Netherlands

Active Latest business and human rights news in the NetherlandsThis page was last updated 6. February 2024

The Netherlands adopted an inaugural NAP on Business and Human Rights in 2013. A National Baseline Assessment (NBA) was conducted by the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights in 2020, and a second Dutch NAP on Business and Human Rights was adopted in November 2022.

(NB: The Netherlands developed an international corporate social responsibility (ICSR) policy in 2020 which focuses on the role of companies under the UN guiding principles (pillar 2). The ICSR policy is one of the building blocks of the new NAP.)

Available NAPs

Netherlands: 1st NAP (2013-open)

Period: 2013-open Available in: English Nederlands

NAP Development Process

Status

The Netherland’s NAP, entitled Nationaal Actieplan bedrijfsleven en mensenrechten: Rapport over het Nederlandse beleid rondom de bevordering van eerbiediging van mensenrechten door het bedrijfsleven, was adopted on 10th December 2013.

Process

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) was responsible for coordinating the process leading to the action plan. In mid-2012, an inter-ministerial working group was formed, representing:

the Ministry of Economic Affairs (as the chair of the group);
The Ministry of Finance;
The Ministry of Security & Justice; and
The Ministry of Social Affairs & Employment.

Departments from the MFA involved were:

The Legal Department;
The Department for Sustainable Economic Growth;
The Department for Human Rights; and
The Department for Internal Market.

Members of the working group were assigned to draft the elements of the NAP that link most directly to their areas of expertise. The working group engaged in internal mapping of government laws, regulations, policies and activities related to business and human rights which, together with the report of the stakeholder consultations, provided the basis for the drafting phase.

The group compared the UN Guiding Principles with current policy and, on the basis of interviews and consultations conducted by the external consultant hired by the MFA with selected representatives of the business community, civil society organisations, implementing organisations and other experts, identified the most important viewpoints and ideas on the action plan (notes from interviews were not published). The process was based on the report from interviews with stakeholders, as well as internal mapping that was conducted by the working group. Where members of the group failed to hand in their drafts in time, or where the drafts were of inadequate quality, the Department for Multilateral Organizations and Human Rights, who was leading the process, made its own suggestions and sought feedback from the respective agencies. The different contributions were then merged into one document which went through several rounds of internal consultations. An external consultant occasionally gave advice to the working group throughout the drafting process, including providing input based on conclusions and recommendations stemming from interviews with stakeholders.

This group stayed active throughout the NAP’s drafting process, responding to 95 questions from the Dutch parliament about the plan prior to parliamentary debate on the NAP.

The group compared the UN Guiding Principles with current policy and, on the basis of interviews and consultations with representatives of the business community, civil society organizations and other experts, identified the most important viewpoints and ideas on the action plan.

After a parallel process of stakeholder consultations and internal mapping of government activities related to business and human rights between October and December 2012, the drafting process started in early 2013.

The National Action Plan on Human Rights was sent to the House of Representatives on 10 December 2013.

The NAP extensively references the OECD Guidelines for MNEs.

Stakeholder Participation

The stakeholder consultations were carried out mostly by an external consultant, David Vermijs, hired by the MFA to conduct extensive stakeholder consultations and write a report based on these insights. The consultant was supported and overseen by the inter-ministerial working group that provided input on an interview protocol and selection of interviewees. The consultant conducted a total of 27 interviews with more than 50 people representing the main stakeholder groups (business, civil society and implementing organizations) during the pre-drafting phase, as well as a round of single stakeholder consultations during the drafting process. The consideration behind this method of consultation was to ensure that stakeholders could comment on their ideas and viewpoints about the implementation of the UNGP as independently as possible on. The aim was to acquire a balanced overview, reflecting the opinions of all relevant organizations. A summary of the consultant’s analysis covering both the results of the interviews and possible options for the action plan was then discussed in three separate meetings hosted by the inter-ministerial working group with the main stakeholder groups: 1) civil society organizations and other experts, 2) the members of the business community and 3) with the implementing organisations. Stakeholders were not consulted in the actual drafting. The consultant continued to provide occasional input during the drafting phase.

According to the Survey on the implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (2015) there was no institutional platform for such (stakeholder) engagement, but there was extensive ad hoc contact between government and stakeholders.

Participation by disempowered or at-risk stakeholders was neither prioritized, nor facilitated during the NAP process.

The Netherlands did not establish a multi-stakeholder steering group or advisory committee – only a governmental, inter-ministerial working group.

Transparency

No public consultations took place and the overall timeline and terms of reference for the entire NAP process were never made publicly available. This is apart from the fixed timeline of the consultant conducting the interviews, which was only shared with participants, and the publication date of the NAP made by the MFA to the Parliament, which was postponed several times, allegedly due to differences in opinion among various ministries concerning the content of the NAP.

There is no publicly available information about the budget.

National Baseline Assessment (NBA)

• Published in August 2020 and available here. The government’s official response to the NBA is available here.
• Commissioned and funded by the State (Ministry of Foreign Affairs) to provide recommendations for a 2nd BHR NAP, which was published in November 2022 and is available here.
• Conducted by the National Human Rights Institution (College voor de Rechten van de Mens), with support from the Utrecht Centre for Accountability and Liability Law (UCALL) and the DIHR.
• Follows its own methodology based on desktop research, stakeholder interviews, expert interviews, and drew from empirical and desktop research done by other agencies in the context of the larger revision of the government’s CSR policy. Contains recommendations.

Follow-up, monitoring, reporting and review

The NAP does not specify follow-up procedures for implementation of the commitments made within the NAP, and it does not provide any timeline for re-writing or updating the NAP. Most of the Actions Points were meant to occur in 2014.

Three of fourteen action points identify the specific entity responsible for implementation of, and a follow-up to, the action point. These action points can be found under Policy coherence (bullet point three), clarifying due diligence (bullet point four, although bullet point five says an ‘independent committee’ will be developed, it does not say who will be part of the committee), and Scope for remedy (bullet point four). The other action points are more vague and instead either say that ‘the government’ will complete the task or leave out assignment of responsibility entirely.

Even the action points that are clearly assigned to a particular entity within the government do not specify who will be in charge of follow-up or how such follow-up will be conducted.

The NAP foresees however stimulating Sector agreements. The Dutch NAP provides for the development of innovative covenants between business and its stakeholders, with 5 such agreements already adopted including, 3 negotiated in line with SER guidance: the Sustainable Garment and Textile Sector Agreement (signed on 4 July 2016), the Banking Sector Agreement on International Responsible Business Conduct regarding Human Rights (signed on 28 October 2016), and the Gold Sector International Responsible Business Conduct Agreement (signed in July 2017). Three of these agreements were negotiated under the SER’s guidance. Preparations are currently under way for agreements in the insurance, ornamental plant, natural stone, metallurgy and food sectors. The agreements are in keeping with the SER’s advisory report in 2014 on International RBC.

Additionally, following adoption of the NAP, the government has commissioned an academic institution to develop an independent study on the question whether the duty of care for corporations is adequately anchored in Dutch law. The government indicated its further actions in its response in April 2016.

Stakeholders views and analysis on the NAP

International Corporate Accountability Roundtable (ICAR), European Coalition for corporate Justice (ECCJ): Assessments of Existing National Action Plans (NAPS) on Business and Human Rights, November 2015
Netherlands Institute For Human Rights: “Response to the National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights “Knowing and Showing”, February 2014
MVO Platform: Dutch National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights, February 2014
Andreas Graf: Developing National Action Plans on Business and Human Rights: Lessons from European States’, April 2013

Additional resources

Government of the Netherlands: National Action Plan for Human Rights and Business: ‘Knowing and Showing’, December 12, 2013
Government of the Netherlands: Nationaal Actieplan bedrijfsleven en mensenrechten
Government of the Netherlands: National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights, December 2013
Survey on the implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: The role of States as economic actors, 2015
Business & Human Rights Resource Centre Government Portal: Government survey results
SER: 75 signatures endorse Sustainable Garment and Textile Sector agreement,
SER: Dutch Banking Sector Agreement on international responsible business conduct regarding human rights, October 2016
SER: Agreement on International Responsible Business Conduct of Companies in the Netherlands with Gold or Gold Bearing Materials in their Value Chains, July 2017

Explore NAP by Issue

Children’s rights

The Dutch NAP makes no direct reference to children’s rights, but makes reference to child labour in a number of places.

