy for banking accounts. Art 12: Strengthened by inc reference to cross-border cooperation, shouldered by the parent country to guarantee that these obligations are met.||Preamble needs to be separate. Language needs modification (bilateral proposal…). In addition, relevance of TNC in development.|
14. We reserve our right
15. clear redacted. Important
|Intervention is on Draft Optional Protocol: Have not received any instructions on this, so they will come back with comments and remarks at some other point|
|European Union||We also encouragingly see companies are taking steps to respect human righst and prevent HR impacts directly linked to their opperation. Promising initiatives are on their way in the field of trade, investment and finance. We believe in effective multilateralis. 4 years after adopion of resolution we would have liked the sponsors take steps to addressed the concerns addressed by us to overcome division. But the proposals to build consessus have not been followed, including the proposal to go back to the IGWG, to reinforce the process and clarify the process. Most states and stakeholders have problems with the footnote restricting the scope to tNCs. This is not a procedural matter but a real substantive issu, in todays globalized worls there are complex networks and many forms of companies operating at domestic levels. covering all companies is important to ensure non discrimination and esure a levelled playing field. off course we could look into the provision 14 of the UNGPs, and use the size of the company. Is the restriction of the resolution 26/9 limiting access to justice and redress to the victims of national companies. The suggestion of John Ruggie as Keynote speaker was not accomodated. This is not a procedural matter but a real substantive issue. a Keynote by ruggie would had helped recall on the need to build on the UNGPs. Letter published by John Ruggie provides useful guidelines to negotiation. There is a reason of the zero draft to not refer to UNGPs. We have refrained from contesting the presidenci and delaying the program of work and support the transparent and constructive process. UN general rules of procedures include transparency as well as respect for the rights of minorities. The UNGPs remain the starting point for the EU engaging on BHR and unfolding their full potential . Within UN we have developped a smart mix of binding and voluntary regulation. We do not shy away from biding norms whn they are needed: E regulation on conflict minerals, NF regulation, Directive on rights to victims, Brussels I, Rome II establishes applicable law for tort cases..... We are working intensively with a wide range of policies and tools. Working with the governments of Brazil, chile, costa Rica, Peru, Colombia, Canada for the implementation of the UNGPs. EU engage with partner countries better realize human rights in the regions in concrete case. the OECD guidelines on DD will support the implementation of HRDD withregard to corruption, environment, human rights ..... The EU welcomes the progress at the UN level thanks to the leadership of the group on BHR: argentina, ghana, norway, russian federation. We thank the high commissionner for the continued leadership in the accountability and remedy project with concrete reccomendations for th implementation of the third pillar of the UNGPs, which hope will be valued during the session. Progress in other initiative in the XXXXX whcih establishes a group of experts for a rage of options including a binding instruments for the traffic and trade of goods involving torture, forced labour, etc... As discussion on possible legal developments are planned this weeks, we would reiterate that thses exchanges do not take place in a legal vacuum. The UNGPs recall existing obligations. States must protect against HR abuse within their territory and within their juristiction (quotes UNGPs). Full implementation fo existing HR obligation swithin territory and jurisdiction are discussed. We need to address the issue of implementation of current and any future obligation: hoe can victims expect to have access to remedy when the legislation fails to comply with HR law, where corruption impacts the fulfillment of all HR. If a new legal instrument was created how could we believe states would implement ew obligations. We believe the added value of binding instrument should be to enhance the protection of HR and set a level playing fild, it is necessary to ensure traction among a sufficient number of State. The standard to achieve a level playing field, we are not yet at the state to engage on the content of such instrument , the EU reserve its position on the binding instrument. We look forward to listen to the positions and hope the report will reflect all positions nominally in the report of the session. The EU is committed to make geniune progress in the BHr agenda, we are comitted to engage at UN level to prevent abuses and ensure access to remedy when abuses occur. We are committed to a meaningful and tangible process as this agenda is connected to wider issues: trade, investment, environment, social and labor protection, corruction and tax evasion. In short, collectively we need to harness globalization. // Issue with Footnotes restricting scope to TNCs|
Notes countless abuses at domestic levels from corporations that have been documented by CSOs. Questions how they will benefit from provisions of this new binding instrument. Supports a transparent and inclusive process, says EU does not shy away from binding norms when needed. Notes EU regulation on public minerals, victims rights. Already 15 EU members have adopted national action plans
