Czechia
The first Czech NAP was adopted and published in October 2017 covering the period 2017-2022.
There is no indication that a second NAP is being developed.
Available NAPs
Czechia: 1st NAP (2017-2022)
NAP Development Process
Status
The Czech NAP was adopted and published by the Czech Government on 23 October 2017.
Process
In October 2015, the Ministry for Human Rights, in conjunction with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, established the business and human rights working group (BHRWG). The BHRWG was tasked by the Minister for Human Rights to draft the Czech Republic National Action Plan for Business and Human Rights (NAP). The BHRWG finalised the draft NAP in June 2017 which was adopted by the Government in October 2017.
Stakeholder Participation
The BHRWG consisted of the Government (including the ministries of environment, finance, foreign affairs, industry and trade, interior, justice, labour and social affairs, and regional development), businesses, civil society organisations, and trade unions. The BHRWG was open to all interested parties and actively encouraged participants to reach out to and invite other organisations.
Transparency
There was no formal publication of the terms of reference or the timeline for the NAP completion. A rough timeline was presented at the first BHRWG meeting and recorded in the minutes. The BHRWG was to meet every two months and present the final draft of the NAP in Spring 2017. The BHRWG agreed on organising principles at the first meeting, including a ‘principle-by-principle’ approach following the UNGPs (as opposed to a sector-specific focus), and agreed to an initial NBA and to setting concrete, measurable and realistic activities. Assessments, analysis, and stakeholder submissions were not formally published, however they were openly shared with all participants in the BHRWG on a non-confidential basis.
National Baseline Assessment (NBA)
• Finalised in November 2015 but not publicly available.
• Commissioned by the State to inform the inaugural BHR NAP, which was published in October 2017.
• Conducted by academics from the Center for Human Rights and Democratization, an independent academic institution, under the supervision of Hubert Smekal, associate professor at Masaryk University.
The NAP mandates the Ministry for Human Rights (Office of the Government) to “[c]ommission research into the situation in the field of business and human rights in the Czech Republic” by the 31st December 2020.
Follow-up, monitoring, reporting and review
The NAP identifies which ministry or ministries are responsible for each of the individual commitments, which are also time-bound.
The NAP provides in the Conclusion that:
“The approval of this Action Plan must not mark the end of the debate on “Business and Human Rights” in the Czech Republic. On the contrary, the Plan’s approval should be an important factor triggering further debate. The Action Plan is a living document that needs to respond to the latest developments in the Czech Republic and around the world. The performance of tasks under this Action Plan will be assessed and, on the strength of the experience and new knowledge gained, the Plan may be updated. The evaluations of the Action Plan will draw on expertise and scientific research, which should be carried out by independent experts. For this reason, a scientific study will be carried out to evaluate the current situation in business and human rights on the part of both the state (laws and practices) and businesses. The study’s conclusions will be used to develop and reinforce the protection of human rights against the backdrop of business.
This process will be coordinated by the Minister for Human Rights, Equal Opportunities and Legislation and, where appropriate, by other Government members whose remit includes human rights. Specific steps to carry out these tasks will be arranged by the Secretariat of the Government Council for Human Rights in collaboration with the Council itself. Evaluation will include dialogue with all stakeholders, i.e. representatives of state administration, civil society and social partners primarily affected by issues of business and human rights. As such dialogue proved to be highly beneficial and instrumental in the successful completion of the existing Action Plan, it would be useful to continue this cooperation and allow anyone who is affected by this subject and who is prepared to contribute to further public debate to become involved. With this in mind, an informal discussion platform will be set up to deal with matters related to business and human rights. That platform will meet as required to discuss questions of immediate interest. Representatives of state administration, businesses, the non-profit sector and trade unions will be invited.”
The Ministry of Human Rights is tasked to run checks on the implementation of the Action Plan and assess developments in the field of human rights in business with a running deadline, and to produce an interim and final report on the implementation of the NAP by the end of 2020 and 2022 respectively.
Explore NAP by Issue
The Czech NAP makes no explicit reference to children’s rights, but does reference child labour. “Respect for human rights is not inherently voluntary – modern-day slavery, child labour, and environmental over-exploitation cannot be dependent on corporate goodwill.” “Increasing attention is being paid to safety conditions at work (e.g. the use of slave and child labour in mining). Risks of this type are particularly serious in areas plagued by armed conflict, which can be attributed to the absence of state authority here. Raw materials imported from geopolitically unstable regions and flashpoints may be used as a source of funding to reconstruct the country and improve the conditions in which its inhabitants live. On the other hand, various groups may exploit slave or child labour in mining operations or in factories, and the proceeds from sales could then be used to pay for weapons and soldiers.” “- Do not be associated with violations of human rights: This applies to other parties’ activities about which a business knows, on which it has a bearing, and/or which are closely related to its own business, and may encompass: … “What human rights? States bear liability for the full range of human rights. Businesses are required to respect those rights that could be affected by their operations, and must do so to the extent of a definite minimum, generally acknowledged fundamental standard deriving from: These rights are fleshed out in a series of other specific instruments, such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. In practice, this concerns matters such as the ban on forced labour, child labour, and life- or health-threatening working conditions”. “Where does respect come into play? … The supply chain and business partners: Businesses should have a vested interest in ensuring that the components, raw materials and external services they use are not associated with violations of human rights (e.g. “sullied” by child labour).” The Czech NAP has a chapter dedicated to Trade in military equipment, which does not explicitly address conflict-affected areas, but states “…non-profit organisations such as Amnesty International continue to criticise the Czech Republic for exporting weapons to “high-risk countries”. “Current state of play: … Tasks: … “Increasing attention is being paid to safety conditions at work (e.g. the use of slave and child labour in mining). Risks of this type are particularly serious in areas plagued by armed conflict, which can be attributed to the absence of state authority here. … Current state of play: Tasks: “…some businesses may face conflict with other rights and principles specific to a particular country or industry. For the sake of example, a manufacturer of military equipment should not supply goods to a regime if there is a deep-seated suspicion that they will be used against civilians, and should not make instruments of torture.” The Czech NAP does not make a direct reference to Construction, although the following points are relevant to the area. “It is often the case that complex authorisation proceedings do not take place as a whole, but comprise a many sub-proceedings and decisions that follow up on each other and are intertwined. If one decision is annulled by a special remedy (review proceedings or an administrative action), the downstream decisions formally remain in force even though they have been robbed of their basis. One example is building permit proceedings, where the issuance of a building permit hinges on the existence of a valid zoning decision. If a court annuls the zoning decision (or even part of the land-use plan forming the basis for the issuance of the zoning decision), the building permit remains in force. This falls foul of the principle of procedural economy (the annulment must take place in a separate process, even though this is a pure formality in the overwhelming majority of cases). It is also contrary to the requirement of legal certainty (the decision remains in force and enjoys the presumption of correctness, even though it obviously needs to be annulled), and is at odds with the principle of legality (because a decision that is clearly not legal remains in force).” “The lack of uniformity of provisions in administrative law is reflected negatively in the issuance of permits and opinions in particular. An investor intending to implement a large-scale plan affecting multiple areas requires numerous individual permits and opinions from various bodies. In this respect, the Czech legal system is highly fragmented. Permits are issued in accordance with laws on building … Current state of play: An amendment to the Building Act adopted in 2017 led to the partial interconnection of zoning proceedings, building permit proceedings, EIA procedure and several other necessary authorisation proceedings.” “Implements Principles 1 and 3a Modern business is inconceivable without companies and cooperatives. They facilitate the concentration of funds, limit risk, and create opportunities for professional management. They are a means of implementing major business projects. However, like any other such means, companies may be open to abuse. Those who engage in crime can divide up responsibility for decisions and hide behind convoluted management structures. At large corporations, it can often be difficult to find a specific liable person. The Act on the Criminal Liability of Legal Persons [Act No 418/2011 on the criminal liability of and proceedings against legal persons] resolves this by making it possible to infer that a legal person as a whole is liable. The most serious human rights abuses can be punished as crimes. According to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, too, the state duty to efficiently investigate and ultimately punish infringements is central to human rights protection. However, criminal prosecution is the strongest instrument of power the state can wield, and has repercussions for employees, shareholders, creditors, business partners and others who have nothing to do with criminal activity. In this light, legislation needs to be monitored and evaluated. While the state carries primary responsibility for human rights protection in its territory, in today’s interconnected age the stringent application of the principle of territoriality is impossible. The Czech Republic has decided that – whether unilaterally or on the strength of an international treaty – it will prosecute certain unlawful conduct by Czech nationals irrespective of where this conduct occurs. As such, it is assuming responsibility for the conduct of its nationals (including businesses) abroad, thus making it possible to fill in the regulatory gap to some extent in those cases where such conduct is not punishable under another country’s law. Current state of play: Task: “Implements Principles 1 and 3b If a company executive orders or, due to negligence or connivance, allows the company he or she manages to encroach on human rights, that executive must be found to be liable. It is always more advisable to prosecute specific culprits rather than a whole company. However, a criminal penalty is not always appropriate. Indeed, criminal prosecution appears to be too strict a response to minor or negligent breaches of the law. One possible solution is disqualification – banning someone from holding corporate directorships. Professionals recommend disqualification as a lighter form of punishment for a number of acts directly associated with business activity. Disqualification is a punishment that is suitably harsh for the perpetrator without carrying the stigma of criminal prosecution, and does not harm the company as a whole. Furthermore, judicial proceedings in such a case are simpler and more economical. Although current Czech law does accommodate disqualification, this is restricted to a narrow set of offences and the maximum duration is limited. In this respect, we need to explore whether the present wording of constituent elements is sufficient, i.e. whether it is broad enough for the courts to have sufficient opportunity to apply this instrument, while being definitive enough so that members of company bodies know what acts are prohibited. We should also consider what the maximum duration of disqualification ought to be for the various acts. Current state of play: Task: “Current state of play: “The Guiding Principles set great store by openness and transparency, which in practice means communication with the public, with employees and with other stakeholders. Businesses should make public the fact that they are mindful of their responsibility, that they are not just assuming this responsibility for show, and that they accept it as part of their business ethics. This ongoing communication could include not only the public, but also