2. Current policy [page 9]

“To prevent abuses in terms of working conditions, child labour, environment, corruption and human rights in their supply chains, the government expects companies to act in accordance with the OECD guidelines wherever possible.”

3.1 An active role for the government

Level playing field [page 15]

“The Netherlands is also committed to universal ratification of the ILO’s fundamental labour standards: the ban on child labour and forced labour, equality of opportunity and treatment, and freedom of association.”

3.2 Policy coherence

Trade and investment agreements [page 20]

“The government is committed to including clear provisions on the relationship between trade, investment and sustainability in trade and investment agreements. Within the EU, the Netherlands urges the inclusion in these agreements of a section on trade and sustainable development, with monitoring and enforcement mechanisms. The aim is for parties to reaffirm their commitment to fulfilling their ILO obligations to eliminate child labour and forced labour and to working together to this end.”

3.3 Clarifying due diligence

CSR Risk Check [page 23]

“Using a grant from the Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, CSR Netherlands has developed the CSR Risk Check for companies wishing to apply due diligence. Based on the sector and country in which a company is operating, this internet tool provides an indication of possible social impacts. CSR Netherlands works with the agency responsible for carrying out Sector Risk Analyses to harmonise the information on which the two instruments are based. This information will be used in the course of 2014 to compile sectoral world maps on which colour coding will be used to indicate whether a certain theme (e.g. child labour, discrimination of women) plays a role in a given country or region.”

3.1 An active role for the government

The OECD Guidelines Proactive Agenda [page 15]

“A multi-stakeholder approach to conflict minerals has proved highly successful in preventing funds being channelled into the civil war in the DCR.”

3.3 Clarifying due diligence

Raising companies’ awareness [page 23]

“As mentioned above, the OECD has published a guide on responsible supply chains for conflict minerals and is working on a guide for responsible investment in agriculture supply chains.”

3.4 Transparency and reporting

Reporting [page 30]

“The government continues to call companies’ attention to the need to comply with the Corporate Governance Code and the principle that members of the management and supervisory boards should take account of CSR in fulfilling their duties. The government has pointed out that CSR should be part of the entrepreneurial spirit. It is therefore essential to devote serious attention to CSR within the existing structures and responsibilities of the management and supervisory boards. Their reports should also include more information on their CSR policies.”

Corruption

2. Current policy [page 9]

3.4 Transparency and reporting

Reporting [page 29]

3. Results of the consultations and government response

3.2 Policy Coherence

International forums [page 18]

Digital technology & electronics sector

The Dutch NAP makes a very brief reference to the ICT and electronics sector.

3.3 Clarifying due diligence

Raising companies’ awareness [page 22]

Energy sector

3.3 Clarifying due diligence

Sector Risk Analysis

An issue raised during the consultations was that the government should help companies to take a proactive approach in identifying risks to human rights. (…) The government has reached agreement with a number of sectors on the subject of due diligence. Agreements with, for example, the textile sector and energy companies are now in preparation. The government is willing to remove obstacles identiied by the companies concerned. It will support them in upscaling initiatives to international level – e.g. through the Beter Coal Initiative dialogue – and will work for a level playing ield for Dutch companies. – page 25

2. Current Policy [page 9]

The Netherlands already pursues an active policy to promote respect for human rights by the business community and to prevent companies from abusing human rights either directly or in their supply chains. The government expects companies operating abroad, in particular in countries where legislation or enforcement falls short, to pursue the same standards for CSR and human rights as they would in the Netherlands. As the government pointed out in A World to Gain, its policy document on aid and trade, International Corporate Social Responsibility (ICSR) is a prerequisite for sustainable, inclusive growth. Companies bear a social responsibility for what goes on in their supply chains and for ensuring fair work under satisfactory conditions of employment. To prevent abuses in terms of working conditions, child labour, environment, corruption and human rights in their supply chains, the government expects companies to act in accordance with the OECD guidelines wherever possible.

Equality & non-discrimination

The Dutch NAP does not make an explicit reference to Equality and Non-Discrimination.

Export credit

3.3 Clarifying due diligence

Due diligence by government [page 27]

“A point raised in the consultations was that the government should also apply due diligence to its own activities, for example in providing support for companies in the form of grants or other types of finance for activities abroad, export credit insurance and trade missions. In all these cases, the government requires the companies concerned to apply due diligence.

For some time now the government has applied ICSR [International Corporate Social Responsibility] frameworks for risk assessment (due diligence) to all applications for support. These frameworks differ, depending on the goals and the nature of the instrument in question. For example, the ICSR framework for trade missions differs from the frameworks for project grants or export credit insurance. Assessment is based on the risk profile of the project or instrument, so that high-risk projects are subject to more thorough assessment than projects with fewer risks.

Companies should always take responsibility for their activities and the ICSR assessment frameworks provide guidance in this respect. Participation in a voluntary CSR agreement will of course help companies wanting support from the government to fulfil the requirements set out in the frameworks.”

ICSR in relation to export credit insurance [page 27-28]

“Under CSR policy on export credit insurance, both the government and companies are required to take responsibility for CSR. Companies using export credit insurance sign a declaration that they will seek to abide by the OECD Guidelines. The export credit agency Atradius DSB is responsible for carrying out a due diligence risk analysis of applications for insurance. The companies concerned are responsible for supplying the necessary information. If they are unable to do so, insurance will not be provided for the export transaction.

International agreements on the due diligence procedure for export credit insurance are set out in the OECD’s common approaches for export credit agencies. The common approaches apply to all OECD member states and, in terms of assessment of environmental and social impact, safeguard a level playing field between the member states’ export credit agencies. In the context of the common approaches, the OECD member states represented in the Export Credit Group have agreed that projects with potential adverse environmental and social impacts will always be screened for compliance with the IFC Performance Standards. The OECD Export Credit Group, in which all member states with export credit facilities are represented, is working on a strategy for assessing project-related human rights. The Netherlands plays an active part in this group, which is responsible for improving risk assessment.”

3.1 An active role for the government

The OECD Guidelines Proactive Agenda [page 15]

“[the OECD] is also working with the various interested parties in the extractive sector on a guide to using stakeholder engagement in their CSR policies. … A multi-stakeholder approach to conflict minerals has proved highly successful in preventing funds being channelled into the civil war in the DCR.”

3.3 Clarifying due diligence

Raising companies’ awareness [page 22]

3.5 Scope for Remedy

Judicial mechanisms [page 33]

“Under the rules of private international law, a dispute about harm is judged on the basis of the law of the country in which it has occurred. If it is the result of the actions of a foreign subsidiary of a Dutch parent company, any liability on the part of the parent company will also be judged under the law of the country where it has occurred. Should the subsidiary in question be located in another country, the liability of the Dutch parent company will be judged according to the law of that country. A Dutch civil court may declare itself competent if there is a sufficiently close relationship with a Dutch legal person.”

Legislation with extraterritorial application [page 38-39]

“The consultations revealed a difference of opinion on the question of whether the Dutch court system should be open to civil or criminal law proceedings against Dutch companies in the event of alleged human rights abuses on the part of their foreign subsidiaries. Some of the people interviewed felt that the Netherlands should push at international level for an international agreement with extraterritorial application to cover international offences, since this would ensure more harmony in terms of a level playing field. Others, however, stressed that the principle of extraterritoriality would result in the Dutch legal system placing itself above the legal system of the country in which the alleged abuse had been committed.

The government would point out that extraterritorial application alone is not enough. A court judgment must also be enforceable, and it is not up to the Netherlands to decide for other countries whether this is possible. The government is therefore not convinced that legislation with extraterritorial impacts will contribute to preventing human rights abuses by foreign companies in the countries in which they are active. There is also too little international support for an international, legally-binding instrument.”

Finance & banking sector

3.1 An active role for the government

The OECD Guidelines Proactive Agenda [page 15]

3.3 Clarifying due diligence

Landgrabbing in Brazil [page 25]

“Several Dutch financial institutions were recently linked through an investment partner to landgrabbing in Brazil. The Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation immediately contacted the Dutch and Brazilian institutions concerned, and had talks with high-level representatives of ABN AMRO Bank, the ABP Pension Fund, Aegon, the Entrepreneurial Development Bank (FMO), ING Bank, the Dutch Banking Association, the Federation of Dutch Pension Funds, PFZW pension fund and Rabobank. They discussed the need for greater transparency with regard to loans and investments, and had a constructive exchange of views on participation of Dutch financial institutions in multi-sector consultations on better land and land-use rights.”

