The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) is an instrument consisting of 31 principles implementing the United Nations (UN) Protect, Respect and Remedy framework on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises. Developed by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General (SRSG) John Ruggie, the Guiding Principles provided the first global standard for preventing and addressing the risk of adverse impacts on human rights linked to business activity, and they continue to provide the internationally accepted framework for enhancing standards and practices regarding business and human rights. On June 16, 2011, the United Nations Human Rights Council unanimously endorsed the Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights, making the framework the first corporate human rights responsibility initiative to be endorsed by the UN.Surya Deva, "Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implications for Companies", European Company Law, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 101–109, 2012; University of Oslo Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 2012-10, published 26 March 2012, accessed 3 July 2012
The UNGPs encompass three pillars outlining how states and businesses should implement the framework: The state duty to protect human rights The corporate responsibility to respect human rights Access to remedy for victims of business-related abuses The UNGPs have received wide support from states, civil society organizations, and even the private sector, this has further solidified their status as the key global foundation for business and human rights.John Ruggie, "United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights" , March 21, 2011, retrieved July 3, 2012 The UNGP are informally known as the "Ruggie Principles" or the "Ruggie Framework" due to their authorship by Ruggie, who conceived them and led the process for their consultation and implementation.
History
The UNGPs came as a result of several decades of UN efforts to create global human rights standards for businesses. In the early 1970s, the United Nations Economic and Social Council requested that the Secretary General create a commission group to study the impact of transnational corporations (TNCs) on development processes and international relations. The UN created the Commission on Transnational Corporations in 1973, with the goal of formulating a corporate code of conduct for TNCs. The Commission's work continued into the early 1990s, but the group was ultimately unable to ratify an agreeable code due to various disagreements between developed and developing countries. The group was dissolved in 1994. The debate concerning the responsibilities of business in relation to human rights became prominent in the 1990s, as oil, gas, and mining companies expanded into increasingly difficult areas, and as the practice of off-shore production in clothing and footwear drew attention to poor working conditions in global supply chains. Flowing from these concerns two major initiatives were created.
In August 1998, the UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights established a Working Group on Transnational Corporations. The Working Group similarly attempted to create standards for corporations' human rights obligations. By 2003 they completed the final draft of the "Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights" (the Norms).U.N. Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, "Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights", August 13, 2003. "", Retrieved July 3, 2012 While the Norms received support from some NGOs, such as the Europe-Third World Centre (CETIM) or Amnesty International, the document encountered significant opposition from the business sector, and key influential states.For a history leading to the abandonment of the Norms, see The Commission on Human Rights ultimately determined in 2004 that the framework had no legal standing.The Kenan Institute for Ethics, "The U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Analysis and Implementation", January 2012. "", Retrieved September 10, 2020
In 2005, in an attempt to overcome the divisive debate regarding the human rights responsibilities of businesses, the Human Rights Commission requested the appointment of a special representative of the Secretary-General (SRSG) on the issue of human rights and TNCs.Commission on Human Rights, 'promotion and protection of human rights' E/CN.4/2005/L.87 (15 Apr. 2005) In July 2005, Harvard professor John Ruggie was appointed to this position for an initial two-year period which was then extended for an additional year. In 2008, on completion of his first three-year mandate, Ruggie presented the United Nations Human Rights Council with the "Protect, Respect and Remedy" framework as a conceptual way to anchor the debate. This framework outlined the State duty to protect against business related human rights abuse, the responsibility of companies to respect human rights, and the need to strengthen access to appropriate and effective remedies for victims of business-related human rights abuse. The Human Rights Council welcomed Ruggie's report and extended his mandate until 2011 with the task of "operationalising" and "promoting" the framework. The Human Rights Council asked Ruggie to provide concrete recommendations on how the state could prevent abuses by the private sector, to elaborate on the scope of corporate responsibility, and to explore options for effective remedies available to those whose human rights are impacted by corporate activities.U.N. Human Rights Council, "Resolution 8/7: Mandate of the Special Representative of the Secretary General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises", June 18, 2008. "", Retrieved July 3, 2012
Over the next three years, Ruggie held extensive consultations with stakeholder groups including governments, businesses, and NGOs. Ruggie intended to create "an authoritative focal point around which actors' expectations could converge—a framework that clarified the relevant actors' responsibilities, and provided the foundation which thinking and action could build over time".U.N. Human Rights Council, "The UN 'Protect, Respect, and Remedy' Framework for Business and Human Rights", September 2010. "", Retrieved July 5, 2012 Ruggie's work resulted in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which he presented to the Human Rights Council in June 2011. Ruggie stated,
The Human Rights Council unanimously endorsed the Guiding Principles, thereby creating the first global standard on this topic.