investors, business partners and potential employees, for whom the business, by following this path, has become a more attractive partner or place to work. Communication may be one way (e.g. various forms of non-financial reporting) or bidirectional (e.g. public hearings on matters of general interest). The Government of the Czech Republic recommends that businesses where the activities, products, services or business relationships are associated with risks of serious human rights violations formally provide information on how they are dealing with those risks, even in situations where the law does not require them to do so. The government recommends all companies reporting on human rights to take account of the Reporting Framework for the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Reporting should provide information of relevance without overwhelming the reader. The Government also recommends that large-scale projects with a potential major impact be publicly presented and consulted.” “The Czech Republic has long set great store by the topic of human rights both generally and in connection with the activities of businesses. Human rights in a business context is covered, for example, by the following strategy documents: … “Current state of play: “Current state of play: “Tasks: “… The application of internationally acknowledged standards for non-financial reporting is recommended. These include: … Global Reporting Initiative, an independent international organisation specialising in the reporting of the impacts of business operations in the fields of human rights, the environment and corruption” For businesses, there are three dimensions to respect for human rights:… The disclosure of customers’ personal data to an undemocratic regime. The Czech NAP does not make an explicit reference to Development Finance Institutions. “Sensitively and coherently used technology could play a major role in freeing the hands of the courts. Just like any other area of human activity, the judiciary could benefit from the advantages delivered by advanced technology. Numerous countries around the world are conducting studies and drawing up strategies on how to use such technology efficiently in the work of the judiciary. [For example, in 2017 the UK Ministry of Justice organised a competition for innovators and programmers to develop tools that would support the online judiciary.] These are tools that could be put to good use in the process of adjudication on the one hand (facilitating the taking of evidence, enabling hearings to be held without the physical presence of all persons) and in the paperwork and state administration of the courts on the other (file computerisation and automation). The technology must be used in such a way that it does not place an extra burden on the courts, and must be accompanied by the thorough induction training of court staff. Likewise, it must not reduce in any way the availability of or access to the courts and judicial protection.” CSR encompasses areas such as … environmental protection, and the setting-up and running of community facilities. The concept of business and human rights, on the other hand, is rooted in the fact that certain unwelcome developments should not happen in the course of business activities per se. Respect for human rights is not inherently voluntary – … environmental over-exploitation cannot be dependent on corporate goodwill. However, this Action Plan’s commitments to mitigate and suppress the risk of such occurrences in the absence of the state regulation that would prevent them directly are voluntary. They also make it easier for businesses to keep clear of such situations in their supply chains and among their business partners. Implements Principles 4 and 7 [page 25] On 1 January 2004, the OECD Recommendation on Common Approaches on the Environment and Officially Supported Export Credits entered into force. That Recommendation includes a commitment by all Member States not to assist – through their institutions – environmentally harmful projects. In June 2012, the OECD Council adopted the Recommendation on Common Approaches for Officially Supported Export Credits and Environmental and Social Due Diligence, which expands and reinforces the original provisions on the environmental and social aspects of officially supported exports. The new Recommendation establishes simpler, more readily accessible procedure for the categorisation of projects according to their environmental and social impact in the countries where they are to be implemented. The main change is the greater stress on the social impacts of projects and the aspects thereof that have a bearing on human rights in the countries of implementation. Current state of play: Task: For businesses, there are three dimensions to respect for human rights: What human rights? These rights are fleshed out in a series of other specific instruments, such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. …As for the external impacts of a business’s operations, this might encompass forced land seizure and population displacement, the ban on requisitioning or destroying natural resources that are vital to a local community, and the ban on destroying cultural heritage. The Czech Republic has long set great store by the topic of human rights both generally and in connection with the activities of businesses. Human rights in a business context is covered, for example, by the following strategy documents:… The objectives of this Action Plan are consistent with the Strategic Framework of the Czech Republic 2030, in particular its tenets of “Let’s preserve and support diversity” and “Let’s respect fundamental human rights”. It supplements the Strategic Framework’s activities in the key areas of “People and society” and “Economic model”. “Implements Principles 4 and 7 The Czech Republic supports exporters via the export bank Česká exportní banka, a.s. (CEB) and the export guarantee and insurance corporation Exportní garanční a pojišťovací společnost, a.s. (EGAP). The state has a duty to make sure that this support does not foster violations of human rights. On 1 January 2004, the ECD Recommendation on Common Approaches on the Environment and Officially Supported Export Credits entered into force. That Recommendation includes a commitment by all Member States not to assist – through their institutions – environmentally harmful projects. In June 2012, the OECD Council adopted the Recommendation on Common Approaches for Officially Supported Export Credits and Environmental and Social Due Diligence, which expands and reinforces the original provisions on the environmental and social aspects of officially supported exports. The new Recommendation establishes simpler, more readily accessible procedure for the categorisation of projects according to their environmental and social impact in the countries where they are to be implemented. The main change is the greater stress on the social impacts of projects and the aspects thereof that have a bearing on human rights in the countries of implementation. Current state of play: Task: “The question of business and human rights was thrust into the public consciousness in the 1990s. With modern business no longer confined by the borders of nation states, production and extraction operations are free to roam in pursuit of the right raw materials, economic conditions and labour.” “Between 2009 and 2011, there were several cases of large-scale labour exploitation involving up to several hundred workers in the forestry sector (Finding of the Constitutional Court II. ÚS 3436/14 of 19 January 2016 and Finding of the Constitutional Court I. ÚS 3196/12 of 12 August 2014).” “Implements Principles 6 and 7 Increasing attention is being paid to safety conditions at work (e.g. the use of slave and child labour in mining). Risks of this type are particularly serious in areas plagued by armed conflict, which can be attributed to the absence of state authority here. Raw materials imported from geopolitically unstable regions and flashpoints may be used as a source of funding to reconstruct the country and improve the conditions in which its inhabitants live. On the other hand, various groups may exploit slave or child labour in mining operations or in factories, and the proceeds from sales could then be used to pay for weapons and soldiers. The raw materials they have mined and the products they have made are then sold on the global market, often without the buyers knowing their provenance. This is a problem that needs to be tackled internationally. One solution lies in certification schemes proving the origin of raw materials. The certification authority guarantees that workers’ rights have not been infringed during mining or production. These certificates are issued by state and international organisations on the one hand, and private issuers on the other. Current legislation allows the public sector to take into account or to demand this certification in the course of procurement, in which case it is only necessary to comply with the conditions of transparency, equal treatment and non-discrimination. [Judgment of the EU Court of Justice of 10 May 2012 in European Commission v Kingdom of the Netherlands (C-368/10)] Current state of play: Tasks: “For businesses, there are three dimensions to respect for human rights: … “… there are certain cases under Czech law where Czech citizens and nationals can be prosecuted for violations of human rights abroad. These include the criminal-law tenets of personality and universality [Sections 6, 7 and 8 of Act No 40/2009, the Criminal Code.]. As a result, the Czech Republic has laid solid foundations and is systemically conditioned for human rights protection.” “While the state carries primary responsibility for human rights protection in its territory, in today’s interconnected age the stringent application of the principle of territoriality is impossible. The Czech Republic has decided that – whether unilaterally or on the strength of an international treaty – it will prosecute certain unlawful conduct by Czech nationals irrespective of where this conduct occurs. As such, it is assuming responsibility for the conduct of its nationals (including businesses) abroad, thus making it possible to fill in the regulatory gap to some extent in those cases where such conduct is not punishable under another country’s law. Current state of play: … Task: The Czech NAP makes no explicit reference to Finance and banking, although the Financial Arbitrator is highlighted within the Alternative and online dispute resolution section [page 49]. The Czech NAP does not make a direct or explicit reference to the Fisheries and Aquaculture sectors. “The concept of business and human rights, on the other hand, is rooted in the fact that certain unwelcome developments should not happen in the course of business activities per se. Respect for human rights is not inherently voluntary – modern-day slavery, child labour, and environmental over-exploitation cannot be dependent on corporate goodwill. However, this Action Plan’s commitments to mitigate and suppress the risk of such occurrences in the absence of the state regulation that would prevent them directly are voluntary. They also make it easier for businesses to keep clear of such situations in their supply chains and among their business partners.” “In 2009, there was a case where at least 22 construction workers were found to have been enslaved for up to 2 years (Judgment of the Supreme Court 4 Tdo 366/2013 of 14 May 2013).” “Tasks: … “Increasing attention is being paid to safety conditions at work (e.g. the use of slave and child labour in mining). Risks of this type are particularly serious in areas plagued by armed conflict, which can be attributed to the absence of state authority here. Raw materials imported from geopolitically unstable regions and flashpoints may be used as a source of funding to reconstruct the country and improve the conditions in which its inhabitants live. On the other hand, various groups may exploit slave or child labour in mining operations or in factories, and the proceeds from sales could then be used to pay for weapons and soldiers.” “- Do not be associated with violations of human rights: This applies to other parties’ activities about which a business knows, on which it has a bearing, and/or which are closely related to its own business, and may encompass: … “What human rights? States bear liability for the full range of human rights. Businesses are required to respect those rights that could be affected by their operations, and must do so to the extent of a definite minimum, generally acknowledged fundamental standard deriving from: These rights are fleshed out in a series of other specific instruments, such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. In practice, this concerns matters such as the ban on forced labour, child labour, and life- or health-threatening working conditions”. “What human rights? States bear liability for the full range of human rights. Businesses are required to respect those rights that could be affected by their operations, and must do so to the extent of a definite minimum, generally acknowledged fundamental standard deriving from: … These rights are fleshed out in a series of other specific instruments, such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. In practice, this concerns matters such as the ban on forced labour, child labour, and life- or health-threatening working conditions, the ban on workplace discrimination, the hindrance of association and collective bargaining, etc.” This section highlights a range of associations which can represent parties in certain types of procedures, for example: “Even today, a trade union organisation may represent its members and associations may, in the course of their activities, represent victims of discrimination or foreign