Fisheries and aquaculture sectors

The Dutch NAP does not make a direct or explicit reference to the Fisheries and Aquaculture sectors.

Forced labour & modern slavery

The Dutch NAP references international forced labour protection and includes one action on the topic.

3.1 An active role for the government

Level playing field [page 15]

3.2 Policy coherence

Trade and investment agreements [page 20]

Freedom of association

The Dutch NAP includes a single reference to freedom of association.

3.1 An active role for the government

Level playing field [page 15]

“The Netherlands is also committed to universal ratification of the ILO’s fundamental labour standards: … freedom of association.”

3. Results of the consultations and government response

3.1 An active role for the government

Cooperation with the Dutch textile sector

At a conference held on 20 June 2013, the sector organisations representing Dutch textile companies presented an action plan to tackle abuses in the production of clothing. The plan aims for structural improvements in CSR in the textile and clothing sector worldwide. The OECD guidelines and the Ruggie Framework are the guiding principles. By the end of 2014 at least 50% of the companies ailiated to the sector organisations should have signed the action plan and/or should be participating in a project aimed at achieving the action plan’s goals. The Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation has called on textile companies to commit to the plan. She has entered into dialogue with the sector on its implementation, and on opportuni- ties to conclude a voluntary CSR agreement on textiles, for which the action plan forms a good starting point. – page 14

The Netherlands is also helping to promote human rights through programmes of multilateral institutions. The ILO’s Beter Work programme is a good example. The Beter Work programme was launched by the ILO and the International Finance Corporation (IFC) to improve working conditions in the textile sector in a number of countries. – page 19

3.3 Clarifying due diligence

Sector Risk Analysis

An issue raised during the consultations was that the government should help companies to take a proactive approach in identifying risks to human rights. Where speciic issues relating to human rights and the Dutch business community play a role, the government will enter into dialogue with the companies concerned. The government has reached agreement with a number of sectors on the subject of due diligence. Agreements with, for example, the textile sector and energy companies are now in preparation. The government is willing to remove obstacles identiied by the companies concerned. It will support them in upscaling initiatives to international level – e.g. through the Beter Coal Initiative dialogue – and will work for a level playing ield for Dutch compa- nies. The Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation has underscored the importance of this initiative and called on other countries to give it their support. To ensure greater efectiveness, the government is also commited to upscaling initiatives relating to the textile sector in Bangladesh, together with other countries and international organisations. – page 25, 26

Gender & women’s rights

The Dutch NAP includes limited references to gender and women’s rights.

3.1 An active role for the government

Level playing field [page 15]

“The Netherlands is also committed to universal ratification of the ILO’s fundamental labour standards: … equality of opportunity and treatment …”

3.3 Clarifying due diligence

CSR Risk Check [page 23]

Read more about Gender & women’s rights

Guidance to business

3.1 An active role for the government

The OECD Guidelines Proactive Agenda [page 15]

“The Proactive Agenda was added to the OECD Guidelines in 2011 to elucidate the guidelines for specific sectors or situations, together with all the countries involved. In the context of the Agenda, the OECD is working with the financial sector on clarifying application of the guidelines. It is also working with the various interested parties in the extractive sector on a guide to using stakeholder engagement in their CSR policies. With the FAO, it is working on a guide for the agriculture sector on fulfilling CSR requirements such as responsible investment in agriculture supply chains and land. In the spring of 2014 a high level forum will be organised with the ILO on CSR in the textile sector. A multi-stakeholder approach to conflict minerals has proved highly successful in preventing funds being channelled into the civil war in the DCR.”

3.3 Clarifying due diligence

Raising companies’ awareness [page 22]

“It is essential for companies to have access to all available information on due diligence. The European Commission has published human rights guidance for three business sectors: ICT companies, oil and gas companies and employment and recruitment agencies. These guides advise companies on how they can implement their responsibility to respect human rights in their everyday operations. At each step, the guides give a short account of what the UN Guiding Principles expect of them, and present a whole range of strategies and examples to help them put the principles into practice. The European Commission has also published a guide for SMEs and has developed a number of case studies. As mentioned above, the OECD has published a guide on responsible supply chains for conflict minerals and is working on a guide for responsible investment in agriculture supply chains. In 2010 Global Compact Netherlands published the results of a pilot study of application of the Ruggie Framework in ten Dutch companies. A follow-up publication is currently being discussed with Global Compact Netherlands.”

3.3 Clarifying due diligence

CSR Risk Check [page 23]

Sector Risk Analysis [page 25]

“The Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation and the Minister of Economic Affairs have requested the SER to advise them on effective CSR agreements with the business community. The SER is expected to issue its recommendations in early 2014. The sectors with which the government plans to enter into voluntary agreements will be announced in mid-2014.”

Due diligence by government [page 27]

“Companies should always take responsibility for their activities and the ICSR [International Corporate Social Responsibility] assessment frameworks provide guidance in this respect. Participation in a voluntary CSR agreement will of course help companies wanting support from the government to fulfil the requirements set out in the frameworks.”

3.1 An active role for the government [page 14]

“As the government pointed out in its policy letter ‘CSR Pays Off’ and as is discussed under point 3 below on due diligence, the challenge in the next few years will be timely identification of risks in Dutch companies’ supply chains. The government wants to work on structural solutions within international chains, not incident management.”

3.2 Policy coherence

Sustainable procurement policy [page 17-18]

“Under the social conditions of national sustainable procurement policy, companies supplying the government with goods and services are required to respect human rights. These social conditions have been included in all central government EU contract award procedures since 1 January 2013, and the municipal, provincial and water authorities are being encouraged to apply them, too. Suppliers can fulfil these conditions in various ways – by joining a reliable multi-stakeholder supply chain initiative (quality mark or certification institute) or, if they have any doubts, carrying out a risk analysis. …

Government suppliers should perform a risk analysis to show that they respect human rights in accordance with the UN Guiding Principles.”

3.3 Clarifying due diligence [page 21-28]

“Due diligence is a core concept of the UN Guiding Principles, as set out by Professor Ruggie. It may be defined as follows:

Identifying and assessing human rights impacts: taking proactive, ongoing steps to understand how existing and proposed activities may cause or contribute to human rights impacts.
Taking action and tracking effectiveness of response.
Externally communicating how the business has addressed adverse impacts: it is possible that these impacts are not the direct result of a business’s own operations, but are caused elsewhere within the supply chain.
Due diligence is not a one-off activity but an ongoing process.”

Raising companies’ awareness

“The government supports the SER [Social and Economic Council] with a grant for workshops to help companies shape the human rights component of their CSR policies, and to assist them in charting and prioritising the risks they face. … The SER has also been given a grant to investigate whether the ISO 31000 risk management standard is applicable to CSR due diligence.”

CSR Risk Check

Sector Risk Analysis

“An issue raised during the consultations was that the government should help companies to take a proactive approach in identifying risks to human rights.

As announced in the CSR policy letter, Sector Risk Analysis has been introduced to identify the sectors that present the greatest risk of adverse social impacts and where priority should be given to strengthening company policy in relation to them. This forms part of the Dutch government’s due diligence towards the business community. In this way, it is helping the business community to fulfil its responsibility to apply due diligence on CSR. Both the business community and civil society organisations will be closely involved in the analysis. The government will enter into dialogue with the sectors identified in the analysis to explore how the situation can be improved. Human rights issues may also be raised. The government will report to the House of Representatives on progress with the project in early 2014.

Where specific issues relating to human rights and the Dutch business community play a role, the government will enter into dialogue with the companies concerned.”

Due diligence by government

“For some time now the government has applied ICSR [International Corporate Social Responsibility] frameworks for risk assessment (due diligence) to all applications for support. These frameworks differ, depending on the goals and the nature of the instrument in question. For example, the ICSR framework for trade missions differs from the frameworks for project grants or export credit insurance. Assessment is based on the risk profile of the project or instrument, so that high-risk projects are subject to more thorough assessment than projects with fewer risks.

Companies should always take responsibility for their activities and the ICSR assessment frameworks provide guidance in this respect.”

