have a broad mandate based on universal human rights standards; be autonomous and independent from government;
have a pluralistic structure and operate in a pluralistic manner; have adequate resources; and
have adequate powers of investigation.
NHRIs are brought together under the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI). The 2010 GANHRI Conference focused specifically on business and human rights, and resulted in the adoption of the Edinburgh Declaration. This considers ways that NHRIs can engage with business and human rights issues, including through:
Promotion, education and research to ensure greater protection against business-related human rights abuses, increased accountability, and access to justice, including through the convening of stakeholders;
Monitoring and documenting violations of human rights by businesses, reviewing adequacy of national approaches;
Handling complaints by victims of corporate related human rights abuses (where they have a mandate to do so);
Mediating between different stakeholders and supporting victims seek remedy.
The 2024 GANHRI conference focused on business and human rights, and based on the NHRIs and the evolved business and human rights landscape, adopted a Statement updating the ways that NHRIs can work with business and human rights, based on their experiences and evolutions in the regulatory landscape. Building from a 2023 GANHRI Business and Human Rights Working Group Survey which identifies how NHRIs engage on the topics, it specifically highlights how NHRIs can work with business and human rights in relation to:
Environment and climate change
Online civic space and digital technologies
Smart mix of policy and regulatory measures
Cooperation
Read more
The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) recognise the important role of NHRIs under each of its three pillars – protect, respect and remedy. For example, Commentary to UNGP 3 states that: “National human rights institutions that comply with the Paris Principles have an important role to play in helping States identify whether relevant laws are aligned with their human rights obligations and are being effectively enforced, and in providing guidance on human rights also to business enterprises and other non-State actors.”
The role of NHRIs has been highlighted by a range of international organisations. The UN General Assembly’s resolution in December 2023 underscores the importance of effective, independent, and pluralistic NHRIs, recognising their role in collaborating with governments to ensure full respect for human rights at the national level. This acknowledgment is not just a testament to the NHRIs’ authority but also a call to action for NHRIs to address the multifaceted challenges posed by business operations on human rights. The UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights reported to the UN General Assembly in 2021 on the role of national human rights institutions in facilitating access to remedy for business-related human rights abuses. The UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights recognised the role of NHRIs in their General comment No. 24 (2017) on State obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the context of business activities. This has been echoed by the Council of Europe too.
A GANHRI Working Group on Business and Human Rights was established in 2009. The purpose of the GANHRI Working Group is to build capacity of, and strengthen advocacy by, NHRIs in the area of business and human rights. In 2023, the Working Group published a Comprehensive Review of how NHRIs work with business and human rights. In addition, there exist regional working groups of NHRIs in Europe and in the Americas. The European Network of NHRIs (ENNHRI)’s Working Group has engaged extensively with the recent business and human rights policy and regulatory developments around mandatory human rights due diligence, sustainability reporting, trade bans, and on the legally binding instrument on business and human rights. This has included through statements, submissions, guidance, capacity building, and briefings for policy makers. The Network of African NHRIs (NANHRI) and the Asia Pacific Forum of NHRIs, while not having constituted formal working groups, have also made business and human rights a thematic priority and supported members work on the topic.
Many NHRIs worldwide are playing a critical role in the development of National Actions plans on business and human rights. This includes undertaking national baseline assessment on business and human rights (e.g., Argentina, Colombia, Georgia, Germany, Kenya, the Netherlands, Tanzania, and Zambia), assessments of business respect for human rights (e.g., Colombia, Denmark), forming part of multi-stakeholder groups leading/ steering NAP development processes (e.g., Luxembourg), providing input on drafts (e.g., Pakistan), facilitating stakeholder engagement with the development process (e.g., Argentina), training state institutions leading the NAP processes (e.g., Argentina and Ghana), forming part of multi-stakeholder groups leading implementation (e.g., Colombia and Kenya), and evaluating NAP implementation (e.g., France).
Another important function carried out by NHRIs in the context of business and human rights is the provision of non-judicial grievance mechanisms. The UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution in 2016 calling for improved accountability and access to remedy in the context of business and human rights abuse, while recognising the important role of NHRIs in achieving this objective. This was echoed in the UN General Assembly’s resolution in December 2023. Some NHRIs have a mandate to received complaints from victims of business-related human rights abuses. Some NHRIs such as the National Human Rights Commission of Indonesia (Komnas HAM), Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines, the South African Human Rights Commission or the Office of the Public Defender in Peru (Defensoría del Pueblo) have interpreted their mandates to investigate business-related human rights abuse allegations. In carrying out this function, NHRIs may assume the role of an impartial mediator to facilitate dialogue between the parties. With respect to remediation, some NHRIs, such as the National Human Rights Commission in Nigeria, have the power to make legally binding resolutions at the conclusion of a dispute. Alternatively, NHRIs may file recommendations to governments and/or state bodies to address human rights violations and monitor to prevent any future instances. The Danish Institute of Human Rights (DIHR) has published a 2-part report on the role of national human rights institutions in facilitating access to effective remedy in the context of business and human rights. The First part of the report presents an analysis of the role and practice of NHRIs regarding access to remedy in BHR. The Second part of the report provides a comparative analysis of four NHRI case studies from the African region.