Responsible business contact in LA and Caribbean. Working with Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Mexico, Panama and Peru. If judicial system is not independent, if legislation does not exist, if national governments do not protects those in their jurisdiction from abuses, what will this treaty do? What trust will victims have? Want all positions reflected nominally in report of this session as it has not been so in the past
Committed to engage at UN level and elsewhere to prevent abuses and access to remedies when abuses occur
|It is important to continue to hear the views of victims, plights of victims are appeal to all of us to respond in effective manner, those of states and non-state actors have right to justice and effective remedy, domestic and companies headquartered abroad, CSO and NHRI have important role on this, unacceptable that those that speak out for victims are endangered themselves, human rights defenders face specific risks, state need to set up measures to protect human rights defenders, clear provisions in UNGP (see Commentary to GP 26), several interventions raised lack of human rights defenders and gender perspective, while EU reserves its position, any possible LBI should affirm that states have obligation also with regard to human right defenders and gender aspects, women, children, person with disabilities, indigenous people, Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights EU has an instrument in place, activities under mechanism includes various activities, in addition KOM supports grants e.g. to human rights defenders; rights of ind. peoples, actions should be taken against violence agains indigenous leaders; Key provisions in EU legislation: EU Charter of Fundamental Rights Art.X, Victims Rights Directive; Project by EU Agency for Fundamental Rights analysing complaint mechanisms in member states; Annual Forum of Business and Human Rights is important, MSI: International - Sport and Human Rights, reaffirmation of UNGP, states must fullfill existing obligations (repeated twice), question open on how to take consensus, EU takes notice that many states do not take part in negotiations, discussions this week show that many have come negative impacts of globalization, an ambitious goal: transforming a world. Collectively, we need to harness globalization|
|France||france supports the statement delivered by the EU. france troubled by violations of HRs that result from direct/indirect business activities, extraction, industry and services - at all levels of the supply chain. int'l action in this sphere is of vital importance to allow for effective remedy. the EU has in the field of human rights a framework considered of its highest that should be taken as a model to corporate accountability. it's realistic and a global level. france invites all states to ratify them. the law on the duty of care for companies and sub-contracting companies in March 2017 complimented the normative framework in France re CSR. the draft treaty includes a more realistic expecations than the elements previously distributed. the group will hold this week discussions on the scope and definitions within the treaty - take into account all companies and not just multinationals ,for univerasilty purposes. we attach great importance to the UNGPs and the ownership by all stakeholders. we believe that all stakeholders, CSOs and private sector should contribute to this. france reiterates that it wishes to work towards a consistent coherent response to all human rights violations documented.||In accordance with the EU position and the EU competence, France reserves its position as disseminated earlier. We are speaking in a national capacity. Our national law (vigilance) is the prerogative of our state, and applies to parent companies. it is totally geared towards prevention. As to allow maximum, I remind you that the law applies to all companies beyond a particular size. This threshold ensures that we target the most powerful companies with the largest market clout. It forces companies to put in place a vigilance plan, and also applies that to its subsidiaries and suppliers, also when they are based in a third country. The prevention plan contains a mapping and ranking of risks, and a regular assessment of subsidiaries and suppliers. It also includes risk mitigation, as well as an early warning system and a signal detection system. The idea is to bring into play a civil liability in the failing of putting in place or implementing its plan. The French judge can condemn the company if it can prove failing regarding the plan, also in relation to actors in third countries. France believes that prevention should lie at the heart of the provisions. This is why the scope cannot by limited to national companies.||In accordance with the EU position and the EU competence, France reserves its position as disseminated earlier. We are speaking in a national capacity. Our national law (vigilance) is the prerogative of our state, and applies to parent companies. it is totally geared towards prevention. As to allow maximum, I remind you that the law applies to all companies beyond a particular size. This threshold ensures that we target the most powerful companies with the largest market clout. It forces companies to put in place a vigilance plan, and also applies that to its subsidiaries and suppliers, also when they are based in a third country. The prevention plan contains a mapping and ranking of risks, and a regular assessment of subsidiaries and suppliers. It also includes risk mitigation, as well as an early warning system and a signal detection system. The idea is to bring into play a civil liability in the failing of putting in place or implementing its plan. The French judge can condemn the company if it can prove failing regarding the plan, also in relation to actors in third countries. France believes that prevention should lie at the heart of the provisions. This is why the scope cannot by limited to transnational companies.