ICSR in relation to export credit insurance

“The OECD Export Credit Group, in which all member states with export credit facilities are represented, is working on a strategy for assessing project-related human rights. The Netherlands plays an active part in this group, which is responsible for improving risk assessment.”

Indigenous peoples

The Dutch NAP does not make an explicit reference to Indigenous Peoples.

3.2 Policy coherence

Trade and investment agreements [page 20-21]

“Incorporating the OECD Guidelines and UN Guiding Principles in trade and investment agreements was one of the suggestions made during the consultations.

The government is committed to including clear provisions on the relationship between trade, investment and sustainability in trade and investment agreements. Within the EU, the Netherlands urges the inclusion in these agreements of a section on trade and sustainable development, with monitoring and enforcement mechanisms. The aim is for parties to reaffirm their commitment to fulfilling their ILO obligations to eliminate child labour and forced labour and to working together to this end. Agreements also need to be made on cooperating on and promoting CSR, through the OECD Guidelines, for instance. For the Netherlands, involvement of civil society organisations is an essential component of any agreement.

The EU’s aim is for every trade agreement to be linked to a broader partnership and cooperation agreement reaffirming states’ human rights obligations. Where human rights are abused, the trade agreement could ultimately be suspended. …

The Lisbon Treaty gave the EU exclusive competence on direct foreign investment. With this shift, which does not apply to every aspect of investment, the EU now negotiates investment treaties together with the member states. Each EU investment agreement will most likely contain a separate section on environment, labour, sustainability and transparency, dealing with these issues in greater detail. The Netherlands is very much in favour of including such sections in all future EU investment protection agreements.”

Judicial remedy

The Dutch NAP contains a section on access to remedy.

3.5 Scope for Remedy [32-38]

“The consultations showed that the government has a major role to play in creating scope for remedy to implement the 3rd pillar of the Ruggie Framework, and providing information on the matter. Suggestions varied from providing more information on existing access to remedy through the embassies, to promoting complaint mechanisms at company level and encouraging dialogue between companies and communities under the leadership of an impartial mediator or facilitator. The ACCESS Facility was mentioned as an initiative that could receive support as part of the action plan.

In his commentary on the 3rd Pillar of the Principles, Professor Ruggie points out that grievance mechanisms may take various forms, but their aim will always be to counteract or make good any abuses. Remedy may include apologies, restitution, rehabilitation, financial or non-financial compensation and punitive sanctions, as well as the prevention of harm through, for example, injunctions or guarantees of non-repetition. The term grievance mechanism is used to indicate any routinised, State-based or non-State-based, judicial or non-judicial process through which grievances concerning business-related human rights abuse can be raised and remedy can be sought.

ACCESS Facility

The ACCESS Facility was set up in December 2012 with a view to knowledge building and improving access to effective dispute settlement between companies and communities either in or out of court. ACCESS supports and facilitates local dispute settlement mechanisms, since it is convinced that local solutions are the most effective and sustainable, and that companies and other interested parties will only use dialogue and mediation if they have confidence in both the design and function of the relevant mechanisms. Since the government believes that the ACCESS Facility clearly provides added value, it has awarded start-up funding under the Human Rights Fund.

Judicial mechanisms

“On the basis of Dutch civil law, victims of abuses that have taken place in the Netherlands can claim compensation in the civil law courts. Where an unlawful act has been committed, the court may order the company not only to cease the abuse but also to compensate for the damage caused to the victim (article 6:162, Civil Code). Dutch criminal law provides limited scope for payment of compensation.

In 2009, Professor Alex Geert Castermans and Dr Jeroen van der Weide of Leiden University conducted research into the legal responsibility of Dutch parent companies for the involvement of their subsidiaries in human rights abuses. In practice, companies often make use of a group structure. In these cases, the Dutch parent company is at the head of a group of subsidiaries, which may be located in various countries. Within a group too, each independent legal person is responsible for its own acts. Each legal person is therefore liable for any harm that may be caused by its actions.

Under the rules of private international law, a dispute about harm is judged on the basis of the law of the country in which it has occurred. If it is the result of the actions of a foreign subsidiary of a Dutch parent company, any liability on the part of the parent company will also be judged under the law of the country where it has occurred. Should the subsidiary in question be located in another country, the liability of the Dutch parent company will be judged according to the law of that country. A Dutch civil court may declare itself competent if there is a sufficiently close relationship with a Dutch legal person.

In the consultations, a number of the people interviewed suggested providing more opportunities to gain an understanding of the legal and organisational structures of groups and the relations of control, and to promote transparency regarding the impact of their operations on human rights. The Minister of Security and Justice will inform the House of Representatives separately on the obligations of companies to provide information.”

Legal aid fund

“During the consultations, it was suggested that more financial support should be provided for alleged victims, enabling them to institute proceedings. A fund was proposed to contribute to the costs, including those incurred in collecting evidence and carrying out investigations. Alleged victims usually have fewer resources at their disposal to take a case to court than a company.

In the government’s opinion, a fund is unnecessary, because the regular legal aid scheme provides scope for support in paying legal costs. In the event of claims for compensation from parent companies in the Netherlands, non-Dutch nationals are also entitled to legal aid.

Access to the courts is not as easy in every country. The Netherlands is therefore committed to strengthening countries’ business climate and, in particular, national legal infrastructure, and providing victims in every country with adequate access to remedy mechanisms. It supports capacity development and enters into strategic partnerships with organisations such as the International Development Law Organisation (IDLO).”

4. Action Points

Scope for remedy [page 42]

“In 2014, the Netherlands will organise a conference on judicial and non-judicial grievance mechanisms, together with the ACCESS Facility.”

3. Results of the consultations and government response

3.3 Clarifying Due Diligence [page 21]

A point raised during the consultations was that the government should clarify the UN Guiding Principles, using language companies understand. Companies feel that the government has failed to say what it expects of them in terms of due diligence.

Sector Risk Analysis [pages 24-25]

Land-grabbing in Brazil

Several Dutch financial institutions were recently linked through an investment partner to land-grabbing in Brazil. The Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation immediately contacted the Dutch and Brazilian institutions concerned, and had talks with high-level representatives of ABN AMRO Bank, the ABP Pension Fund, Aegon, the Entrepreneurial Development Bank (FMO), ING Bank, the Dutch Banking Association, the Federation of Dutch Pension Funds, PFZW pension fund and Rabobank. They discussed the need for greater transparency with regard to loans and investments, and had a constructive exchange of views on participation of Dutch financial institutions in multi-sector consultations on better land and land-use rights.

3.1 An active role for the government [page 14]

3.3 Clarifying due diligence [page 21-28]

“A point raised during the consultations was that the government should clarify the UN Guiding Principles, using language companies understand. Companies feel that the government has failed to say what it expects of them in terms of due diligence.

Due diligence is a core concept of the UN Guiding Principles, as set out by Professor Ruggie. It may be defined as follows:

Identifying and assessing human rights impacts: taking proactive, ongoing steps to understand how existing and proposed activities may cause or contribute to human rights impacts.
Taking action and tracking effectiveness of response.
Externally communicating how the business has addressed adverse impacts: it is possible that these impacts are not the direct result of a business’s own operations, but are caused elsewhere within the supply chain.
Due diligence is not a one-off activity but an ongoing process.

In the 2011 update of the OECD Guidelines, the recommendation to apply due diligence was extended to the CSR domain. In all its communications with and conditions for the business community, the government uses the OECD Guidelines as its framework of reference for ICSR [International Corporate Social Responsibility]. Companies must take account of the potential social impact of their activities. Due diligence is thus the most important new element in the CSR policies of companies operating internationally and/or within international supply chains. Corporate responsibility for applying due diligence is part of good business practice. But what the most effective due diligence process entails depends on the size of the company, the nature of its trade relations and the sectors and countries in which it operates.

Raising companies’ awareness

“The aim of the information strategy described in the policy letter ‘CSR Pays Off ’ is to raise companies’ awareness of the need for due diligence. As an earlier study showed, SMEs operating internationally mainly need practical information. There are various aids for companies wishing to apply due diligence, and new ones are currently being developed, by the Social and Economic Council (SER), for instance. The government also has a role to play in making information and aids accessible. The knowledge centre CSR Netherlands plays an important role, while NL Agency and the embassies are major sources of information for companies operating at international level.