NHRIs may also work with, or provide guidance on human rights for businesses. Examples of NHRIs working with business include the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC)’s Guide for managers and boards. The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has created tools and an on-line hub for businesses, as has the New Zealand Human Rights Commission (NZHRC), as well as the Danish Institute for Human Rights (DIHR), which in 2024 published a tool analysing different methodologies for assessing business respect for human rights.
Here you can find examples from 14 national human rights institutions from Africa, Latin America, Asia Pacific and Europe on their work with business and human rights.
National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) are crucial elements of the good governance and institutional accountability architecture that is necessary to achieve the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the aspirations of Agenda 2063. The existence of independent national human rights institutions compliant with the Paris Principles is the indicator for Target 16a. Elaborating on the ways NHRIs can contribute to a human rights-based approach to the 2030 Agenda, the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) adopted the Mérida Declaration in 2015. The Declaration emphasises that “NHRIs in all regions are already addressing issues of crucial importance to the [2030] Agenda in their regular work” and reaffirms the mutually reinforcing nature of SDGs and human rights. The Declaration also made specific references to gender, encouraging “NHRIs in particular to address all forms of exclusion, poverty and to prioritise and mainstream the human rights of women and girls and gender equality in their work.”
16) Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
No references.
What National Action Plans say on National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs)/ Ombudspersons
Belgium (2017 - open)
The Action Plan does not give any concrete actions relating to NHRIs. In the introduction, the NAP states that:
“It should be noted that Belgium does not yet have a national human rights mechanism (in casu, a national institute for human rights) based on the Paris Principles. In accordance with our international commitments, and the federal government agreement of 9 October 2014, the competent authorities will continue to work towards the development of such a national human rights mechanism by the end of the government legislature.”
Actions of the National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights (page 26)
Regarding the situation in Chile, there are national, international and global mechanisms that execute, supervise and evaluate the country’s compliance with human rights. Some of these documents provide recommendations in the field of human rights and business at a local level. Such is the case of reports concerning the United Nations mechanisms to protect human rights; reports prepared by the INDH about monitoring missions; annual reports prepared by the INDH; a map showing environmental conflicts prepared by the INDH. Other documents containing related matters at a local level are the Baseline of Business and Human Rights; the Country Guide of Business and Human Rights and the reports of dialogues held in the context of the Action Plan.
Pillar 1: The State Duty to Protect Human Rights
Strand 1: Training in the Field of Business and Human Rights
Action Point 1.7 (page 33)
The National Human Rights Institute will:
Train staff working in regions about business, human rights and sustainable development, in line with the 2030 Agenda.
Update the booklet of emerging issues and the business and human rights card.
Introduce the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in the recommendations they submit to the State about cases documented by this institution.
These recommendations, and those coming from the international human rights system will be considered in training sessions given to public officers about companies and human rights.
Strand 2: Dialogue
Action Point 2.2 (page 34)
The National Institute for Human Rights will coordinate dialogues about business and human rights at a regional level through local workshops disseminating the Action Plan, addressing important business and human rights issues at a local level, and collecting recommendations to be applied locally.
Strand 5: Public Procurement
Action Point 5.3 (page 43)
The INDH will adopt a human rights and environmental policy for the purchase of goods and services.
Pillar 3: Access to Redress Mechanisms
Strand 2: State-Based Non-Judicial Mechanisms
Action 2.1 (pages 59-60)
The National Contact Point for OECD Guidelines (NCP) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will adopt a series of measures to strengthen its duties. For this, it will:
o Renew and strengthen the Mirror Committee, a body composed by representatives from the business community, unions, NGOs, and academia -with the support of the INDH. The Committee’s main role is advising the NCP and supporting his/her work, including the dissemination and treatment of the cases he/she receives. This role will be strengthened by renewing the Committee to enhance the promotion of a Responsible Corporate Behaviour among national stakeholders
Publication and dissemination of existing documents, education and awareness-raising [page 10]
“Current state of play:
Every year, the Government publishes a Report on the State of Human Rights and numerous other reports and documents analysing respect for human rights in the Czech Republic. Reports in the same vein are also published by other institutions, including the Ombudsman.”
Pillar III [page 41]
“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).”