nationals in labour cases. It is worth considering expanding opportunities for representation by those organisations in the future.” “…an informal discussion platform will be set up to deal with matters related to business and human rights. That platform will meet as required to discuss questions of immediate interest. Representatives of state administration, businesses, the non-profit sector and trade unions will be invited. Tasks: … The Czech NAP does not make a direct reference to the Garment sector. “The Czech Republic has long set great store by the topic of human rights both generally and in connection with the activities of businesses. Human rights in a business context is covered, for example, by the following strategy documents: … Equal treatment and equality are mentioned at four points in the Czech NAP, however these are not explicitly mentioned in relation to gender or women’s rights. “Implements Principles 2, 3c and 8 Increasing attention is paid to the theme of business and human rights in recent years. Many countries, international organisations and universities have produced numerous documents, model professional and theme-based codes of conduct, examples of good practice, recommendations and guidelines. Examples include recommendations and model codes published by the OECD, EU bodies, the Council of Europe and the ILO, as well as examples of good practice from the business community. However, these documents have not been gathered in one place. Businesses wishing to guard against human rights risks in their operations, perhaps by introducing new internal control mechanisms, adopting a code of conduct or incorporating human rights clauses into their contracts, may find it difficult to look up information. A sound of response would be to find these documents, collect them in one place, classify them and, where necessary, translate them into Czech so that texts on business and human rights are made available to the general public. When new materials are drawn up, they should be written in plain language that a layman can easily understand. The world’s universities are also aware of how important this subject is. The “Teach BHR” platform, grouping together those who teach business and human rights at universities, currently has 240 members from 140 institutions in 32 countries. It also offers ready-made study materials, workshops and experience-sharing forums. When it comes to Czech higher-education institutions, the University of Economics, Prague, runs a specialised course called “Business and Human Rights”, and other colleges cover this topic, for example, as part of their business ethics courses. Current state of play: Tasks: “Current state of play: “Current state of play: … Tasks: “…guidance should be drawn up for award procedure in accordance with human rights. This guidance should encompass specific practical examples, including model contractual provisions and/or a model tender dossier. The guidance should be accompanied by an overview of international platforms and initiatives sharing experience and information on socially responsible public contracts. This guidance should be preceded by consultations and should be produced in collaboration with business associations. Current state of play: Tasks: “Current state of play: … “Current state of play: … Tasks: “Businesses in the same industry or in the same geographical area are exposed to similar problems, so it is more efficient for them to tackle them together. Cooperation could result in the exchange of good experience and practical examples, and in the creation of new instruments (in particular the conclusion of sectoral agreements or the adoption of sectoral standards).” “The Office of the Government of the Czech Republic collects model documents, guidelines and materials intended for businesses to improve the performance of tasks in this chapter, and posts them on the National Corporate Social Responsibility Portal: For businesses, there are three dimensions to respect for human rights: – Do not commit violations of human rights: This applies to a business’s active conduct, the direct impacts of its decisions, and its operations, and may encompass: o The health- or life-threatening working conditions of its employees. o The destruction of a source of water, permanent soil damage, and emissions that pose a threat to health. – Do not contribute to violations of human rights: A business does not commit violations itself, but acts in a way that facilitates or smooths the way for violations. This may encompass: o The marketing of products that could be harmful to health. No explicit reference is made in the Czech NAP to human rights defenders. “The Government of the Czech Republic recommends that businesses adopt internal commitments in accordance with the recommendations below. … What should a commitment encompass? … Protection of whistleblowers: This includes, on the one hand, instructions for employees on how to proceed if they detect unlawful conduct and, on the other, protection from retaliation.” “Tasks: “Current state of play: Tasks: “… certain international standards, such as ISO 26000, contain criteria recommended for human rights risk assessments. …” “Current state of play: The Czech NAP contains a section on Due diligence [page 35-36] which is relevant to human rights impact assessments (see the analysis on Human rights due diligence) “The Government of the Czech Republic recommends that businesses where the activities, products, services or business relationships are associated with risks of serious human rights violations formally provide information on how they are dealing with those risks, even in situations where the law does not require them to do so. The government recommends all companies reporting on human rights to take account of the Reporting Framework for the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Reporting should provide information of relevance without overwhelming the reader. The Government also recommends that large-scale projects with a potential major impact be publicly presented and consulted.” “A business may publish periodic non-financial reports in numerous forms, either as part of the annual report or entirely separately. In any case, they should be posted online on the business’s website. The non-financial report should not be drawn up just for show, but should shed light on significant information relevant to an impact assessment of the business’s operations. On the other hand, it should remain brief and concentrate on matters of relevance. Parent companies should include information on the activities of their subsidiaries.” What human rights? [page 30] These rights are fleshed out in a series of other specific instruments, such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. …As for the external impacts of a business’s operations, this might encompass forced land seizure and population displacement, the ban on requisitioning or destroying natural resources that are vital to a local community, and the ban on destroying cultural heritage. An effective due diligence mechanism should meet the following criteria:… Public engagement can take many forms. First of all, this may entail consultations with those affected by businesses’ operations (holders of human rights) because these people are best placed to highlight the problems looming over them. Likewise, employees should be involved as they need to know how to deal with the knowledge they accrue in their work. Finally, public engagement may comprise external expert opinions, opposing views, etc. Transparent consultation of matters of general interest [page 29] If a business is preparing a major project that could be linked – even if only potentially – with human rights risks, open communication with all stakeholder groups is recommended. Negotiations should be guided by the following principles: If the direct participation of a particular group is impossible, communication with their representatives or with experts familiar with the situation is an option. “Under the common commercial policy, the negotiation of commercial agreements is in the sole competence of the EU. Agreements are negotiated on behalf of the Union by the European Commission, which acts in the name of Member States (they must always mandate it to do so). The European Commission pursues the common commercial policy in furtherance of the principles and objectives of the European Union, i.e. inter alia by promoting democracy, the rule of law and human rights. Subject to the European Commission’s approval, the Czech Republic may negotiate bilateral investment agreements. Current state of play: … Tasks: … Read more about Investment treaties & investor-state dispute settlements “Implements Principles 1 and 3a Modern business is inconceivable without companies and cooperatives. They facilitate the concentration of funds, limit risk, and create opportunities for professional management. They are a means of implementing major business projects. However, like any other such means, companies may be open to abuse. Those who engage in crime can divide up responsibility for decisions and hide behind convoluted management structures. At large corporations, it can often be difficult to find a specific liable person. The Act on the Criminal Liability of Legal Persons resolves this by making it possible to infer that a legal person as a whole is liable. The most serious human rights abuses can be punished as crimes. According to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, too, the state duty to efficiently investigate and ultimately punish infringements is central to human rights protection. However, criminal prosecution is the strongest instrument of power the state can wield, and has repercussions for employees, shareholders, creditors, business partners and others who have nothing to do with criminal activity. In this light, legislation needs to be monitored and evaluated. While the state carries primary responsibility for human rights protection in its territory, in today’s interconnected age the stringent application of the principle of territoriality is impossible. The Czech Republic has decided that – whether unilaterally or on the strength of an international treaty – it will prosecute certain unlawful conduct by Czech nationals irrespective of where this conduct occurs. As such, it is assuming responsibility for the conduct of its nationals (including businesses) abroad, thus making it possible to fill in the regulatory gap to some extent in those cases where such conduct is not punishable under another country’s law. Current state of play: Task: “Implements Principles 1 and 3b If a company executive orders or, due to negligence or connivance, allows the company he or she manages to encroach on human rights, that executive must be found to be liable. It is always more advisable to prosecute specific culprits rather than a whole company. However, a criminal penalty is not always appropriate. Indeed, criminal prosecution appears to be too strict a response to minor or negligent breaches of the law. One possible solution is disqualification – banning someone from holding corporate directorships. Professionals recommend disqualification as a lighter form of punishment for a number of acts directly associated with business activity. Disqualification is a punishment that is suitably harsh for the perpetrator without carrying the stigma of criminal prosecution, and does not harm the company as a whole. Furthermore, judicial proceedings in such a case are simpler and more economical. Although current Czech law does accommodate disqualification, this is restricted to a narrow set of offences and the maximum duration is limited. In this respect, we need to explore whether the present wording of constituent elements is sufficient, i.e. whether it is broad enough for the courts to have sufficient opportunity to apply this instrument, while being definitive enough so that members of company bodies know what acts are prohibited. We should also consider what the maximum duration of disqualification ought to be for the various acts. Current state of play: Task: “It is incumbent on states to protect human rights. This duty includes the provision of efficient and effective means of remedy for those whose rights have been infringed. Article 36 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms provides that: “Anyone may claim, in the prescribed manner, their rights in an independent and impartial court and, where so provided, before another authority. “The third pillar of the National Action Plan is designed to ensure that, in the field of business and human rights, this right is genuinely available to everyone without unnecessary obstruction, and that it results in efficient remedies. That is not to say that the third pillar is simply a framework for the improved functioning of the courts. Extrajudicial remedies are also attainable. The third pillar also includes quasi-judicial tribunals, dispute resolution authorities, informal ombudsman-type institutions and mediation institutions (such as the National Contact Point, a Government-devised neutral platform to hear complaints about infringements of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises). Ultimately, the ideal dispute is one that never arises in the first place. The third pillar also includes the means to prevent disputes at the businesses themselves. The primary aim of the third is to find remedies. Remedies may take various forms – an apology, the restoration of what has been damaged to its previous condition, financial or non-financial compensation, or the punishment of the guilty party. The aim is not just to remedy loss or damage, but also to prevent a recurrence by means of enforceable judicial rulings or other less formal guarantees. Judicial resources: Although there are no fundamental legal obstacles in access to the courts in