The government supports the SER with a grant for workshops to help companies shape the human rights component of their CSR policies, and to assist them in charting and prioritising the risks they face. These workshops are organised by SHIFT, a non-profit organisation set up with Professor Ruggie’s support to help companies and government authorities put the UN Guiding Principles into practice. The SER has also been given a grant to investigate whether the ISO 31000 risk management standard is applicable to CSR due diligence.

It is essential for companies to have access to all available information on due diligence. The European Commission has published human rights guidance for three business sectors: ICT companies, oil and gas companies and employment and recruitment agencies. These guides advise companies on how they can implement their responsibility to respect human rights in their everyday operations. At each step, the guides give a short account of what the UN Guiding Principles expect of them, and present a whole range of strategies and examples to help them put the principles into practice. The European Commission has also published a guide for SMEs and has developed a number of case studies. As mentioned above, the OECD has published a guide on responsible supply chains for conflict minerals and is working on a guide for responsible investment in agriculture supply chains. In 2010 Global Compact Netherlands published the results of a pilot study of application of the Ruggie Framework in ten Dutch companies. A follow-up publication is currently being discussed with Global Compact Netherlands.”

CSR Risk Check

Sector Risk Analysis

An issue raised during the consultations was that the government should help companies to take a proactive approach in identifying risks to human rights.

Where specific issues relating to human rights and the Dutch business community play a role, the government will enter into dialogue with the companies concerned.

The government has reached agreement with a number of sectors on the subject of due diligence. Agreements with, for example, the textile sector and energy companies are now in preparation. The government is willing to remove obstacles identified by the companies concerned. It will support them in upscaling initiatives to international level – e.g. through the Better Coal Initiative dialogue – and will work for a level playing field for Dutch companies. The contents of these voluntary CSR agreements will depend on the nature of the problem, the degree to which the sector is organised and whether companies commit to achieving certain results or making certain efforts. The Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation and the Minister of Economic Affairs have requested the SER to advise them on effective CSR agreements with the business community. The SER is expected to issue its recommendations in early 2014. The sectors with which the government plans to enter into voluntary agreements will be announced in mid-2014.

Due diligence by government

ICSR in relation to export credit insurance

4. Action points

Clarifying due diligence [page 41]

“The government will enter into dialogue with educational institutions providing courses in management-related studies on including business ethics and/or CSR in their curriculums.
The government supports the SER with a grant for workshops to help companies shape the human rights component of their CSR policies, and to assist them in identifying and prioritising the risks they face. The SER has also been given a grant to investigate whether the ISO 31000 risk management standard is applicable to CSR due diligence.
The government has entered into talks with Global Compact Netherlands on a follow-up to its publication ‘How to do Business with Respect for Human Rights’ (2010). • The Ministry of Foreign Affairs will shortly provide an interministerial training course for civil servants whose work calls for knowledge of the UN Guiding Principles, and a refresher or other course for implementing organisations on the significance of the OECD Guidelines for companies.
In 2014 an independent committee will investigate whether the obligations of Dutch companies in relation to CSR are adequately regulated in Dutch law, and in accordance with the UN Guiding Principles. The committee will take into account the relevant case law, the situation in neighbouring countries and the business climate.”

Migrant workers

The Dutch NAP makes no reference to migrant workers.

2. Current Policy [page 10]

“The Netherlands Institute for Human Rights can monitor whether relevant legislation complies with the Netherlands’ human rights obligations. It has entered into a dialogue with companies and non-state actors on this issue. The Institute monitors policy, provides independent advice and researches human rights issues.”

Non-financial reporting

3.4 Transparency and reporting [page 28-31]

“During the consultations, various parties pointed out that companies should be encouraged and/or required to report on their human rights policy and the results achieved. At the same time, they stressed that level of reporting should be proportionate to what it yields, and that account needs to be taken of the administrative burden on the business community.

The UN Guiding Principles devote attention to the importance of transparency and reporting. The responsibility to respect human rights calls not only for internal processes to identify and mitigate risks of adverse impacts (‘knowing’), but also for communication on these risks with the parties directly involved and other stakeholders, such as investors (‘showing’). In this way, companies can account for their policies and facilitate dialogue with all stakeholders.”

Reporting

“As it points out in its policy letter ‘CSR Pays Off’, the government supports the European Commission’s proposal to amend accounting legislation in relation to non-financial reporting. Large companies will be required to disclose information on human rights, environmental matters, social and employee-related matters and corruption. The proposal affects some 600 companies in the Netherlands, which together account for considerable social impact. The new Directive will ensure a level playing field at European level. What is more, it will place a limited administrative burden on the business community, since it is non-prescriptive as regards information provision, and works on the basis of the ‘apply or explain’ principle.

The Netherlands pursues an active policy of encouraging social reporting through the transparency benchmark. This benchmark is carried out every year on the instructions of the Ministry of Economic Affairs to give the 500 largest Dutch companies a rating for transparency on sustainability and CSR. The benchmark’s criteria have been updated and brought in line with international developments such as the UN Guiding Principles and the European Commission’s proposal for a new Accounting Directive. The Transparency Benchmark will now apply to the 600 companies referred to in this proposal.

The government supports the growing number of international initiatives to promote transparency by means of tax disclosure. It takes an active part in discussions in the EU on a possible expansion of obligatory tax disclosure by companies operating internationally to include payments to countries where they are active. It urges attention for possible adverse economic consequences of making this information public, and for close harmonisation with existing transparency requirements.

The government continues to call companies’ attention to the need to comply with the Corporate Governance Code and the principle that members of the management and supervisory boards should take account of CSR in fulfilling their duties. The government has pointed out that CSR should be part of the entrepreneurial spirit. It is therefore essential to devote serious attention to CSR within the existing structures and responsibilities of the management and supervisory boards. Their reports should also include more information on their CSR policies.

During the consultations, attention was again requested for the Production and Supply Chain Information (Public Access) Act (WOK). With this legislation, consumers, members of the public, civil society organisations and other parties who ask companies about the origins of their products and services would be assured of an answer. On the basis of the results of a study by Panteia/EIM15 in 2009, the government then in office concluded that implementation of the WOK was technically feasible, but that it would entail high costs for the business community, and its enactment would probably run into international legal obstacles.

In this light, the government does not feel that this is the right time to enact such legislation, and points to the increasing availability of information on supply chains through instruments such as the Sustainable Trade Initiative and the Sector Risk Analysis project. The SER also devotes considerable attention to promoting supply chain transparency and responsibility in its ICSR committee. Moreover, it is possible to report to the NCP on companies that are insufficiently transparent for a constructive dialogue on CSR.

3.5 Scope for Remedy [page 32-38]

ACCESS Facility

Non-judicial mechanisms

“In the Guiding Principles, Professor Ruggie points out that non-judicial mechanisms can contribute to faster, potentially more effective and more direct remedy for victims. They are therefore an important addition to judicial proceedings, which are often time-consuming and costly.

The National Contact Point (NCP) supports companies in putting the OECD Guidelines into practice. Where there is a difference of opinion between companies and other stakeholders on the application of the Guidelines, any party may submit a complaint to the NCP. Should the complaint be deemed admissible, the NCP may attempt to act as an impartial mediator between the parties reporting the abuse and the company in question. The NCP may be regarded as an overarching external remedy mechanism, since it is accessible to all stakeholders and is based on impartial mediation. At the end of a procedure, the NCP issues a final statement in which it describes the process and the relationship between the solution and the OECD Guidelines. Parties may reach agreement that remedy (including compensation) should be offered by the company. The NCP also issues a final statement in cases where parties fail to reach a solution. In that event, the NCP not only describes the process but also issues recommendations on the alleged breach of the OECD Guidelines, on the basis of its understanding of the facts. The purpose of these recommendations is to prevent future disputes. The NCP procedure is non-judicial. Its final statement is not an administrative law decision and there is therefore no scope for appeal.

At the request of the House of Representatives, a study was conducted into strengthening the functioning of the NCP. The Dutch NCP was compared with the NCPs in the UK, Norway and Denmark, and interviews were held with representatives of companies, trade unions and civil society organisations and government representatives involved in the work of the NCP. Specifically, the study examined whether the NCP should be authorised to carry out investigations into possible breaches of the OECD Guidelines by Dutch companies on its own volition, thus not only in response to complaints.