“Other examples of non-judicial institutions which contribute to remedy for victims of business-related human rights abuses, include Employment Tribunals, national Ombudsman, and Consumer tribunal.”
Appendix 1, GP 7
Initiatives taken or planned as a dedicated measure to implement the UNGPs (after the UN ratification of the Guiding Principles) [page 30]
“The Danish Institute of Human Rights will launch a Business Guide to Human Rights in December 2013. The Guide to Human Rights is a free website for companies to identify, assess and address their human rights impacts around the world. It provides country- and sector-specific information about the human rights impacts of businesses, alongside concrete recommendations for preventing and mitigating adverse impacts, as well as maximising positive ones. The Guide to Human Rights emphasises multi-stakeholder engagement and dialogue, and seeks to build the capacity of local Portal partners on human rights and business.”
The Finnish NAP makes no substantive reference to National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) or Ombudspersons. (Finland has both an NHRI and Ombuds offices)
Given the importance the French Government places on [human rights], it formally requested an opinion from the National Consultative Commission on Human Rights (CNCDH) on 21 February 2013 in order to prepare its action plan for the implementation of the United Nations Guiding Principles.
This opinion, adopted at a plenary assembly of the CNCDH on 24 October 2013, included a wide range of recommendations for implementing the guiding principles at a high level. The CNCDH also suggested actions for pillars 1 (the State’s obligation to protect against human rights abuses by third parties, including businesses) and 3 (victims’ right to effective remedy). These recommendations can be viewed at the following address: http://www.cncdh.fr/fr/publications/entreprises-et-droits-de-lhomme (in French). Those that have not already been implemented are included in this action plan.
The CNCDH’s proposals were carefully examined by an inter-ministerial working group run by the CSR Ambassador (members included representatives from the French Ministry for Foreign Affairs and International Development, Ministry for the Economy, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Labour, Ministry of Justice and Ministry of the Environment). This group distinguished between the recommendations it considered had already been largely implemented by the Government and could be reinforced, those that could form the basis of further proposals for action, and those that should be examined or applied in a more relevant context. This enabled them to establish an overview and develop appropriate proposals for action …
… The French Action Plan for the Implementation of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and actions implemented will be monitored and evaluated by the CNCDH, acting as an independent administrative authority, in line with the recommendation issued by the United Nations working group on business and human rights. The CNCDH will evaluate the policy implemented, issuing regular reports.
I- The State’s Obligation to Protect Human Rights
The European Framework
8. Trade and Investment Agreements [page 19]
In its 2013 opinion, the CNCDH underlined that “the need for coherence should guide France’s foreign policy” and recommended that, in accordance with Guiding Principle no.10, “the Government support and promote the aforementioned instruments within multilateral institutions dealing with economic, commercial and financial issues, including those that are binding, that are designed to ensure that businesses respect human rights.” …
The National Framework
13. The Role of Public Agencies [page 27]
In a 2013 opinion, the CNCDH recommended that the State adopt “measures designed to enable COFACE and its clients to introduce a due diligence process with regards to human rights”. It emphasized that “COFACE’s policies and procedures regarding due diligence should be disclosed, along with the projects they insure” and that “it would also be desirable for the information and assessment process adopted with regard to the impact on human rights of operations insured by COFACE to also fall within the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and/or the Ministry of the Economy and Finance, the departments of which are able to provide an analysis for each country with regards to respecting human rights, based notably on the ‘information for travellers’ that they produce.” Finally, it stated that “the annual report on the activities of COFACE submitted by France to the European Commission (in accordance with Regulation (EU) 1233/2011) should be discussed at the National Assembly and/or at the Senate and should be the subject of consultations with civil society.”
In addition, the CNCDH recommended that “representatives of civil society and users of those services that are likely to be the subject of public-private partnerships (PPPs) be given a more central role as part of an approach designed to protect and promote the most vulnerable of populations. Indeed, in order for PPPs to be useful for development purposes, it is essential that all stakeholders, including the State, community representatives and users, be kept informed and consulted at all stages of the PPP creation process.” It added that, “in accordance with Guiding Principles nos. 4 and 6, the French State should, by means of its development aid network (the AFD, PROPARCO, the Ministry of the Economy and Finance, the ADETEF, etc.), fulfil its obligation to protect by imposing a series of specifications that include exhaustive impact studies regarding human rights.”