the Czech Republic, numerous de facto obstructions do exist here. The World Bank’s Doing Business project rates the organisation of the courts and the quality of decision-making in the Czech Republic very highly, but criticises the duration and costs of proceedings for businesses. It takes an average of 611 days to enforce payment under a model contract, and the recovery costs can amount to as much as a third of the claim value. Of that period, enforcement of the judgment per se takes an average of 113 days, with enforcement costs accounting for almost half of costs occasioned by the proceedings as a whole. Overall, the Czech Republic ranked 68th out of the 190 countries assessed. The Government of the Czech Republic systematically analyses the functioning of the judicial system and attempts to reduce the length of judicial proceedings and relieve the courts of unnecessary paperwork in order to streamline the entire judicial architecture. However, this must not be to the detriment of the quality of decision-making and the rights of parties to proceedings. Improvements in law enforcement are addressed by other government strategies, including the International Competitiveness Strategy and the Consumer Policy Priorities 2015-2020. The following factors have been pinpointed as the main barriers to the prompt and efficient enforcement of the law: The Czech Republic views the courts as a fundamental means of redress for those who believe that their rights have been infringed. However, it must not be the only source of recourse. …” “Judicial proceedings assessing matters of business and human rights can often be very complex and convoluted. Furthermore, the victims in these disputes tend to be the economically or de facto weaker party (consumers, employees members of minorities, etc.) unable to afford decent legal assistance. The European Court of Human Rights takes the view that effective access to a court, including affordable legal systems, is part and parcel of the protection of human rights. [Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights No 6289/73 of 9 October 1979 in Airey v Ireland] The state, then, should take action to ensure that everyone, without fail, has the opportunity to seek judicial protection efficiently and effectively. Representation in court is mainly the domain of lawyers, whose activities are regulated and guarantee a certain standard of quality, courtesy (to some degree) of checks conducted by the competent professional organisation, i.e. the bar association. However, for some types of proceedings it is advisable to permit representation by persons who, for example, possess specialised knowledge in a narrowly defined area of law or are willing to systematically provide representation free of charge. Even today, a trade union organisation may represent its members and associations may, in the course of their activities, represent victims of discrimination or foreign nationals in labour cases. It is worth considering expanding opportunities for representation by those organisations in the future. A trade union organisation could also represent other employees at the same employer; consumer protection associations could represent consumers; and associations that have long pushed for environmental protection in a particular place could represent plaintiffs in environmental cases. Other options could also be weighed up. Although these organisations can already provide representation, this is only as general agents (i.e. not systematically across a range of cases). Legislative enshrinement will enable them not only to pursue this activity systematically, but also make it possible to establish their liability more precisely, including, say, compulsory insurance. Current state of play: Tasks: “Disputes deriving from the protection of human rights are complex in terms of their legal classification and from the aspect of precisely defining the action and the claim. Quantifying loss or damage in relation to non-economic rights is difficult, as is determining the extent to which a specific culprit is guilty. Some of the evidence necessary tends to be in the complete control of the counterparty (e.g. minutes of the meetings of company bodies, internal instructions, and the working correspondence of employees). The Code of Civil Procedure recognises the “duty of release”, where the court, on a motion from the plaintiff, may indicate specific evidence (documentation) in the possession of the counterparty and order it to be released. However, such procedure is possible only after proceedings have been opened (i.e. the action must already have been brought), even though this evidence may be required to formulate the action, its statement of grounds, and the precise definition of the relief sought. The documentation solicited must also be very clearly specified. Current state of play: Task: “Historically (bar the odd specific exception), Czech law has not accommodated collective means for the protection of rights. In disputes where there are a large number of victims, they must all bring their own action and lodge their own claim separately. Actions may be joined, but even so each plaintiff has the status of a separate party. This is particularly problematic in disputes where the overall loss or damage is large, but is fragmented among a large number of people. The costs of judicial proceedings (and the risk of having to pay the counterparty’s costs if the action fails) are disproportionate to the scale of the loss or damage, which deters people from lodging numerous claims that would otherwise be legitimate. This procedure is also expensive for the counterparty, which has to deal with scores – even hundreds – of actions, and even pushes up the cost to the courts in terms of the paperwork, the service of documents, the ruling per se, and the enforcement thereof. The situation is much the same in the administrative judiciary in cases requiring the judicial review of decisions involving large numbers of parties. Here, too, there may be situations where a large number of persons feel that their rights have been infringed by a particular decision of a public authority, but the Code of Procedure of Administrative Courts does not let them file their claims collectively. Even if cases are joined within the scope of single proceedings, each plaintiff effectively acts independently. Current state of play: Tasks: “Judicial proceedings in the Czech Republic are still relatively protracted. Although a lot of headway has been made in reducing the average length of proceedings in recent years, there is still room for improvement. The courts’ main problem is that they are overloaded with a huge number of cases. Judicial proceedings are highly formalised, at great cost to both parties to the dispute and to the court itself. The paperwork associated with the running of the judiciary encumbers not only the judges, but also the courts’ administrative machinery. Sensitively and coherently used technology could play a major role in freeing the hands of the courts. Just like any other area of human activity, the judiciary could benefit from the advantages delivered by advanced technology. Numerous countries around the world are conducting studies and drawing up strategies on how to use such technology efficiently in the work of the judiciary. These are tools that could be put to good use in the process of adjudication on the one hand (facilitating the taking of evidence, enabling hearings to be held without the physical presence of all persons) and in the paperwork and state administration of the courts on the other (file computerisation and automation). The technology must be used in such a way that it does not place an extra burden on the courts, and must be accompanied by the thorough induction training of court staff. Likewise, it must not reduce in any way the availability of or access to the courts and judicial protection. Alongside the judges, an indispensable role in the smooth and problem-free functioning of the judiciary is played by judges’ assistants, trainee judges and other employees of the judiciary. These positions need to be filled by highly skilled specialists who are well versed in the law and able to apply it, and they should be rewarded accordingly. The judiciary must offer conditions capable of attracting and retaining top-class lawyers. The Ministry of Justice, aware of this need, is preparing to increase the number of such workers and their pay in 2018. This is a positive trend that should continue in the years to come. Current state of play: Tasks: “Judicial proceedings are inherently formalised and costly affairs. The calling of a judge is mainly to handle complex legal issues. Yet much of the agenda at the courts is filled with disputes that are legally and factually simple and could be dealt with by extrajudicial means. Ministry of Justice statistics indicate that half of the disputes that pass through the courts have a claim value of less than CZK 10,000. In other words, these are petty disputes. While it would be wrong to automatically dismiss petty disputes as simple in their facts, we can assume that this is the case in many instances. It may be more effective, in some cases, for these types of factually simpler disputes to be handled in certain special procedural regimes (e.g. by simplifying judicial hearings or restricting appeals), or a solution to them could be found out of court. If the courts no longer have to grapple with a surfeit of such disputes, they will have more capacity to address complex and fundamental legal issues. However, it is difficult to estimate the actual number of such simplified disputes. Numerous low-value disputes do not even make it into court because the costs of proceedings would dwarf the claim value. Even plaintiffs who are sure of the legitimacy of their claim will not bring an action in a situation where the loss of the case and reimbursement of costs to the counterparty would make them destitute. Consequently, many such disputes are “latent”, though that is not to say that they are non-existent. In this light, the state needs to offer a functioning, effective and efficient alternative running parallel to the judicial system. This alternative system could take over some of the agenda handled by the courts, thereby making it possible to speed up and streamline the judiciary. This system, in a way, can already be found, e.g. in the extrajudicial resolution of consumer disputes [See Parts Three and Four (Section 20d et seq.) of Act No 634/1992 on consumer protection]. However, it could also be developed in other areas (labour law and small claims). Notwithstanding the above, any alternative dispute resolution system must be viewed genuinely as an alternative and must not hobble any party’s access to the courts. In this regard, when parties opt for alternative dispute resolution, this choice must primarily be based on their express, free and knowing consent, and also with consideration for the possible weaker position that either of them may be faced with (e.g. consumers). This should never hamstring judicial protection and the right to a fair trial. The modernisation of the judiciary, the development of alternative dispute resolution methods and the adaptation of the existing system to the requirements of the modern age are topics being addressed by most countries around the world. The Czech Republic has a solid foundation on which to build, but the existing systems need to be carefully assessed and the best foreign examples need to serve as inspiration. The Government of the Czech Republic recommends that businesses make use of vehicles for the alternative amicable resolution of disputes, support the formation and development of such vehicles, and offer them to their partners and customers as an option. Current state of play: Tasks: “It is often the case that complex authorisation proceedings do not take place as a whole, but comprise a many sub-proceedings and decisions that follow up on each other and are intertwined. If one decision is annulled by a special remedy (review proceedings or an administrative action), the downstream decisions formally remain in force even though they have been robbed of their basis. One example is building permit proceedings, where the issuance of a building permit hinges on the existence of a valid zoning decision. If a court annuls the zoning decision (or even part of the land-use plan forming the basis for the issuance of the zoning decision), the building permit remains in force. This falls foul of the principle of procedural economy (the annulment must take place in a separate process, even though this is a pure formality in the overwhelming majority of cases). It is also contrary to the requirement of legal certainty (the decision remains in force and enjoys the presumption of correctness, even though it obviously needs to be annulled), and is at odds with the principle of legality (because a decision that is clearly not legal remains in force). Task: “The lack of uniformity of provisions in administrative law is reflected negatively in the issuance of permits and opinions in particular. An investor intending to implement a large-scale plan affecting multiple areas requires numerous individual permits and opinions from various bodies. In this respect, the Czech legal system is highly fragmented. Permits are issued in accordance with laws on building, the protection of nature and the landscape, water, clean air and others. This fragmentation logically also has a bearing on rules for the participation of the relevant public in individual proceedings. Conditions for the participation of the relevant public are subject to special provisions set out in a separate law, and, at the same time, the relevant public abides by general rules in accordance with the Code of Administrative Procedure. In this respect, it can be difficult for the general