||France aligns with EU, draws attention to principles that require further explication, more coherent to include a mechanism on due diligence obligations like the loi de vigilance, speaking realistically so that national judges can give justice, legal rules needs to be clearly defined, thoughts inspired by UNGP which are consensus|
|Holy See||Binding instrument could represent advancement. Instrument for framing more stable legal environment. Congratulations to Chair. Pope Francis: 21st century witnessing weakening of power of nation states. Growing interest by States, civil society. Could help clarify extraterritorial obligations of States. Take a constructive, positive approach. Rights of communities. Primacy of human rights over trade & investment agreements. Including assessment of their impacts on communities. Environmental aspects Articles 4.1, 8.1. Human person at the center. Establish legal liability at home and abroad.||The concept of leverage included in the UNGPs is useful. Including liabilities under criminal, civil and administrative law is common place.|
10.8 - criminal laiblity are definied with sufficient clarity. Legal and natural persons should be liable.
Reversal of the burden of proof is a good attempt to rebalance the power imbalances.
|Economic activities should be at the service of persons. Economic and financial actors function not only to self-regulations of the markets, but they service to the development of persons.|
Environmental and energy problems have a global impact, global responses – consensus: concern for future generations.
“Stressing that the urgent challenge to protect out common home … to seek a sustainable development”.
|India||Conducted consultations and has a delegate of MFA to participate in discussion. 2030 agenda for sustainable development recognises business as key sector to achieve SDGs. International community has felt the need to recognise bussiness responsibility to respect HR. Significant achievement were the UNGPs. India has made several positive advances. India is the only country that recognises in its law the obligation of business to contribute to social development, and also is finalising guidelines. Important responsibilite to draft LBI for TNCS and OBEs, the binding effect will complement the UNGPs. The zero draft is a signal of seriousness of this WG. India has always supported the process. International instrument needs to be flexible and balanced to ensure its effectivemess. We eed detailes and thorough deliberation: scope, jurisdiction and rights of victims. Idia comitted to engage constructive instrument. // We will share interventions on every article as they come to discussion|
Reaffirm commitment to sustainable development. 2030 agenda for SDGs also recognizes business sector as key partner to achieve goals. International community has increasingly felt need to recognize corporate responsibility for human rights. UNGPs = significant addition to subject. India has made strides: Companies Act 2013 has moved to a stakeholder model of government from a shareholder model. National voluntary guidelines on sustainable development being implemented. Legally binding instrument will have binding effect and complement UNGPs. India has always supported Res. 26/9. Making transnational corporations accountable while taking into account developing nations needs. Clarity is need in zero draft on: Scope, Jurisdiction, Rights of victims, Will be constructive in discussions
|Thank you for introducing articles 2 and 8. Article 2- reserve comments until discussion on 4 on definitions, needs more clarity on "transnational character". Believe it shuld not cover domestic enterprises because there are domestic laws. On article 8 - needs considerabale revision and balance. There need not be conflict between domestic and international. Words like "satisfaction" in the legal sense difficult to define. We need to make this article more flexible and list minimal standards and then each state will develop it as part of its domestic framework.||the core of the legally binding treaty, approach that we have is for business ot come with self regulation. what we have done is to change the philisophie of thebusiness so that they have to consider people and planet. Companies of a certain sice have to spend 2% on CSR. The draft need improvement 9.2c talk about need to prevent, treshold must be to 'seek to prevent'. Further 'seeking to prevent' should be treated as a mitigating measure. 9.4 needs to be redrafted, HRDD must be understood as a standard of conduct instead of results. Considering importance of SMEs in the economy, more flexibility may be required,||Art 10 - Cannot be in conflict with corporate law. |
UJ needs clarity.
|significant revision, right to action should be with the victim only, risk of abuse. Art. 5 should also deal with issue of conflicting proceedings. Need to align with corporate law. Leaves scope for misuse: delete art. 5.3.||Preamble should be separate, in conformity to all int. instruments.|
Para.5. should be revisited (only TNC). – 9.5.