II- Businesses’ Responsibility to Respect Human Rights
5. Employee Representatives [page 43]
In its 2013 opinion, the CNCDH recommended that “employee and union representatives be kept informed and consulted and be able to express their opinions when it comes to producing a company’s management report”, as this would “improve the credibility of such reports”. It added that each company should “be obliged to indicate whether there is in fact any form of union or employee representation within each of its entities and subsidiaries.”…
… In 2013, the CNCDH recommended “including stakeholders outside of the company in the term ‘interested parties’ used in Article L.238-1 of the Commercial Code so as to enable such persons to ask the judge hearing applications for interim relief to order the company to provide any information it might not have provided in its ‘sustainable development’ report.”…
III- Access to Remedy
Introduction [page 46]
In its 2013 opinion, the CNCDH made the following recommendations:
“In order to bring French law into line with Guiding Principle 26, the CNCDH recommends allowing parent companies to actually be held responsible for acts committed by their foreign subsidiaries.
The CNCDH recommends that consideration be given to the possibility of extending the exception to the principle of legal independence of companies, which is currently limited to environmental issues, to the field of human rights.
Vicarious liability is an example of something that could be used in civil law to hold the parent company responsible in the event of any violation of human rights committed by its subsidiaries.
Drawing inspiration from the duty to protect and remedy in the environmental sphere, the CNCDH recommends that a duty of vigilance on the part of the parent company with regards to its subsidiaries be legally imposed with the aim of preventing any violations of human rights that might occur over the course of its activities.
It should also be possible to hold a contracting party responsible for acts committed by its subcontractors, where it is proven that the relationship with the commercial partner is likely to influence them to operate in a way that is more human rights-friendly.
With regards to criminal matters, the CNCDH recommends that the competent authorities consider the issue of extending the extraterritorial jurisdiction of French criminal courts. French courts should be able to consider themselves competent with regards to certain offences committed abroad by French companies without being subject to the dual criminality requirement.
With regards to civil matters, the CNCDH recommends that the government extend the notion of extraterritoriality to the parent company in the case of violations of human rights committed by a foreign subsidiary.
The CNCDH believes it would be desirable for subsidiary jurisdiction based on the denial of justice to be granted in civil matters in the event that the State competent for recognising detrimental acts on the part of the subsidiary is deemed unable or does not want to initiate and see through to their conclusion legal proceedings.
The CNCDH recommends that France extend this consideration of the possibility of attributing greater responsibility in civil and criminal matters to businesses for their international activity in the framework of the discussions currently under way in the European Union.”
1. Judicial Mechanisms – At the National Level
1.4 Proceedings
Collective Actions [page 51]
In its opinion dated 24 October 2013, the CNCDH recommended “extending collective action, to matters relating to the environment and health in particular. It is also essential that any French or foreign individual or legal entity residing in France or abroad be able to get involved in any collective action initiated against a French company.”…
1.5 The Denial of Justice [page 52]
… In its 2013 opinion, the CNCDH stated that “it would be desirable for subsidiary jurisdiction based on the denial of justice to be granted in civil matters in the event that the State competent for recognising detrimental acts on the part of the subsidiary is deemed unable or does not want to initiate and see through to their conclusion legal proceedings.”
2. Non-Judicial Mechanisms – At the International Level
2.1 The OECD National Contact Point (NCP) [page 54]
… The French NCP has also made it easier to call on external technical experts at any time, as seen during the Rana Plaza hearings and meetings with the CNCDH …
At the National Level
2.5 The Defender of Rights [page 58]
The Defender of Rights, whose legal authority has been enshrined in the Constitution, was created in 2011. This independent administrative entity has jurisdiction to deal with subjects in four specific areas.
Any individual or legal entity can call on the Defender of Rights when they consider that they have been discriminated against or when they observe public or private representatives of law and order (police officers, customs officers, security guards, etc.) engaging in improper conduct.
The Defender of Rights can also be called on to address difficulties in dealing with public services (the Family Allowances Fund or CAF, the national employment agency or Pôle emploi, retirement funds, etc.).
Lastly, the Defender of Rights can be called on whenever someone considers that a child’s rights are not being respected.
Complaints can be lodged by way of an online form, a letter, or through one of the Defender’s deputies.
This Defender of Rights replaces four previous entities: the Mediator of the Republic, the Defender of Children, the High Authority in the Fight against Discrimination and for Equality (HALDE), and the National Commission on Security Ethics (CNDS).
Given the Defender of Rights’ jurisdiction over discrimination-related matters, he/she plays a role in dealing with cases and mediation proceedings concerning CSR.
There is no mention of National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs)/ Ombudspersons in the Business and Human Rights Chapter of the Georgian Human Rights NAP.
1. The process of drawing up the Action Plan [page 6-7]
“At the end of 2014 a steering group was appointed. Besides representatives of the six government ministries listed above, it included … two advisory members, the German Institute for Human Rights and econsense. …
In May 2015, the German Institute for Human Rights presented a National Baseline Assessment, a review of the current situation based on interviews with experts from the various groups of participants in the process. This assessment was discussed with interested members of the public at a second plenary conference, conducted by the Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs and the Federal Foreign Office in May 2015.”