public to navigate their way round individual processes, no matter how long the proceedings themselves are. Integration should be aimed at faster proceedings, coordination, reduced red tape, and a uniform vision for the engagement of the relevant public. The integration of multiple proceedings into one, or the greater coherence of individual proceedings, will yield numerous benefits – the parties and the relevant public will find the proceedings clearer, the proceedings will be faster, and there will be less of an administrative burden. On the flip side, there will be risks, too. For example, the annulment of a decision by a court could have repercussions for those areas that are otherwise free of defects. These aspects need to be carefully balanced and the risks need to be mitigated, for instance by setting appropriate rules on judicial review. Current state of play: Task: What human rights? [page 30] These rights are fleshed out in a series of other specific instruments, such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. …As for the external impacts of a business’s operations, this might encompass forced land seizure and population displacement, the ban on requisitioning or destroying natural resources that are vital to a local community, and the ban on destroying cultural heritage. “…The second pillar, declaring the corporate responsibility to respect human rights, is aimed at businesses, who are responsible for not breaching human rights actively, not being directly involved in human rights infringements, and acting with due diligence to lay bare any such violations. …” “Current state of play: “Current state of play: … Tasks: “In June 2012, the OECD Council adopted the Recommendation on Common Approaches for Officially Supported Export Credits and Environmental and Social Due Diligence, which expands and reinforces the original provisions on the environmental and social aspects of officially supported exports.” “The introduction of efficient mechanisms to safeguard respect for human rights is not only moral and ethical, but also purely pragmatic: damages for human rights abuse can be sought in judicial proceedings. Modern legal systems allow high levels of damages to be awarded, and any such judgment could generate very bad publicity among customers, partners and the general public. Reasonable control mechanisms and thorough due diligence in keeping with best practice make it possible to work around – or at least curb – such risks even if damage has already been caused.” “How should respect be shown? Recommended measures will differ depending on the size of a business, the market on which it is active, the sector, and a host of other factors. The UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights makes the following recommendations in particular: … Due diligence [page 35-36] “The Government of the Czech Republic recommends that businesses consider introducing an internal due diligence mechanism to spot and eliminate human rights risks, or incorporate human rights risks – as another evaluation criterion – into their existing due diligence mechanisms. The term “due diligence” is broadly known in the business community and denotes in-depth reviews into businesses and or the transactions they are preparing. The UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights defines human rights due diligence as a process to identify and evaluate human rights risks, a series of steps to understand how a company’s activities can affect human rights. It must also include appropriate responses to the findings. A fundamental difference between financial risk and human rights risk is that, while financial audits and financial due diligence explore the ramifications for the business itself, human rights due diligence examines the effects on third parties – the holders of human rights (customers and people living in the vicinity of a business or who are affected by its operations). The search for and eradication of human rights risks should form part of all major commercial operations, not just because any violations of human rights that are exposed could lead to hefty financial losses (compensation, loss of customers, a tarnished reputation), but mainly because – unlike economic loss – human rights loss cannot be fixed so easily. An effective due diligence mechanism should meet the following criteria: Public engagement can take many forms. First of all, this may entail consultations with those affected by businesses’ operations (holders of human rights) because these people are best placed to highlight the problems looming over them. Likewise, employees should be involved as they need to know how to deal with the knowledge they accrue in their work. Finally, public engagement may comprise external expert opinions, opposing views, etc. Most companies have already introduced control mechanisms that can be tweaked so that they also apply to human rights risks. These tend to be compliance mechanisms, used by businesses to keep track of requirements imposed by legislation, regulators, investors and capital markets (the conditions for participating on the stock exchange etc.). Businesses should view the obligation to respect human rights as a legal compliance matter. Even if the duty to comply with human rights in the course of business operations may not derive directly from a particular country’s legal system, businesses should act as though this were the case and attribute the weight of the law to moral and ethical rules in their internal decision-making. This will enable them to incorporate human rights protection into existing mechanisms used to run checks on legal obligations. As a result, businesses will comply with their duty to respect human rights and take due care at minimum extra cost, thereby making big savings. Human rights auditing should extend beyond the actual business to some extent and touch on the activities of external entities, such as those in the supply chains. Businesses could have a hand in violations of human rights through their own negligence, including via their subsidiaries and suppliers. Such conduct, despite not being wilful or intentional, does not relieve a business of liability as it could be viewed – by the courts and the public – as a form of negligence or failure to engage in appropriate supervision. Although it is impossible for a business to carry out due diligence at an external entity to the same extent as internal due diligence, those areas that are most at risk should be identified, someone should be singled out as liable for infringements of rights and, where possible and feasible, specific steps to eliminate these risks should be demanded. If external risks identified, businesses should exercise any influence they have to stave off those risks, for example by sharing good practices and their own experience. Businesses lacking such influence should leverage their links with other entities (customers, suppliers, business associations, trade unions and bodies of public administration). If they have no way of influencing such conduct, they should weigh up the option of terminating cooperation. Businesses who decide to publish the results of due diligence should: “What should be included in a report? Human rights standards, as opposed to financial reporting, which is governed by sophisticated and internationally reputed respected standards, are still inchoate. Even so, the following information should not be left out of a report: Significant events that have occurred in the past year.” “Implements Principles 1, 2 and 8 Even in advanced countries, we come across cases where employees find themselves in a highly vulnerable position and are required to put up with undignified working conditions, and where their employer, for instance, refuses to pay them. The victims of this abuse are frequently foreign nationals as they have limited opportunity to defend themselves. Evidence of such practices can also be found in the Czech Republic. [The footnote states that “In 2008, an organised group was detected that had been recruiting farmworkers abroad. These recruits, sometimes working between 12 and 18 hours a day, were paid only a fraction of the wages they had been promised (Judgment of the Supreme Court 7 Tdo 1261/2013 of 12 March 2014). In 2009, there was a case where at least 22 construction workers were found to have been enslaved for up to 2 years (Judgment of the Supreme Court 4 Tdo 366/2013 of 14 May 2013). Between 2009 and 2011, there were several cases of large-scale labour exploitation involving up to several hundred workers in the forestry sector (Finding of the Constitutional Court II. ÚS 3436/14 of 19 January 2016 and Finding of the Constitutional Court I. ÚS 3196/12 of 12 August 2014).”] Those working in other people’s households are another risk group. Such actions have fallout for employees, for the state (which is robbed of taxes and insurance contributions), and for honest businesses, who cannot compete with such labour. Whereas minor cases of labour-law violations are subject to checks by labour inspection bodies, more serious cases can be prosecuted as crimes. However, for these modern-day unfair practices to be detected and prevented effectively, there needs to be coordinated cooperation between many state bodies and social partners. There may be numerous labour-law violations in supply chains, via temporary employment agencies, or at entities that act as recruiters but do not hold a permit to do so. To make it possible to stamp out these most serious forms of abuse, businesses themselves should pay attention to working conditions at their partners and, if they detect any breaches of the law, they should either demand that corrective action be taken or sever ties. The state’s role here is to create a functioning labour market that will not cater to illegal practices. This does not mean just the repression of the perpetrators, but also the shaping of conditions conducive to the legal employment of foreign nationals. Current state of play: Tasks: “Even today, a trade union organisation may represent its members and associations may, in the course of their activities, represent victims of discrimination or foreign nationals in labour cases. It is worth considering expanding opportunities for representation by those organisations in the future.” “Current state of play: “The third pillar also includes quasi-judicial tribunals, dispute resolution authorities, informal ombudsman-type institutions and mediation institutions (such as the National Contact Point, a Government-devised [See Government Resolution No 779 of 16 October 2013] neutral platform to hear complaints about infringements of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises).” Read more about National Human Rights Institutions/ Ombudspersons “Implements Principle 3d Reporting on the activities of large companies works to the benefit not only of business partners and shareholders, but also other stakeholders. With this in mind, companies are increasingly reporting not only on their financial position, but so on the non-financial aspects of their operations. Information on the impacts that companies’ operations have on the environment, social aspects, human rights and the protection thereof is disclosed in separate non-financial reports or as part of the annual report. Many companies already engage in non-financial reporting entirely voluntarily because this is regarded as a matter of prestige and an opportunity to improve their market position. Nevertheless, the European Union, having decided to coordinate non-financial information, has issued a Non-financial Reporting Directive. [Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 amending Directive 2013/34/EU as regards disclosure of non-financial and diversity information by certain large undertakings and groups.] The non-financial reports drawn up by certain large entities could become an important tool for transparency. The auditor examines whether an entity has drawn up non-financial information and disclosed it in the annual report or consolidated annual report, or whether it has produced a separate report. As non-financial reporting shoulders entities with a heavier administrative burden and extra costs, it is not compulsory for smaller entities, who will be able to decide for themselves whether or not to publish a non-financial report. Current state of play: Tasks: “The Guiding Principles set great store by openness and transparency, which in practice means communication with the public, with employees and with other stakeholders. Businesses should make public the fact that they are mindful of their responsibility, that they are not just assuming this responsibility for show, and that they accept it as part of their business ethics. This ongoing communication could include not only the public, but also investors, business partners and potential employees, for whom the business, by following this path, has become a more attractive partner or place to work. Communication may be one way (e.g. various forms of non-financial reporting) or bidirectional (e.g. public hearings on matters of general interest). The Government of the Czech Republic recommends that businesses where the activities, products, services or business relationships are associated with risks of serious human rights violations formally provide information on how they are dealing with those risks, even in situations where the law does not require them to do so. The government recommends all companies reporting on human rights to take account of the Reporting Framework for the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Reporting should provide information of relevance without overwhelming the reader. The Government also recommends that large-scale projects with a potential major impact be publicly presented and consulted.” “In the European Union, large companies are required to