The people interviewed were reasonably satisfied with the functioning of the NCP. The way in which the NCPs are organised reflects each country’s specific social and economic structure. For example, the Dutch decision not to opt for civil servants, but for independent members with a firm base in society differs from the British model in which a Steering Board oversees the work of the NCP, whose members are civil servants.

There is no essential difference between the nature of the statements the various NCPs may issue in response to complaints. The Danish NCP is the only NCP entitled to carry out investigations on its own volition into the involvement of companies in abuses in international supply chains. No criteria have been laid down for starting an investigation. When asked, the Danish NCP was unable to say on what grounds it would take the initiative to launch an investigation. To date, no such investigation has been launched.

The government is not in favour of the Dutch NCP having similar, unconditional powers to carry out investigations. The people interviewed also expressed little support for this idea. The Dutch NCP may carry out additional investigations in response to complaints. If the NCP were entitled to carry out its own investigations, the business community would ultimately lose confidence in its impartiality. Moreover, if an issue were to be investigated on the NCP’s own volition, thus not in response to a complaint by an interested party, there would be no official ‘other party’ for the mediation procedure with the company in question.

It should be noted here that, in practice, the Dutch NCP already facilitates dialogue on CSR at the request of civil society organisations and/or companies, and thus not in response to a formal complaint submitted in accordance with the OECD Guidelines. The aim of those requesting facilitation is to bring about improvements, sometimes with a view to forestalling submission of an official complaint to the NCP.

Proactive investigation of possible risks in the Dutch business community’s supply chains now takes place by means of Sector Risk Analyses, as described above. Voluntary CSR agreements will be concluded with a number of sectors on the basis of these analyses. In their letter requesting advice on how effective CSR agreements can be concluded with business sectors, the Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation and the Minister of Economic Affairs asked the SER to devote explicit attention to the role the NCP could play as facilitator or dispute settlement mechanism.

In very serious situations, where a recommendation by the NCP is needed to support the social dialogue, the government will acquire scope to ask the NCP to carry out a sector-wide investigation into CSR issues. To promote a level playing field, the results will be brought to the attention of all countries that adhere to the OECD Guidelines in the OECD working group on CSR. Given the NCP’s limited capacity and the fact that the Sector Risk Analyses already ensure systematic identification of risks in Dutch sectors, such an investigation would probably be needed no more than once a year. The conditions under which the NCP may be requested to carry out these investigations will be specified in the amendments to the decree establishing the NCP, which will be submitted to the House of Representatives in the summer of 2014.

The study referred to above into the functioning of the NCP will lead to a number of other amendments to this decree. The preferred option is for the decree to put the consultations that the NCP regularly holds with civil society organisations, employers’ organisations and trade unions onto a formal footing, and indicate the issues on which the NCP should, in any event, consult its stakeholders. The Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation will submit a proposal on this subject, with explanatory notes, to the House of Representatives before the summer of 2014.

In 2014, the Netherlands will organise a conference on judicial and non-judicial grievance mechanisms, together with the ACCESS Facility.

Project on improving the accessibility and effectiveness of non-judicial grievance mechanisms

“Through the Human Rights Fund, the Netherlands is supporting SOMO’s Grievance Mechanisms and Human Rights Programme. The programme, which runs from 2012 to 2015, aims to improve the accessibility and effectiveness of non-judicial grievance mechanisms, such as the NCP and complaint procedures at company level. In September a training session was held in Jakarta for civil society organisations and trade union representatives, with the aim of equipping them more adequately with the knowledge and skills needed for these mechanisms. SOMO is also lobbying in a number of sector initiatives for stronger internal complaint mechanisms.”

Companies’ complaint mechanisms

“When a company establishes that it is the cause of or contributes to a human rights abuse, it is expected to rectify the situation and/or provide compensation. Complaint procedures at company level could prove to be an effective means to this end. The procedure should be in line with the OECD Guidelines, and based on dialogue and commitment to seeking an acceptable solution. Complainants should still have access to other judicial or non-judicial complaint procedures, including the NCP’s and the standard court system.”

OECD National Contact Points

3.3 Clarifying due diligence

Awareness-raising by embassies [page 24]

“The embassies bring Dutch and local entrepeneurs and civil society organisations together and are active in providing information on CSR, human rights themes, the OECD Guidelines and National Contact Point (NCP) procedures”

3.4 Transparency and reporting

Reporting [page 31]

“…it is possible to report to the NCP on companies that are insufficiently transparent for a constructive dialogue on CSR.”

3.5 Scope for Remedy [page 34-36]

Non-judicial mechanisms

“The National Contact Point (NCP) supports companies in putting the OECD Guidelines into practice. Where there is a difference of opinion between companies and other stakeholders on the application of the Guidelines, any party may submit a complaint to the NCP. Should the complaint be deemed admissible, the NCP may attempt to act as an impartial mediator between the parties reporting the abuse and the company in question. The NCP may be regarded as an overarching external remedy mechanism, since it is accessible to all stakeholders and is based on impartial mediation. At the end of a procedure, the NCP issues a final statement in which it describes the process and the relationship between the solution and the OECD Guidelines. Parties may reach agreement that remedy (including compensation) should be offered by the company. The NCP also issues a final statement in cases where parties fail to reach a solution. In that event, the NCP not only describes the process but also issues recommendations on the alleged breach of the OECD Guidelines, on the basis of its understanding of the facts. The purpose of these recommendations is to prevent future disputes. The NCP procedure is non-judicial. Its final statement is not an administrative law decision and there is therefore no scope for appeal.

Companies’ complaint mechanisms

Persons with disabilities

The Dutch NAP does not make an explicit reference to Persons with Disabilities.

Policy coherence

3.2 Policy coherence [page 16-21]

“It became apparent from the consultations that the government sometimes conveys conflicting messages about CSR and human rights – for example about the most important norms, and which ministry is responsible for which part of the policy. For civil society and implementing organisations, coherence is essential. During the consultations, specific attention was requested for international policy coherence and incorporation of the UN Guiding Principles in trade and investment agreements.

The government recognises that it must be consistent on the subject of human rights and business and in pursuing and implementing policy at both national and international level. The policy letter ‘CSR Pays Off’ clarifies the CSR framework. The OECD Guidelines provide an overarching framework for what the Dutch government expects of companies in terms of ICSR. The Guidelines incorporate other relevant provisions such as the ILO labour standards and the UN Guiding Principles on business responsibility to respect. State-controlled companies are expected to comply with the Guidelines and to report on their CSR policies. To monitor their progress, these companies are always included in the Transparency Benchmark. Companies in which the government invests in a different way, for example through export licences, are also expected to comply with the Guidelines.

CSR and human rights are always on the agenda during both preparations and annual follow-up days for attachés and diplomats assigned to the missions. An e-learning course is currently being developed for both civil servants operating at international level and implementing organisations to provide clear and reliable information on the subject of human rights and business.

Sustainable procurement policy

“Under the social conditions of national sustainable procurement policy, companies supplying the government with goods and services are required to respect human rights.9 These social conditions have been included in all central government EU contract award procedures since 1 January 2013, and the municipal, provincial and water authorities are being encouraged to apply them, too. Suppliers can fulfil these conditions in various ways – by joining a reliable multi-stakeholder supply chain initiative (quality mark or certification institute) or, if they have any doubts, carrying out a risk analysis.

The consultations showed that sustainable procurement policy is not regarded as effective in implementing social and human rights criteria. Companies are often unaware of risks. Government suppliers should perform a risk analysis to show that they respect human rights in accordance with the UN Guiding Principles. In its 2014 evaluation of the sustainable procurement policy social conditions, the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations will examine whether this policy is in line with the OECD Guidelines and the UN Guiding Principles, and whether central government policy can also be applied by the municipal, provincial and water authorities.”

International forums

“During the consultations it was emphasised that the Netherlands should work in multilateral forums such as the EU and the UN for adoption of the UN Guiding Principles as the reference framework, in the interests of international policy coherence. Some groups remarked that the Dutch sector and multi-stakeholder initiatives should be upscaled to international level, since this would increase their effectiveness. Both the business community and civil society organisations endorsed the need for a European approach to business and human rights – the business community in the interests of a level playing field, and civil society organisations for reasons of greater effectiveness.

In its 2011 Communication on CSR, the European Commission placed the initiative with the EU member states. It called for measures to promote CSR and for national action plans based on the UN Guiding Principles. The report on priorities in the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles has not yet been published.