1.1 Basic rules of economic policy
Protection within states’ own territory – challenges within Germany [page 14]
“Germany has ratified most international human rights instruments without reservation and possesses, moreover, an independent national institution dedicated to human rights, the German Institute for Human Rights (DIMR). Among the core tasks of the DIMR are policy consultancy, research, the dissemination of information on human rights issues, education on human rights, and dialogue and cooperation with national and international organisations.”
Development policy [page 19]
The current situation
“Seeking to identify practical approaches to development which will boost corporate responsibility for human rights, the Institute for Development and Peace (INEF) has implemented, on behalf of the Economic Cooperation and Development Ministry, a research programme entitled “Human Rights, Corporate Responsibility and Sustainable Development”. A research project sponsored by the same ministry at the German Institute for Human Rights, moreover, supports national human rights institutions in partner countries in the field of human rights and business.”
Section 2: Current legislative and Regulatory Framework
Equality [page 14]
“The Government is committed to promoting equality in all aspects of Irish society. The statutory-based Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission works towards the elimination of discrimination and the promotion of equal opportunities. It is tasked with providing information and advice to persons who consider themselves discriminated against on any of the nine grounds in employment or non-employment situations.”
IV. Italian ongoing activities and future commitments
a) Foundational Principles
“Italy intends to continue to ensure the highest level of protection of human rights from a legislative and operational perspective. To this end it is necessary:
– in agreement with parliamentary authorities, support the process for establishing an independent national human rights institution in accordance with the Paris Principles of 1993”
ANNEX 1 – Accountability Grid and Assessment Tools for the Implementation of the NAP
“58. The provision of mechanisms for coordination and cooperation with many ombudsmen active at local and national level, in order to raise their awareness in the activities of protection and advocacy against human rights abuses by businesses;” (p. 69)
ANNEX 2 – Summary of the results of the assessment concerning the implementation of the first PAN-BHR
“In structural terms, two main challenges have been the creation of an NHRI and a national network on BHR, also to favour the institutionalization of ad hoc spaces for consultation, comparison and participation.” (p. 71)
iii. Provide training and support to the judicial, administrative and oversight organs on business obligations in respect of human rights. Priority will be given to the following institutions:
[…]
Constitutional bodies including the KNCHR
[…]
CHAPTER FOUR: IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING [page 22]
To ensure that the measures proposed in this NAP are implemented, there shall be a NAP Steering Committee overseen by the Department of Justice and the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights. The Implementing Committee will consist of representatives from the following institutions:
6. Kenya National Commission on Human Rights
ANNEX 1: SUMMARY OF POLICY ACTIONS
Strategic Objective
Policy Actions
Key Actors
Strategic Objective 1: Enhance existing policy, legal, regulatory and administrative framework for ensuring respect of human rights by business through legal review and development of specific guidance for business
Ensure continuous training for government agencies’ workers involved in the promotion and regulation of businesses on the State’s human rights obligations and the nexus to their various mandates and functions
KSG, OAG&DOJ, KNCHR, KEPSA, KAM
Strengthen leverage in using public procurement to promote human rights
PPOA, KNCHR, OAG&DOJ
Strategic objective 2: Enhance understanding of the obligation of business to respect human rights
Develop and disseminate guidance for businesses on their duty to respect human rights and the operationalisation of this duty in the Kenyan context, including the implications of their operations.
OAG&DOJ, KNCHR, KAM, KEPSA, Global Compact
Enforce compliance with human rights standards by State owned enterprises and other businesses that receive export credit and state support, including by providing access to a remedy for human rights violations.
State Corporations Advisory Committee, KNCHR
Strategic Objective 3: Enhance access to justice for victims of business-related human rights abuses
Provide training and support to the judicial, administrative and oversight organs on business obligations in respect of human rights.
Judiciary, JTI, KNCHR
Improving access to information on available judicial and non-judicial mechanisms involved in the resolution of business-related abuses as a measure to promote access to justice.
Judiciary, CAJ, KNCHR, KAM, KEPSA, Kenya Chamber of Commerce
Assist community based organisations working on human rights issues to build their technical capacity to effectively monitor human rights impacts by business.
CHAPTER THREE: POLICY ACTIONS 3.3 Access to Remedy
Access to remedy within the context of the NAPBHR is aligned with Liberia National Development Plan.