publish certain non-financial information, including information on human rights matters. Small businesses, however, may report voluntarily, especially if they are active in sectors or in countries where there is a heightened risk of encroachment on human rights. Transparency is highly self-regulatory and makes it easier to appoint a responsible person in complex corporate structures. It enables a business to evaluate and map out risks, while making it clear to the public that the company does not underestimate them. What should be included in a report? Human rights standards, as opposed to financial reporting, which is governed by sophisticated and internationally reputed respected standards, are still inchoate. Even so, the following information should not be left out of a report: A business may publish periodic non-financial reports in numerous forms, either as part of the annual report or entirely separately. In any case, they should be posted online on the business’s website. The non-financial report should not be drawn up just for show, but should shed light on significant information relevant to an impact assessment of the business’s operations. On the other hand, it should remain brief and concentrate on matters of relevance. Parent companies should include information on the activities of their subsidiaries. Human rights commitments cannot always be assessed with precision. Businesses should retain the option of evaluating commitments according to their own internal schemes and criteria. Nevertheless, where possible standardised indicators, including historical developments, should be used. The application of internationally acknowledged standards for non-financial reporting is recommended. These include: “It is incumbent on states to protect human rights. This duty includes the provision of efficient and effective means of remedy for those whose rights have been infringed. Article 36 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms provides that: “Anyone may claim, in the prescribed manner, their rights in an independent and impartial court and, where so provided, before another authority .“The third pillar of the National Action Plan is designed to ensure that, in the field of business and human rights, this right is genuinely available to everyone without unnecessary obstruction, and that it results in efficient remedies. That is not to say that the third pillar is simply a framework for the improved functioning of the courts. Extrajudicial remedies are also attainable. The third pillar also includes quasi-judicial tribunals, dispute resolution authorities, informal ombudsman-type institutions and mediation institutions (such as the National Contact Point, a Government-devised neutral platform to hear complaints about infringements of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises). Ultimately, the ideal dispute is one that never arises in the first place. The third pillar also includes the means to prevent disputes at the businesses themselves. … Extrajudicial state resources: Other state bodies may also provide means of redress. These include both subsequent and preventive means. Provisional protection permits various activities that may constitute a risk, in particular industrial operations with a major impact on the surrounding area. The public is entitled to participate in these proceedings. Arrangements must be in place so that public engagement is not complicated and so that the public is informed in plain language and in a readily accessible. On the other hand, this engagement must not be exploited for obstruction or to make proceedings longer and more expensive than they need to be. In proceedings on offences, authorities tend to provide subsequent protection – if there is a breach of the law, an authority may, ex officio or on a proposal, order a remedy and, where appropriate, impose penalties. It is imperative for authorities to be steadfast in identifying and prosecuting breaches of the law and for the penalties to be effective and enforceable. Ultimately, authorities may deal with several types of dispute. As a rule, such proceedings are faster and less formal than judicial proceedings. Dispute resolution by an authority should really be selected only in those areas where this makes sense in view of the nature of the dispute. The decision must subsequently be reviewable by a court. Extrajudicial non-state resources: The Czech Republic acknowledges the benefits and advantages of alternative dispute resolution. Alternative dispute resolution is often faster, cheaper, less formal and more accessible to the parties. As the parties to a dispute are apt to accept an amicable solution better than an authoritative ruling, the Czech Republic welcomes and supports the development of alternative dispute resolution platforms among non-state entities, especially consumer organisations, trade unions and industrial associations. Nevertheless, no means of alternative dispute resolution must restrict access to an ordinary court. This means that arrangements must always be in place to ensure that both parties have decided on alternative resolution knowingly and voluntarily, except in situations where participation in an extrajudicial solution is required directly by the law. Under no circumstances, however, is the protection of the weaker party (e.g. the consumer) allowed to be violated. Nonetheless, it should be remembered, first and foremost, that the ideal situation is one where no dispute occurs at all. When an action is brought before a court, this is not the start of the dispute, but the final step after previous attempts to reach a settlement have failed. The businesses themselves should offer a formalised mechanism for the amicable settlement of disputes. The dispute resolution instruments offered by the state should be geared towards prevention and actively assist in the search for an amicable solution.” “Current state of play: “The third pillar also includes quasi-judicial tribunals, dispute resolution authorities, informal ombudsman-type institutions and mediation institutions (such as the National Contact Point, a Government-devised neutral platform to hear complaints about infringements of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises).” The Czech NAP does not make an explicit reference to Persons with Disabilities. The Czech NAP makes no explicit reference to policy coherence. However policy coherence is implied at a number of stages, for example: “The Czech Republic has long set great store by the topic of human rights both generally and in connection with the activities of businesses. Human rights in a business context is covered, for example, by the following strategy documents: The objectives of this Action Plan are consistent with the Strategic Framework of the Czech Republic 2030, in particular its tenets of “Let’s preserve and support diversity” and “Let’s respect fundamental human rights”. It supplements the Strategic Framework’s activities in the key areas of “People and society” and “Economic model”.” “Tasks: “Tasks: Implements Principle 5 States often delegate the performance of some of their tasks to private entities, though this does not relieve them of their human rights commitments. In fact, they must find ways of meeting their human rights duties even in these circumstances. There are many situations where the roles of the state are transferred to a private entity. In order to protect human rights, increased attention needs to be paid, for example, to the social services sector. Clients in receipt of residence-based social services are particularly vulnerable and in many respects are dependent on the support and care provided within the scope of social services. The state should make sure that checks on respect for human rights are run especially for these types of social services. The same conclusion has been reached, for instance, by the Ombudsman in her reports on visits to retirement homes and other facilities. Current state of play: Tasks: Coordinator: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs Deadline: The material and technical conditions of residence-based social services by 31 December 2018; the staffing conditions of social services by 31 December 2020 Coordinator: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs Deadline: Running Coordinator: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs Deadline: 31 December 2020 Coordinator: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs Deadline: Running “One solution lies in certification schemes proving the origin of raw materials. The certification authority guarantees that workers’ rights have not been infringed during mining or production. These certificates are issued by state and international organisations on the one hand, and private issuers on the other. Current legislation allows the public sector to take into account or to demand this certification in the course of procurement, in which case it is only necessary to comply with the conditions of transparency, equal treatment and non-discrimination. … Tasks: … “Implements Principle 6 In OECD states alone, public procurement accounts for 12% of GDP. Worldwide, public contracts are estimated to be worth more than EUR 1,000 billion. [footnote – http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/accessing-markets/public-procurement/] On some markets, contracting authorities are so prominent that they can influence standards and practices throughout a sector by flexing their market strength. This is why numerous states have legislated the requirement of certain human rights standards among their suppliers. Other countries enable these standards to be incorporated into contracts. In addition, certain international standards, such as ISO 26000, contain criteria recommended for human rights risk assessments. EU law [Recital 75 of Directive 2014/24/EU and Recital 85 of Directive 2014/25/EU] initially expressly refers to “labelling”, making it possible to incorporate labels and certificates attesting to the environmental, social and human rights properties of products or suppliers into procurement evaluations. Aspects of human rights protection can be encouraged in public procurement after weighing up the nature of a public contract and the deliverable; specific human rights requirements must reflect these aspects accordingly. In practice, human rights protection requirements can be factored into the conditions for participation in award procedure or into rules for the evaluation of bids and must be verifiable, for example, in the form of a label. [Section 94 of Act No 134/2016 on public procurement] It is always advisable to reflect these requirements in the contract between the contracting authority and the supplier. The protection of and respect for human rights should also be taken into account in public procurement. In their public procurement, contracting authorities should know how to reflect and evaluate environmental and social requirements and the protection of human rights correctly in relation both to the supplier and, as far as practicable, the supplier’s subcontractors. In this respect, guidance should be drawn up for award procedure in accordance with human rights. This guidance should encompass specific practical examples, including model contractual provisions and/or a model tender dossier. The guidance should be accompanied by an overview of international platforms and initiatives sharing experience and information on socially responsible public contracts. This guidance should be preceded by consultations and should be produced in collaboration with business associations. Current state of play: Tasks: The Czech NAP makes no explicit reference to the security sector. “The Czech Republic has long set great store by the topic of human rights both generally and in connection with the activities of businesses. Human rights in a business context is covered, for example, by the following strategy documents: … “How should respect be shown? Recommended measures will differ depending on the size of a business, the market on which it is active, the sector, and a host of other factors.” “An effective due diligence mechanism should meet the following criteria: … Adapt the mechanism to the size of the business, the nature of its operations and specific local factors.” Implements Principle 4 [page 26] The state owns important business assets. Although state enterprises and companies in which the state has a shareholding are autonomous legal entities, in reality their operations can be influenced significantly by the state via ministries exercising owner or founder rights. The public is sensitive to this relationship and associates those enterprises’ operations with the state. This link is perceived even more strongly if those enterprises operate abroad. The activities of such enterprises can hold significant sway over the home state’s reputation. If the state is to guarantee human rights, in the first place it must ensure that there is a high standard of protection at the enterprises it has established and at companies in which it has a shareholding. Both private and state entities have a legal obligation to respect human rights. State enterprises and companies in which the state has a shareholding, however, should comply with fundamental human rights standards even when they find themselves in a situation where the law does not expressly require them to. These sorts of situations might arise in particular if they operate in countries where the law provides for a lower standard of protection. These enterprises should ensure a high level of prevention in order to avoid becoming involved in violations of human rights indirectly (e.g. in supply chains). Current state of play: Tasks: Coordinators: All ministries concerned Deadline: Running Coordinators: All ministries concerned Deadline: Running Coordinators: All ministries concerned