The government regards the UN Guiding Principles as an integral part of its foreign and human rights policy. The government can play a role in sector and multi-stakeholder initiatives by forging direct links with government authorities in other countries and by raising issues in multilateral forums and through the embassies. The government is committed to keeping CSR and human rights on the European agenda. In the run-up to the EU Presidency in the first six months of 2016, the Netherlands will consult with like-minded member states on Europe’s commitment to achieving a level playing field and to increasing the effectiveness of multi-stakeholder initiatives. Among the subjects the government will focus on the need for collaboration to achieve ICSR, with a view to greater social impact, the creation of a level playing field for business and implementation of the UN Guiding Principles.

The Netherlands and a group of like-minded countries will play a pioneering role with the aim of getting the other EU member states on board.

As a shareholder in the international financial institutions, the Netherlands calls for more systematic attention for human rights and effective internal monitoring mechanisms to safeguard observance of human rights in projects. It is, for example, urging more systematic attention for human rights in the review and update of the World Bank safeguard policies. The Netherlands is also helping to promote human rights through programmes of multilateral institutions. The ILO’s Better Work programme is a good example.”

Trade and investment agreements

Incorporating the OECD Guidelines and UN Guiding Principles in trade and investment agreements was one of the suggestions made during the consultations.

Existing Dutch bilateral trade agreements provide parties with the policy space to take non-discriminatory measures to protect public interests such as human rights, working conditions and the environment. The Lisbon Treaty gave the EU exclusive competence on direct foreign investment. With this shift, which does not apply to every aspect of investment, the EU now negotiates investment treaties together with the member states. Each EU investment agreement will most likely contain a separate section on environment, labour, sustainability and transparency, dealing with these issues in greater detail. The Netherlands is very much in favour of including such sections in all future EU investment protection agreements.”

4. Action points [page 41]

“In the run-up to the Dutch EU Presidency in 2016, the government will consult with like-minded member states on shared priorities and commitments in Europe.
An e-learning course will be developed for ministries and implementing organisations enabling them to provide clear, reliable information on human rights and business.
In its 2014 evaluation of the social conditions of sustainable procurement policy, the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations will examine whether this policy is in line with the OECD Guidelines and the UN Guiding Principles, and whether central government policy can also be applied by the municipal, provincial and water authorities.”

2. Current policy [page 9]

“In its letter ‘CSR Pays Off’ the government identifies its tasks in relation to ICSR. They are: …

to set a good example – by pursuing sustainable procurement policies, for instance.”

3.2 Policy coherence [page 17-18]

Sustainable procurement policy

3.3 Clarifying due diligence

Raising companies’ awareness [page 22-23]

“As an earlier study showed, SMEs operating internationally mainly need practical information [Good Company (2010). Evaluation of the NCP’s promotional tasks 2007-2010. Parliamentary Papers 26 485, no. 101.]. …

The European Commission has also published a guide for SMEs and has developed a number of case studies [European Commission (2012). My Business and Human Rights: a guide to human rights for small and medium-sized enterprises.].”

State Owned Enterprises/ Public Private Partnerships

3. Results of the consultations and government response

3.2 Policy Coherence [page 16]

The government recognises that it must be consistent on the subject of human rights and business and in pursuing and implementing policy at both national and international level. The policy letter ‘CSR Pays Off’ clarifies the CSR framework. The OECD Guidelines provide an overarching framework for what the Dutch government expects of companies in terms of ICSR. The Guidelines incorporate other relevant provisions such as the Corporate social responsibility in economic missions, House of Representatives 26 485, no. 166, July 2013. ILO labour standards7 and the UN Guiding Principles on business responsibility to respect. State-controlled companies are expected to comply with the Guidelines and to report on their CSR policies. To monitor their progress, these companies are always included in the Transparency Benchmark. Companies in which the government invests in a different way, for example through export licences, are also expected to comply with the Guidelines.

Supply chains

1. Introduction [page 5]

“The Netherlands encourages the business community to respect human rights. The aim is to prevent companies from abusing human rights either directly or within supply chains.”

2. Current policy [page 9]

“The Netherlands already pursues an active policy to promote respect for human rights by the business community and to prevent companies from abusing human rights either directly or in their supply chains. The government expects companies operating abroad, in particular in countries where legislation or enforcement falls short, to pursue the same standards for CSR and human rights as they would in the Netherlands. …

Companies bear a social responsibility for what goes on in their supply chains and for ensuring fair work under satisfactory conditions of employment. To prevent abuses in terms of working conditions, child labour, environment, corruption and human rights in their supply chains, the government expects companies to act in accordance with the OECD guidelines wherever possible.”

3.1 An active role for the government [page 14-15]

The OECD Guidelines Proactive Agenda

3.2 Policy coherence [page 17-18]

Sustainable procurement policy

3.3 Clarifying due diligence [page 21]

“Due diligence is a core concept of the UN Guiding Principles, as set out by Professor Ruggie. It may be defined as follows:

Externally communicating how the business has addressed adverse impacts: it is possible that these impacts are not the direct result of a business’s own operations, but are caused elsewhere within the supply chain. …

Companies must take account of the potential social impact of their activities. Due diligence is thus the most important new element in the CSR policies of companies operating internationally and/or within international supply chains.”

3.4 Transparency and reporting [page 28-31]

Reporting

3.5 Scope for Remedy [page 34-36]

Non-judicial mechanisms

“There is no essential difference between the nature of the statements the various NCPs may issue in response to complaints. The Danish NCP is the only NCP entitled to carry out investigations on its own volition into the involvement of companies in abuses in international supply chains. No criteria have been laid down for starting an investigation. When asked, the Danish NCP was unable to say on what grounds it would take the initiative to launch an investigation. To date, no such investigation has been launched.

3.4 Transparency and reporting [page 30]

Reporting

“The government supports the growing number of international initiatives to promote transparency by means of tax disclosure. It takes an active part in discussions in the EU on a possible expansion of obligatory tax disclosure by companies operating internationally to include payments to countries where they are active. It urges attention for possible adverse economic consequences of making this information public, and for close harmonisation with existing transparency requirements.”

2. Current policy [page 9]

“As the government pointed out in A World to Gain,its policy document on aid and trade, International Corporate Social Responsibility (ICSR) is a prerequisite for sustainable, inclusive growth.”

3.1 An active role for the government [page 15-16]

Human rights and trade missions

“For many of the people interviewed, raising the issue of human rights during trade missions is an example of a proactive approach that can enable the government to fulfil its Duty to Protect.

For the government, it is essential to encourage ICSR during trade missions, and it has now become a permanent feature of them. The government expects companies represented in a trade mission to look into the possible adverse effects of their operations on communities, including on human rights, in the country in question, and to pursue policies to mitigate them.

Trade mission to Indonesia

“Between 20 and 22 November 2013, Prime Minister Mark Rutte led a trade mission to Indonesia. He was accompanied by the Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation and the Minister for Agriculture. During talks with the Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, Mr Rutte raised the issue of human rights. He also opened a forum on sustainable production and trade, organised in collaboration with the Sustainable Trade Initiative. The Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation took part in this forum and talked with representatives of Indonesia’s government, civil society organisations and private sector on the importance of sustainable production of and trade in palm oil and pulp for the paper industry”

3.2 Policy coherence [page 16-21]

Trade and investment agreements

“Incorporating the OECD Guidelines and UN Guiding Principles in trade and investment agreements was one of the suggestions made during the consultations.

Free trade agreement between the EU, Peru and Colombia

“Free trade agreement between the EU, Peru and Colombia The free trade agreement between the EU, Peru and Colombia seeks to reaffirm respect for human rights and ensure sustainable economic development. Title IX on Trade and Sustainable Development contains provisions on supervision and implementation, based on labour and environmental standards, with agreements on promoting and implementing internationally recognised ILO labour standards. The Colombian government undertakes to consult civil society organisations each year on implementation of this Title of the trade agreement. These organisations may also issue recommendations on their own initiative.”

3.3 Clarifying due diligence

Due diligence by government [page 27]

For some time now the government has applied ICSR frameworks for risk assessment (due diligence) to all applications for support. These frameworks differ, depending on the goals and the nature of the instrument in question. For example, the ICSR framework for trade missions differs from the frameworks for project grants or export credit insurance.”