The following include the policy actions that the Government of Liberia intends to undertake:
c) Access to Remedy
viii. Businesses shall be obligated to have an Ombudsman System for the monitoring and 33 reporting of the activities of the grievance mechanism. This shall be established in line with the Eight Effectiveness Criteria of the UNGPs and in consultation with the target group.
ix. A system shall also be put in place for the monitoring and reporting of the activities of the Ombudsman System to identify issues and areas that require administrative, policy, or legislative intervention. xiv. Strengthening of the INCHR to discharge its quasi-judicial responsibilities in addressing human rights violations by businesses and rendering effective remedy.
Part II: Specific objectives of the National Action Plan 2020-2022
1. The state duty to protect human rights
(…)
1.5. Strengthening the coherence of human rights policies through cross-references in the texts and on the respective websites of the different National Action Plans (NAPs) with a human rights connotation
Context
In implementing its international human rights commitments, and in particular when submitting implementation reports to the United Nations treaty bodies, Luxembourg is regularly called upon to formulate sectoral national action plans. Cross-referencing between the NAP “Business and Human Rights” [PAN « Entreprises et droits de l’Homme »] and the other sectoral NAPs should contribute to greater policy coherence. The publication of these different NAPs on the internet can contribute to a better understanding of the issues at stake in public opinion.
Objectively verifiable indicators
– National Baseline Assessment (NBA) [Etude de base]: Identification of other NAPs
– Identification of relevant web pages on the guichet.lu website
– Identification of overlapping areas
Verification sources
× Vulnerable peoples
× NAP texts
× Texts in guichet.lu (website)
Expected results
× Cross-referencing
× Improved policy coherence
Implementation timeline
2020
Means of implementation
× Competent ministries
× Inter-ministerial committee on Human Rights [Comité interministériel des droits de l’Homme], MAEE (Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs)
× CET (Centre pour l’égalité de traitement)
× ORK (Luxembourg’s Ombudsman) [Ombuds Comité fir d’Rechter vum Kand]
× Specialised NGOs
The 2020-22 NAP states the second edition of the National Action Plan complements the first NAP. Additional information about the first NAP can be found here.
[SUHAKAM is acknowledged for the role in developing the NAP and in its work broadly on human rights in Malaysia, and that it mentioned as a Collaborative Partner in a range of actions, but that the actions listed here are those which address SUHAKAM directly.]
THEMATIC PRIORITY 1: GOVERNANCE
UNGP PILLAR 1
FOUNDATIONAL
No.: G1.5
Action: Establish an Office of the Ombudsman Malaysia
Output Indicator(s):
The establishment of an Office of the Ombudsman Malaysia through the enactment and mandate of an Ombudsman Act, which covers four main elements:
Maladministration
Misconduct amongst Enforcement Agencies
Whistblower [sic] protection
Freedom of information
Collaborative Partner(s): BHEUU
No.: G1.6
Action: Amend the SUHAKAM Act to enhance the Commission’s mandate and include provisions to ensure sufficient human and
technical resources.
Output Indicator(s):
SUHAKAM is empowered by binding investigatory, adjudicative and mediation authority and is provided sufficient resources to address inquiries and cases related to BHR within a stipulated timeframe.
Inclusion of permanent seats for vulnerable groups that contributes to strengthening the role of the Commission.
Collaborative Partner(s): BHEUU; SUHAKAM
THEMATIC PRIORITY 3: ENVIRONMENT
UNGP PILLLAR 1
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
No.: E1.21
Action: Conduct a feasibility study on the ratification of the Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169) of the ILO.
Output indicators:
Evidence, insights and recommendations are developed that define entry points towards the ratification Convention.
Policy reforms and institutional measures are undertaken in alignment with SUHAKAM’s National Inquiry into the Land Rights of Indigenous Peoples in Malaysia (2013) report.
Indigenous representatives are formally included in the policy process at both federal and state levels.
Collaborative partner(s): KKDW; SUHAKAM; related State agencies; IGOs; CSOs; EHRDs
No.: E1.26
Action: Ensure thorough investigations are conducted where reprisals against human rights defenders are found. Ensure thorough investigations are conducted where reprisals against human rights defenders are found.
Output Indicator(s):
Coordination meetings are held between SUHAKAM, civil society, and enforcement agencies on protection mechanisms.
Number of investigation reports completed and submitted to the relevant authorities.
CHAPTER FOUR – Actions to provide remedy for human rights violations, enhance the legal framework for compensation, and improve their effectiveness
6. Strengthen the complaints and dispute resolution activities of the National Human Rights Commission.
Actions and measures to be implemented:
Strengthen the capacity of the National Human Rights Commission to receive and resolve complaints of human rights violations related to business activities.
Time frame: 2023-2027
Criteria: An assessment of the performance of the Law on National Human Rights Commission will be made and appropriate conclusions will be drawn on the need for amendments and additions. Capacity-building measures for the handling of complaints will be implemented.