Deadline: Running Coordinator: Ministry of Finance Co-coordinator: Ministry of the Interior Deadline: Running Read more about State Owned Enterprises/ Public Private Partnerships “… this Action Plan’s commitments … make it easier for businesses to keep clear of such situations in their supply chains and among their business partners.” “There may be numerous labour-law violations in supply chains, via temporary employment agencies, or at entities that act as recruiters but do not hold a permit to do so.” “Current state of play: Tasks: “In their public procurement, contracting authorities should know how to reflect and evaluate environmental and social requirements and the protection of human rights correctly in relation both to the supplier and, as far as practicable, the supplier’s subcontractors.” “… [State enterprises and companies in which the state has a shareholding] should ensure a high level of prevention in order to avoid becoming involved in violations of human rights indirectly (e.g. in supply chains). … Tasks: “For businesses, there are three dimensions to respect for human rights: … Where does respect come into play? Unlike a state, which is duty-bound to protect human rights everywhere in its jurisdiction, a business’s liability depends on where it exercises genuine influence and what sort of control it wields over a situation: What should a commitment encompass? A commitment is not merely an internal document. It is a statement by a business that it is aware of and serious about its human rights responsibility. Besides being posted on the corporate website, the commitment should also be incorporated into communications with suppliers, investors, business partners and other groupings. These communications should encompass the following information: “Human rights auditing should extend beyond the actual business to some extent and touch on the activities of external entities, such as those in the supply chains. Businesses could have a hand in violations of human rights through their own negligence, including via their subsidiaries and suppliers. Such conduct, despite not being wilful or intentional, does not relieve a business of liability as it could be viewed – by the courts and the public – as a form of negligence or failure to engage in appropriate supervision. Although it is impossible for a business to carry out due diligence at an external entity to the same extent as internal due diligence, those areas that are most at risk should be identified, someone should be singled out as liable for infringements of rights and, where possible and feasible, specific steps to eliminate these risks should be demanded. If external risks identified, businesses should exercise any influence they have to stave off those risks, for example by sharing good practices and their own experience. Businesses lacking such influence should leverage their links with other entities (customers, suppliers, business associations, trade unions and bodies of public administration). If they have no way of influencing such conduct, they should weigh up the option of terminating cooperation.” “The diversity of legal systems can be a good thing as it is an opportunity to explore new avenues and it motivates governments to improve regulation. Yet if a country is too lax in the way it devises its rules, a competitive advantage becomes a threat. A fragmented and inconsistent legal regime can spawn unwelcome developments – tax avoidance (“aggressive tax planning”) for one thing, and human rights abuses for another.” “Those working in other people’s households are another risk group. Such actions have fallout for employees, for the state (which is robbed of taxes and insurance contributions), and for honest businesses, who cannot compete with such labour.” The Czech NAP does not make an explicit reference to the Sustainable Development Goals. The Czech NAP does not make an explicit reference to the tourism sector. “Implements Principles 5, 6 and 7 Trade in military equipment is one of the riskier sectors from the perspective of human rights. While the manufacture of military equipment and arms is a traditional segment of Czech industry, these are goods that are susceptible to abuse, so they must be subject to regulation. A legislative act [Act No 38/1994 on external trade in military equipment and amending Act No 455/1991 on licensed trading (the Trading Act), as amended, and Act No 140/1961, the Criminal Code, as amended] establishes procedures for the authorisation of trade, conditions for the granting and use of licences, and general inspections of trade in military equipment, including penalties. In the Czech Republic, there are two stages to checks on external trade in military equipment. The first stage is authorisation to engage in external trade in military equipment. The authorisation specifies specific items of equipment in which the holder can trade, and lists the countries where trade is permitted. Authorisation is issued by the Ministry of Industry and Trade on the strength of opinions submitted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (encompassing foreign-policy interests, commitments under international treaties and membership of international organisations, including the protection of human rights), the Ministry of the Interior (encompassing public policy, security and protection of the population), and the Ministry of Defence (covering the provision of national defence). The second stage is the licence for external trade in military equipment, which is required to carry out specific deals. The decision on whether to issue or refuse a licence rests with the Ministry of Industry and Trade, again in response to binding opinions from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (other than applications for transfer licenses for EU Member States), the Ministry of the Interior and, where the military equipment is significant, the Ministry of Defence (these opinions cover the same areas as those addressed for authorisation to engage in foreign trade in military equipment). Checks on the use of exported arms rely, in part, on information in the end-user certificate (EUC). If doubts have arisen or if there are reasons for heightened prudence, the state may reserve the right to conduct a subsequent spot check via its embassy, and/or to make the delivery of military equipment conditional on the presence of state representatives at the destination. Although this process is consistent with standards within the European Union, it is occasionally castigated on grounds of transparency, the amount of information released by the state, and the timeliness of access to such information. Every year, the Ministry of Industry and Trade publishes an Annual Report on Checks on the Export of Military Equipment, Small Arms for Civilian Use and Dual-use Items and Technology. In view of the sensitivity of this whole issue, these reports are consulted with the National Security Council and are subsequently approved by the Government ahead of publication. The annual reports are relatively lengthy, respect the methodology for drawing up common annual reports of the European Union, and mainly contain summaries and statistics. So much data is processed, and it is so taxing, that these annual reports tend not to be approved by the Government until July of the following year. The EU’s summary annual reports [In accordance with Article 8(2) of Council Common Position 2008/944/CFSP defining common rules governing control of exports of military technology and equipment] are published with a time lag of more than a year, which has also been criticised. The Czech Republic also reports regularly to the UN on international transfers of conventional arms, small arms and light weapons. In accordance with Article 13 of the Arms Trade Treaty, the Czech Republic also submits a report to the Treaty Secretariat for the preceding calendar year concerning authorised or actual imports and exports of conventional arms. Information on specific transactions may be reported to the extent permitted by the protection of classified information and trade secrecy. However, non-profit organisations such as Amnesty International continue to criticise the Czech Republic for exporting weapons to “high-risk countries”. Current state of play: Tasks: “Implements Principles 1, 2 and 8 Even in advanced countries, we come across cases where employees find themselves in a highly vulnerable position and are required to put up with undignified working conditions, and where their employer, for instance, refuses to pay them. The victims of this abuse are frequently foreign nationals as they have limited opportunity to defend themselves. Evidence of such practices can also be found in the Czech Republic. [The footnote states that “In 2008, an organised group was detected that had been recruiting farmworkers abroad. These recruits, sometimes working between 12 and 18 hours a day, were paid only a fraction of the wages they had been promised (Judgment of the Supreme Court 7 Tdo 1261/2013 of 12 March 2014). In 2009, there was a case where at least 22 construction workers were found to have been enslaved for up to 2 years (Judgment of the Supreme Court 4 Tdo 366/2013 of 14 May 2013). Between 2009 and 2011, there were several cases of large-scale labour exploitation involving up to several hundred workers in the forestry sector (Finding of the Constitutional Court II. ÚS 3436/14 of 19 January 2016 and Finding of the Constitutional Court I. ÚS 3196/12 of 12 August 2014).”] Those working in other people’s households are another risk group. Such actions have fallout for employees, for the state (which is robbed of taxes and insurance contributions), and for honest businesses, who cannot compete with such labour. Whereas minor cases of labour-law violations are subject to checks by labour inspection bodies, more serious cases can be prosecuted as crimes. However, for these modern-day unfair practices to be detected and prevented effectively, there needs to be coordinated cooperation between many state bodies and social partners. There may be numerous labour-law violations in supply chains, via temporary employment agencies, or at entities that act as recruiters but do not hold a permit to do so. To make it possible to stamp out these most serious forms of abuse, businesses themselves should pay attention to working conditions at their partners and, if they detect any breaches of the law, they should either demand that corrective action be taken or sever ties. The state’s role here is to create a functioning labour market that will not cater to illegal practices. This does not mean just the repression of the perpetrators, but also the shaping of conditions conducive to the legal employment of foreign nationals. Current state of play: Tasks: “Increasing attention is being paid to safety conditions at work (e.g. the use of slave and child labour in mining). Risks of this type are particularly serious in areas plagued by armed conflict, which can be attributed to the absence of state authority here. Raw materials imported from geopolitically unstable regions and flashpoints may be used as a source of funding to reconstruct the country and improve the conditions in which its inhabitants live. On the other hand, various groups may exploit slave or child labour in mining operations or in factories, and the proceeds from sales could then be used to pay for weapons and soldiers. The raw materials they have mined and the products they have made are then sold on the global market, often without the buyers knowing their provenance. This is a problem that needs to be tackled internationally. One solution lies in certification schemes proving the origin of raw materials. The certification authority guarantees that workers’ rights have not been infringed during mining or production. These certificates are issued by state and international organisations on the one hand, and private issuers on the other. Current legislation allows the public sector to take into account or to demand this certification in the course of procurement, in which case it is only necessary to comply with the conditions of transparency, equal treatment and non-discrimination.” “Current state of play: “For businesses, there are three dimensions to respect for human rights: What human rights? States bear liability for the full range of human rights. Businesses are required to respect those rights that could be affected by their operations, and must do so to the extent of a definite minimum, generally acknowledged fundamental standard deriving from: These rights are fleshed out in a series of other specific instruments, such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. In practice, this concerns matters such as the ban on forced labour, child labour, and life- or health-threatening working conditions, the ban on workplace discrimination, the hindrance of association and collective bargaining, etc.” “The Government of the Czech Republic recommends that businesses adopt internal commitments in accordance with the recommendations below. … What should a commitment encompass? … Protection of whistleblowers: This includes, on the one hand, instructions for employees on how to proceed if they detect unlawful conduct and, on the other, protection from retaliation.” “Even today, a trade union organisation may represent its members and associations may, in the course of their activities, represent victims of discrimination or foreign nationals in labour cases. It is worth considering expanding opportunities for representation by those organisations in the future. Current state of play: Tasks:Children’s rights
National Action Plan – production and objectives [page 6-7]
Supply chains and conflict minerals [page 20]
Pillar II, Scope and content of the obligation to respect human rights [page 30-31]
Conflict-affected areas
Trade in military equipment [page 18-20]