3.1 An active role for the government

Level playing field [page 15]

NAP Development Process

Status

The second Dutch NAP on Business and Human Rights was adopted in November 2022.

Process

In the Netherlands, two Dutch MPs requested the NAP be updated in July 2019. A process to develop a second NAP began in Autumn 2020

The process of creating the second NAP was administered by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with support from an interministerial working group made up of the Ministries of:

Economic Affairs & Climate Policy
Infrastructure & Water Management
Finance, Interior & Kingdom Relations
Justice & Security
Social Affairs & Employment

The NAP states that the process consisted of the following phases:

Making preparations and gathering ideas (January – December 2020)

“Prior to the drafting of this revised NAP, in 2020 the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights conducted a National Baseline Assessment (NBA)78. It collaborated with the Danish Institute for Human Rights and Utrecht University to produce a status report on the extent of the UNGPs’ implementation. They looked at national and international developments, the impact of the Netherlands’ 2014 NAP, the implementation of the action points and the current level of the UNGPs’ implementation in the Netherlands. Discussions with businesses, civil society organisations and experts were followed in December 2020 by a response to the NBA from the previous government with a letter to parliament setting out the key points of its commitment to the revised NAP.”

Analysis and elaboration of the NAP (January 2021 – February 2022)

“The recommendations and ideas about policy priorities set out in the government’s response were collated, elaborated and discussed in the interministerial working group. Consultations were held in July 2021 with representatives of the business community, civil society organisations, implementing organisations and other experts on the main ideas behind the action plan and the draft version of it in a meeting led by the SER. The SER led another consultation meeting in January 2022 following a written discussion on the draft NAP. In addition to the consultations in the Netherlands, embassies conferred with local stakeholders (civil society, the business community and experts) in Africa and Asia to discuss policy and action points with a cross-border impact from a local perspective. Particular efforts were made to hear the views of women whenever local stakeholders were approached.”

Refining and decision-making.

“Input for the draft NAP was collated and processed. The government took a decision on the new NAP in July 2022.” In November 2022, a second NAP was published.

Further Information is available in the NAP, and on this website: Revision of the National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights | Responsible Business Conduct (RBC) | Government.nl

Stakeholder Participation

See details in the process section.

Transparency

See details in the process section.

National Baseline Assessment (NBA)

Published in August 2020 and available here. The government’s official response to the NBA is available here.
Commissioned and funded by the State (Ministry of Foreign Affairs) to provide recommendations for a 2nd BHR NAP, which was published in November 2022 and is available here.
Conducted by the National Human Rights Institution (College voor de Rechten van de Mens), with support from the Utrecht Centre for Accountability and Liability Law (UCALL) and the DIHR.
Follows its own methodology based on desktop research, stakeholder interviews, expert interviews, and drew from empirical and desktop research done by other agencies in the context of the larger revision of the government’s CSR policy. Contains recommendations.

The NBA contained a section on Pillar I considering the Dutch commitments and activities in foreign policy relating to the UNGPs. This section analysed Dutch State activities in relation to business conflict-affected areas, international trade and investment treaties, and diplomatic efforts to develop EU-level due diligence regulations and in drafting a binding treaty on BHR at the UNWG. The NBA considered gaps in the implementation of remedies for cross-border cases under Pillar III, such as complexity, cost and availability. Pillar II was not a component of the Dutch NBA.

The Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation published an official Cabinet response to the House of Representative on the NBA conducted by Netherlands Institute for Human Rights. The response outlined whether the government agreed or disagreed with particular findings, and detailed how the NBA findings would be incorporated into the new NAP (both on process and content).

Follow-up, monitoring, reporting and review

The NAP states [page 76, Monitoring and reporting]:

“The NAP outlined 33 action points to be implemented between 2022 and 2026. Progress will be monitored by the interministerial working group involved in the review of the NAP. The working group will meet as often as necessary to share results and findings.

The working group will consider the progress made on the action points for each theme. It will present an annual progress report to the House of Representatives. If warranted by the results, this may also include additional or more stringent action points.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is responsible for convening the working group and drafting the report. The ministries and implementing organisations tasked with carrying out the various NAP action points are responsible for delivering the results and sharing relevant findings with each other.

Every two years the draft progress report will be shared with a focus group comprised of representatives of the business community, civil society organisations and experts.

The progress report will be based on the complete list of action points and will provide an overview and concise explanation of the progress made on each pillar and on the themes within each pillar. The report on the results of the programme ‘Together Against Human Trafficking’76 may be used as a source of inspiration.”

Stakeholders views and analysis on the NAP

The second NAP has not generated any stakeholder views known at this moment.

Additional resources

Government of the Netherlands: Revision of the National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights: November 8, 2022.

Government of the Netherlands: National Action Plan Business and Human Rights: November 8, 2022.

Explore NAP by Issue

Children’s rights

Pillar I

Development cooperation

Sustainable trade with and investment in developing countries

“The interests and specific circumstances of developing countries must be taken into account when drafting national, European and international agreements aimed at improving the sustainability of trade and investments. Examples include developing standards on deforestation and the climate, the circular economy, land use rights, labour, foreign trade and investments and RBC. The cornerstone of this is to determine the development impact of efforts to make trade and investment more sustainable, especially the impact on vulnerable groups such as indigenous peoples, small-scale producers, workers and agricultural labourers, with a particular focus on women and young people.

Developing countries receive several forms of support. … efforts are made to increase the sustainability of international value chains by working jointly with businesses, civil society organisations and other levels of government on improved procurement practices and new revenue models with a focus on work, a living wage and income, land rights and land use and the elimination of child labour.” p. 46

Pillar II

RBC support office

…

• Offering and providing risk-specific knowledge and expertise, for example about major RBC risks such as … combating child labour …” p. 59

ACTION POINTS PILLAR 1	Aim	Responsible party	Timeline
Doing business in conflict areas and fragile states
Include the UNGPs and conflict sensitivity in the Multiannual Country Strategies (MACS) of embassies in fragile states, through dialogue between embassies, implementing organisations, the business community, and with local stakeholder involvement	Further improve integration of conflict sensitivity into foreign policy”	BZ	From 2022
Develop conflict sensitivity guidelines for the Dutch business community in collaboration with businesses, NGOs and implementing organisations, and distribute them via the RBC support office	Inform businesses on conflict sensitivity	BZ in collaboration with implementing partners and appropriate businesses in the Netherlands and abroad.	From 2022

ACTION POINTS PILLAR 1	Aim	Responsible party	Timeline
Central Government procurement
Measure impact of SPP at all government levels.	SPP impact monitor	National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), commissioned by I&W, on behalf of other SPP ministries	Biennial monitor

ACTION POINTS PILLAR 1	Aim	Responsible party	Timeline
Protect human rights defenders
Draft a plan of action to initiate a dialogue between embassies, the Dutch business community and human rights defenders to better identify environmental, social and security risks (early warning) and to take early action on them (early action).	Work with human rights defenders to integrate protection programmes and the prevention of environmental, social and security risks into embassies’ Multiannual Country Strategies (MACS).	BZ	From 2022

ACTION POINTS PILLAR 1	Aim	Responsible party	Timeline
Foreign trade and investment
Strive to ensure that negotiations maintain the generous character of a new Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP) and strengthen the GSP provisions with a social, labour and climate focus.	Integrate appropriate international business and human rights frameworks into the GSP agreement.	BZ	Up to end of 2023
Strive for ambitious commitments and robust compliance with agreements on trade and human rights, working conditions and the environment during negotiations on new and existing EU trade agreements.	Integrate relevant international business and human rights frameworks into the EU’s trade policy strategy	BZ	Begin 2022 to end of negotiations

ACTION POINTS PILLAR 1	Aim	Responsible party	Timeline
Combating Abuse of Migrant Workers
Implement report by Migrant Worker Protection Task Force.	Prevent abuse of migrant workers.	SZW (coordinating ministry); Interministerial Project Team on Migrant Workers leads and monitor	Annual report on EU labour migration to House of Representatives, reporting on progress on the various recommendations, each with its own timeline
Modernise article 273f of the Criminal Code.	Improve prosecution of perpetrators.	J&V (coordinating ministry for whole of article 273f); SZW responsible for tackling labour exploitation	The House of Representatives will be informed in the summer of 2022