Implementing organisations: NHRCM [National Human Rights Committee of Mongolia]
Jointly implementing organisations: MoJHA [Ministry of Justice and Home Affairs], Relevant ministries and organisations.
The Nigeria NAP provides a list of existing constitutional obligations, domestic legislation, internation obligations, and police and administrative steps. This breakdown only looks at the list of challenges and the implementation of the 3 pillars of the UNGPs.
PILLAR 3 – ACCESS TO REMEDY B. STATE-BASED NON-JUDICIAL MECHANISM “These consist of State Agencies which though non judicial, exercise statutory powers and regulatory functions pertaining to Business and Human Rights. They have the potential of addressing the greatest number of human rights violations by businesses because they exercise statutory powers and regulatory functions. They include the following: i. National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) … In order to improve the effectiveness of State Based non-judicial mechanism, the following plan of action will be implemented: …
Strengthening of the National Human Rights Commission to discharge its quasi-judicial responsibilities in addressing human rights violations by businesses; and rendering of effective remedy.” (p.164-165)
Norway has a number of well-functioning institutions such as the Labour Inspection Authority, the Ombudsman for Children, the Consumer Ombudsman, the Equality and Anti-discrimination Ombudsman, the Norwegian Environment Agency and the Parliamentary Ombudsman for the Public Administration. There are also complaints mechanisms in connection with the rights of employees, children, women and men. For example, on the basis of the Environmental Information Act, the Appeals Board for Environmental Information handles appeals concerning rejected requests from private and public agencies for access to environmental information. The National Contact Point provides information on the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the UN Guiding Principles. The Contact Point also deals with individual cases independently of the government. In line with the Guidelines, the parties to cases that come before the Contact Point are expected to participate in good faith during the procedure.
CHAPTER 1: National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights
1.4 | Coherence between the National Action Plan, Other Government Policies, and Pakistan’s International Commitments (page 9)
‘[…]The Action Plan calls for a rights-based approach to development planning, strengthening of the National Human Rights Institutes (NHRI), […]’
CHAPTER 2: Protect, Respect, Remedy Framework
Pillar I: State Duty to Protect Human Rights (page 15)
‘The NHRIs in Pakistan have an evolving role and special powers to protect human rights and improve Pakistan’s reporting standards internationally. In addition to the National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR), other NHRIs include the National Commission on Child Welfare and Development (NCCWD), the National Commission on the Rights of the Child (NCRC), and the National Commission on the Status of Women (NCSW). Additionally, the process is underway for the establishment of Pakistan’s National Commission on Minorities (NCM).’
CHAPTER 3: National Action Plan Priority Areas and Proposed Actions
3.1 | General Proposed Actions
Federal (page 16)
‘2. Review framework, engage with, and build the capacity of, National Human Rights Institutions to promote and sustain effective support to the implementation and oversight of the protection, respect, and remediation of human rights in the context of business activity.
Performance indicator(s): (i) Review report; (ii) Number of capacity-building activities conducted with NHRIs in Pakistan
This information is also covered under Appendix 1: Implementation Plan, Proposed Action 2 designating the Ministry of Human Rights; National Commission for Human Rights; National Commission for Child Welfare and Development; National Commission on the Status of Women; National Commission on the Rights of the Child as Leading Entities, and designating the Provincial Human Rights Departments and the Provincial Labour Departments as Additional Entities (page 42).
3.2. NAP Priority Areas
3.2.2 | Anti-Discrimination, Equal Opportunity, and Inclusion
Proposed Actions
Provincial (page 23)
‘25. Increase awareness about harassment at the workplace and gender-based discrimination, and existing reporting and remedial mechanisms, such as the Provincial Ombudsperson.
Performance indicator(s): (i) Number of awareness-raising activities
This information is also covered under Appendix 1: Implementation Plan, Proposed Action 25 designating the Provincial Women Development Departments and the Provincial Commissions on the Status of Women as Leading Entities, and designating Media, the Business Community, CSOs, NGOs & INGOs, the Information, Science and Technology Department, the Training, Management and Research Wing of the SGA&CD Department, the Provincial Public Service Commissions, the Provincial Judicial Academies, the Provincial Industries Departments, the Provincial Commerce Departments, the Provincial Labour Departments and the Provincial Information Departments as Additional Entities (page 53).
3.2.8 Access to Remedy
Proposed Actions
Federal and Provincial (page 37)
‘68. Ensure the effective functioning of public grievance redressal mechanisms such as the Ombudsperson Offices and enhance their capacity to resolve complaints.