“Self-determination” should only applied to people under foreign domination.
Revisited to avoid conflict with domestic law.
14/15 no comments. First, we should work on consensus of the whole treaty.
|Indonesia||The participation of relevant stakeholders is important in ensuring inclusiveness of the process. Idonesia needs to strad a balance between investñent human rights and development. Indonesia host many TNCs and their activities should promote and protect human rights of our communities and provide remedies. But we must make sure that the improvements of LBI contribute to our priority. More than 99 of our enterprises are SME and public enterprise many of which has TNC caracter as part of supply chan. this SME are regulated under national law, the LBI should take into account the framework of developping countris as them. Mr. Chairperson I ould like to reafirm the position that resolution 26/9 and as a result of it th process shuld focus on TNCS and should not apply to local business registered in terms of relevant domestic law. Our delegation will participate and contribute constructively. // Congratulations to the Chair and trust in leadership. Thanks to Ecuador for zero drafts. While supporting process of drafting of legally binding instrument, Indonesia needs to strike balance between development, poverty eradication, environment, investment, and human rights.Host numerous companies in extractives sector. Need to ensure they promote human rights and provide remedies. However, legally binding instruments should contribute to development priorities. More than 99 of our business sectors are dealing with small/medium enterprises or state-owned enterprises have international supply chains. Binding instrument should take into account conditions of developing countries. Reaffirm that Resolution is the mandate for this discussion and therefore instrument should not apply to local businesses registered in terms of domestic law||Article 2 - future treaty should focus on TNCS and make it on line with 1A and 1B - activities of transnational chatracter, activities of transnational corporatoins. See the need to revise definition in Article 4 and will provide input when item will be discussed. Para 1C - purporse to advance fulfillment of state obligations is to broad. We wish to add in the context of activities of transnational corporations, after intenrational human rights law. So the para 1C would read "advance international cooperatoin with a view toward fulfilling state obligations and human rights law in the context of activities of transnational corporations" On 8,3 - clarification on the scope of all human rights violations. The term ALL is very broad and therefore need to be elaborated. On 8, 5B and 6, we share the views that states should take into acocunt the economic resources available to the victims and assist the cost bearers, however the state capacity in this regard should be considered. Seek preliminary views from panelist and Chair on establishment of intenrational fund for victims as articulated in 8,7.||like to see clarification of 'potantial impact' - we view that in article 4, treaty should also define sope of violation of HR and potential impacts, as tehy are frequently used. we do not think we need 92f, as it will create unnecessary addiitonal obligation. 92e is already comprehensive. we appreciate the provision of exemption of SMEs. we think it is important for developing countries whos economies depend on SMEs||Preamble separated from articles.|
Include “Reaffirming the principles of the UN Charter”
Para.6. revise and revisited since it is not in line with resolution 26/9.
14.2. 5 years instead of 4.
15.3. It is important to prevent corrupt gov. and commercial interests (move it to the preamble).
|Iran||Attach great importance to LBI, with regard to optional protocol have reservations|
|Iraq||is it possible to prosecute in the name of the victim or only as the victim? I distinguish between violations simple or grave. simple crimes should be lodged by the victim. as for grave crimes they could be lodged as cases on behalf of victims||Art 10 - legal persons can only behave according to the natural will of the natural person. Natural persons must not evade punishment. This is in contradition with art 9 on criminal liability. Criminal liaibilty on natural and legal persons must be on an equal footing. |
The provisions of the convention need to be revised to be more strictly legal.
|jurisdiction depends on nationality and domicile. Violations could lead to victims fleeing because of harm. Could add guarantees for victims to ensure access to justice. Linguistic drafting: needs to be revised to fill in the gaps. Art. 5 terms must be defined such as domicile, parent company. Should add legal center rather than center of activities.||What was heard this morning needs to be included in conclusion, in Iraq large number of TNCs involved in killings and shootings without reason, they enjoy immunity, violations are commited by governemnts themselves, some countries grant priviledges to TNC which needs to be tackled, no guarantee granted to victims, they do not have access to remedy,|