In June 2011, the Human Rights Council adopted Resolution 17/4, it acknowledged the formal end of the mandate of Ruggie as the SRSG on Human Rights and TNCs and Other Enterprises, and unanimously endorsed the Guiding Principles making them the authoritative global reference point on business and human rights.
Additionally, the Council established a working group to focus on the global dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles. OHCHR provides ongoing support and advice to the Working Group, which consists of five independent experts, of balanced regional representation, for a three-year period. Current Working Group Members are: Mr. Surya Deva (Chair from 1 July 2021) (India), since 2016; Ms. Elżbieta Karska (Vice-chair from 1 July 2021) (Poland), since 2018; Mr. Dante Pesce; (Chile), since 2015; Mr. Githu Muigai (Kenya), since 2018; and Ms. Anita Ramasastry (USA), since 2016. The first Forum on Business and Human Rights took place on December 4–5, 2012, in Geneva, Switzerland.Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, "Forum on Business and Human Rights", "", Retrieved July 5, 2012
The three pillars Source:
State duty to protect human rights The first pillar of the Guiding Principles is the state's duty to protect against human rights abuses through regulation, policymaking, investigation, and enforcement. This pillar reaffirms states' existing obligations under international human rights law, as put forth in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Issues in Conflict-affected areas An area which has been the subject of much scrutiny under the first pillar is in regards to support business respect of human rights in conflict-affected areas under guiding principle 7. The first apparent issue with this principle is the interpretation of the term "conflict-affected areas". This terminology was employed by the SRSG to reflect the intention to expand the principles coverage beyond definitions of armed conflict in international humanitarian law. When defining the application of principle 7, consideration must be given to the flexible definition boundaries that the UNGP, as a soft law instrument, employs and also guidance based nature of the principle. Where the issue with interpretation of principle 7 arises is to what types of conflict are to be left out of the principle.
Another area of uncertainty which exists is in the relation between 'gross abuses' and 'conflict-affected areas' which impact directly on the applicability of principle 7 to serious violations within conflict zones that require home states action to influence companies operating within the area. Gross violations of human rights occurs both in conflict areas, and areas absent of a conflict, such as in repressive States and dictatorships. The question recognised here is whether principle 7 applies to gross abuses in non conflict-affected areas. Additionally, does principle 7 have equal application across democratic, authoritarian, and oppressive States where gross abuses that have arisen in conflicts or is the principles application dependent on the State losing control over its territory.
Corporate responsibility to respect Businesses must act with due diligence to avoid infringing on the rights of others and to address any negative impacts. The UNGPs hold that companies have the power to affect virtually all of the internationally recognized rights. Therefore, there is a responsibility of both the state and the private sector to acknowledge their role in upholding and protecting human rights. In conducting due diligence, the UNGP encourage companies to conduct a Human Rights Impact Assessment through which they assess their actual and potential human rights impacts.
Access to remedy if these rights are not respected The third pillar addresses both the state's responsibility to provide access to remedy through judicial, administrative, and legislative means, and the corporate responsibility to prevent and remediate any infringement of rights that they contribute to. Having effective grievance mechanisms in place is crucial in upholding the state's duty to protect and the corporate responsibility to respect. The UNGPs dictate that non-judicial mechanisms, whether state-based or independent, should be legitimate, accessible, predictable, rights-compatible, equitable, and transparent. Similarly, Company-level mechanisms are encouraged to operate through dialogue and engagement, rather than with the company acting as the adjudicator of its own actions.
Issues with access to home state remedies