Coordinators: Ministry of Industry and Trade, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Deadline: Running
Coordinators: Ministry of Industry and Trade, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Deadline: Running”Supply chains and conflict minerals [page 20-21]
Coordinator: Ministry of Trade and Industry
Deadline: 9 December 2017”Pillar II, Scope and content of the obligation to respect human rights [page 31]
Construction sector
Administrative courts and their opportunities to review and annul follow-up decisions [page 51]
Integration of authorisation proceedings [page 53]
Corporate law & corporate governance
Criminal liability of legal persons in the field of human rights [page 11-12]
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Deadline: 31 December 2018”Disqualification of a member of a body [page 13-14]
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Deadline: 31 December 2020”State aid, guarantees and subsidies [page 26]
Transparency [page 37-38]
Corruption
Existing plans, initiatives and strategies [page 8]
Criminal liability of legal persons in the field of human rights [page 12]
External policy [page 28]
Coordinator: Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Deadline: Running, with an assessment in 2020″Voluntary non-financial reporting [page 38]
Data protection & privacy
Pillar II baselines: Human rights as a moral and ethical obligation
Scope and content of the obligation to respect human rights [page 30]
Development finance institutions
Digital technology & electronics sector
Accessibility of the courts [page 48-49]
Energy sector
The Czech NAP does not make a direct reference to the Energy sector. Environment & climate change
National Action Plan – production and objectives [page 6]
Pillar I: state duty to protect human rights
State aid, guarantees and subsidies
Pillar II baselines: Human rights as a moral and ethical obligation
Scope and content of the obligation to respect human rights [page 30]
Equality & non-discrimination
National Action Plan – production and objectives
Existing plans, initiatives and strategies [page 8]
Export credit
State aid, guarantees and subsidies [page 25]
Coordinator: All ministries concerned
Deadline: Running”Extractives sector
Introduction [page 4]
Most serious infringements of working conditions [page 16]
Supply chains and conflict minerals [page 20-21]
Coordinator: Ministry of Trade and Industry
Deadline: 9 December 2017
Coordinators: All ministries
Deadline: Running”Pillar II, Scope and content of the obligation to respect human rights [page 30]
Extraterritorial jurisdiction
Plan format and choice of themes [page 8]
Criminal liability of legal persons in the field of human rights [page 11]
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Deadline: 31 December 2018”Finance & banking sector
Fisheries and aquaculture sectors
Forced labour & modern slavery
National Action Plan – production and objectives [page 6-7]
Most serious infringements of working conditions [page 16-18]
Coordinators: Ministry of the Interior, Ministry of Justice
Deadline: Running”Supply chains and conflict minerals [page 20]
Pillar II, Scope and content of the obligation to respect human rights [page 30-31]
Freedom of association
Pillar II, Scope and content of the obligation to respect human rights [page 30-31]
Representation in court, legal assistance [page 44-45]
Conclusion [page 54-55]
Coordinator: Ministry for Human Rights and all ministries concerned
Deadline: Running”Garment, Textile and Footwear Sector
Gender & women’s rights
Existing plans, initiatives and strategies [page 8-9]
Guidance to business
Publication and dissemination of existing documents, education and awareness-raising [page 9-11]
Coordinator: Ministry of Trade and Industry
Co-coordinator: Ministry for Human Rights
Deadline: 30 June 2018
Coordinators: Ministry for Human Rights, Ministry of Industry and Trade
Deadline: Running, following the completion of the previous task
Coordinator: Ministry for Human Rights
Deadline: 31 December 2017
Coordinators: All ministries
Deadline: Running
Coordinator: Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Deadline: 31 December 2020”Supply chains and conflict minerals [page 21]
Non-financial reporting [page 21-22]
Coordinator: Ministry for Human Rights, Ministry of Industry and Trade, Ministry of Finance
Deadline: 31 December 2017
Coordinator: Ministry of Finance
Deadline: Running”Public procurement [page 23-24]
Coordinator: Ministry of Regional Development
Co-coordinators: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, Ministry of Human Rights
Deadline: 31 December 2017”State enterprises and companies in which the state has a shareholding [page 26]
External policy [page 28]
Coordinator: Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Deadline: Running, with an assessment in 2020”Cooperation [page 39]
Documents and sources of information [page 39]
Health and social care
Pillar II
Scope and content of the obligation to respect human rights [page 30]
Human rights defenders & whistle-blowers
Pillar II, Commitment [page 32-33]
Human rights impact assessments
Publication and dissemination of existing documents, education and awareness-raising [page 11]
Coordinator: Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Deadline: 31 December 2020” Trade in military equipment [page 19-20]
Coordinators: Ministry of Industry and Trade, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Deadline: Running” Public procurement [page 23]
State aid, guarantees and subsidies [page 25]
Transparency [page 37-38]
Voluntary non-financial reporting [page 38]
Indigenous peoples
Pillar II baselines: Human rights as a moral and ethical obligation
Scope and content of the obligation to respect human rights
Due diligence [page 34]
Transparency
Investment treaties & investor-state dispute settlements
External policy [page 27-28]
Coordinator: Ministry of Trade and Industry
Deadline: Running
Coordinators: Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Industry and Trade
Deadline: Running”Judicial remedy
Criminal liability of legal persons in the field of human rights [page 11-12]
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Deadline: 31 December 2018”Disqualification of a member of a body [page 13-14]
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Deadline: 31 December 2020” Pillar III [page 41-42]
Representation in court, legal assistance [page 44-45]
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Deadline: 31 December 2020
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Co-coordinators: Ministry for Human Rights
Deadline: 31 December 2020”Access to evidence [page 45-46]
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Co-coordinator: Office for the Protection of Competition
Deadline: 31 December 2022
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Deadline: 31 December 2022”Collective actions [page 46-47]
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Deadline: 31 December 2020
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Deadline: 31 December 2022”Accessibility of the courts [page 48-49]
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Deadline: Running, with an assessment as at 31 December 2020
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Deadline: Running
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Co-coordinator: Ministry for Human Rights
Deadline: 31 December 2020” Alternative and online dispute resolution [page 49-51]
Coordinator: Ministry of Trade and Industry
Deadline: Running
Coordinator: Ministry for Human Rights
Co-coordinators: Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Industry and Trade
Deadline: 31 December 2020” Administrative courts and their opportunities to review and annul follow-up decisions [page 51-52]
Coordinator: Ministry for Human Rights
Co-coordinators: Ministry of Regional Development, Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of the Environment
Deadline: 31 December 2019
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Deadline: 31 December 2021”Integration of authorisation proceedings [page 53]
Coordinators: Ministry of Regional Development, Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Industry and Trade, Ministry of Transport, Ministry of Agriculture
Deadline: 31 December 2020
Coordinators: Ministry of Regional Development, Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Industry and Trade, Ministry of Transport, Ministry of Agriculture
Deadline: Running”Land
Pillar II baselines: Human rights as a moral and ethical obligation
Scope and content of the obligation to respect human rights
Mandatory human rights due diligence
UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights [page 5]
Disqualification of a member of a body [page 13]
Supply chains and conflict minerals [page 21]
Coordinator: Ministry of Trade and Industry
Deadline: 9 December 2017”State aid, guarantees and subsidies [page 25]
Pillar II baselines: Human rights as a moral and ethical obligation [page 29]
Pillar II, Scope and content of the obligation to respect human rights [page 32]
Voluntary non-financial reporting [page 38]
Migrant workers
Most serious infringements of working conditions [page 16-18]
Coordinator: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs
Deadline: Running
Coordinator: Ministry of the Interior
Co-coordinator: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs
Deadline: 31 December 2022
Coordinator: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs
Deadline: Running, with a comprehensive assessment on 31 December 2022
Coordinator: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs
Deadline: Running
Coordinators: Ministry of the Interior, Ministry of Justice
Deadline: Running”Representation in court, legal assistance [page 44]
National Human Rights Institutions/ Ombudspersons
Publication and dissemination of existing documents, education and awareness-raising [page 10]
Pillar III [page 41]
Non-financial reporting
Non-financial reporting [page 21-22]
Coordinator: Ministry for Human Rights, Ministry of Industry and Trade, Ministry of Finance
Deadline: 31 December 2017
Coordinator: Ministry of Finance
Deadline: Running”Transparency [page 37-38]
Voluntary non-financial reporting [page 38-39]
Non-judicial grievance mechanisms
Pillar III [page 41-43]
OECD National Contact Points
Publication and dissemination of existing documents, education and awareness-raising [page 10]
Pillar III [page 41]
Persons with disabilities
Policy coherence
Existing plans, initiatives and strategies [page 8-9]
Integration of authorisation proceedings [page 53]
Coordinators: Ministry of Regional Development, Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Industry and Trade, Ministry of Transport, Ministry of Agriculture
Deadline: Running”Conclusion [page 54]
Coordinator: Ministry for Human Rights
Deadline: Running
Coordinator: Ministry for Human Rights
Deadline: 31 December 2020
Coordinator: Ministry for Human Rights
Deadline: 31 December 2022″Privatisation
Pillar I – state duty to protect human rights
Protection of social service clients [pages 15-16]
Public procurement
Supply chains and conflict minerals [page 20-21]
Coordinators: All ministries
Deadline: Running”Public procurement [page 22-24]
Coordinator: Ministry of Regional Development
Co-coordinators: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, Ministry of Human Rights
Deadline: 31 December 2017
Coordinator: Ministry of Regional Development
Deadline: 31 December 2018”Security sector
Small & medium-sized enterprises
Existing plans, initiatives and strategies [page 8]
Scope and content of the obligation to respect human rights [page 32]
Due diligence [page 35]
State Owned Enterprises/ Public Private Partnerships
Pillar I: state duty to protect human rights
State enterprises and companies in which the state has a shareholding
Supply chains
National Action Plan – production and objectives [page 6-7]
Most serious infringements of working conditions [page 16]
Supply chains and conflict minerals [page 20-21]
Coordinator: Ministry of Trade and Industry
Deadline: 9 December 2017
Coordinators: All ministries
Deadline: Running”Public procurement [page 23]
State enterprises and companies in which the state has a shareholding [page 26-27]
Coordinators: All ministries concerned
Deadline: Running”Pillar II, Scope and content of the obligation to respect human rights [page 30-34]
Due diligence [page 36]
Taxation
Introduction [page 4]
Most serious infringements of working conditions [page 16}
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
Tourism sector
Trade
Trade in military equipment [page 18-20]
Coordinator: Ministry of Trade and Industry
Deadline: 30 June 2019
Coordinators: Ministry of Industry and Trade, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Deadline: Running
Coordinators: Ministry of Industry and Trade, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Deadline: Running”Workers’ rights
Most serious infringements of working conditions [page 16-18]
Coordinator: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs
Deadline: Running
Coordinator: Ministry of the Interior
Co-coordinator: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs
Deadline: 31 December 2022
Coordinator: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs
Deadline: Running, with a comprehensive assessment on 31 December 2022
Coordinator: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs
Deadline: Running
Coordinators: Ministry of the Interior, Ministry of Justice
Deadline: Running”Supply chains and conflict minerals [page 20-21]
External policy [page 28]
Pillar II, Scope and content of the obligation to respect human rights [page 30]
Pillar II, Commitment [page 32-33]
Representation in court, legal assistance [page 44]
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Deadline: 31 December 2020
Coordinator: Ministry of Justice
Co-coordinators: Ministry for Human Rights
Deadline: 31 December 2020”