Performance indicator(s): (i) Development of Capacity-building Initiatives; and (ii) Number of Capacity-building Trainings
UN Guiding Principle(s): 1, 3, 27
Relevant SDG(s): Goal 5 – Gender Equality; Goal 8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth; Goal 10 – Reduced Inequalities’
This information is also covered under Appendix 1: Implementation Plan, Proposed Action 68 designating the Federal and Provincial Ombudsperson against Harassment of Women at the Workplace; Ministry of Human Rights as Leading Entities, and designating the Provincial Human Rights Departments; National Commission of Human Rights; Services and General Administration Department; Legal experts as Additional Entities (page 71).
ANNEX II: Actions Already Undertaken by Pakistan
B | Measures Relevant to NAP Priority Areas
ii. Anti-Discrimination, Equal Opportunity, and Inclusion
Gender-Based Discrimination (page 74)
‘The Protection against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act 2010 was passed to ensure the safety of women at the workplace. The Act requires each organization to ensure the creation of an inquiry committee to investigate and decide upon cases of harassment at the workplace. The power to investigate and decide upon cases of harassment also rests with the Federal and Provincial Ombudspersons for Harassment.’
Sindh (page 76)
‘The Sindh Protection against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act 2010 ensures that women are provided adequate protection against harassment at places of work. Every organization is under an obligation to create an inquiry committee to investigate and decide open cases of harassment at the workplace in accordance with the provisions of the Act. A Provincial ombudsperson has been authorized under the Act to investigate and decide upon cases of harassment.’
Khyber Pakthunkhwa (page 76)
‘The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Protection against Harassment of Women at Workplace Act 2018 ensures that women are provided adequate protection against harassment at places of work. Every organization is under an obligation to create an inquiry committee to investigate and decide open cases of harassment at the workplace. A Provincial ombudsperson has been authorized under the Act to investigate and decide upon cases of harassment.’
Balochistan (page 77)
‘The Balochistan Protection Against Harassment of Women at Workplace Act 2016 provides adequate protection to women against harassment at places of work. Every organization is under an obligation to create an inquiry committee to investigate and decide open cases of harassment at workplace in accordance with the provisions of the Act. A Provincial ombudsperson has been authorized under the Act to investigate and decide upon cases of harassment.’
viii. Access to remedy (page 86)
‘In addition to judicial mechanisms, quasi-judicial bodies exist to regulate competition in business, unfair labour practices and industrial disputes. These bodies include the Ombudsperson offices in all four provinces for sexual harassment at the workplace, taxation, insurance and to address any complaints faced by the public from Federal Government Departments which include State Owned Entities.’
There are a total of 97 actions with more than 150 indicators, distributed in five strategic guidelines and 13 objectives, involving 21 public entities of the Executive Power, with the support, according to their competences, of the Judicial Power, the Public Ministry, the Academy of the Magistracy, the Ombudsman’s Office, regional governments and other institutions. These actions have the State as the main responsible, but their effectiveness requires a strategic alliance with the business sector and all social actors, based on equitable participation, timely accountability, and compliance with each one’s duty. – page 7
CHAPTER III DIAGNOSIS AND BASELINE: ACTION AREAS
3.2. Conclusions of the specific issues
Judicial and extrajudicial reparation mechanisms
It is necessary to strengthen the operational and technical capacity of the PNC and explore the possibility of establishing collaboration mechanisms with the Ombudsman’s Office for the attention of specific instances, as well as to institutionalize the mediation to address social conflicts so that its function is preventive and accessible to the potentially affected population. – page 51
Table 8: NAP strategic guidelines and objectives, and alignment with the axes of the Peru Vision 2050
Strategic guideline No. 2: Design of public protection policies to prevent human rights violations in the business environment.
Objective No. 1: Promote regulatory actions to prevent human rights violations in the corporate sphere
17.
Action: Promote capacity building on GP-RBC between the Ombudsman’s Office, the National Contact Point, and other national agencies.
Background: In order to strengthen the coherence of public policies in the area of GP-RBC, it is important to generate the articulation of different public entities. In this sense, the work of the National Contact Point would be strengthened through synergies with the Ombudsman’s Office and other additional agencies, which could also strengthen the fulfillment of its functions.
Indicator: National Point of Contact, with the collaboration of MINJUSDH. – page 68
Institutions specialised in human rights protection and promotion include: the Human Rights Ombudsman, the Advocate of the Principle of Equality, coordinators for equal opportunities for women and men, the Commission for Petitions, Human Rights and Equal Opportunities, the Office of the Republic of Slovenia for National Minorities, and numerous working bodies established by the Government or operating within ministries. (pg. 8-9)
Principle 10 – Basic Orientations
To promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms and to enhance legal security, the amended Human Rights Ombudsman Act establishes the Centre for Human Rights… (pg. 34)
The Centre for Human Rights and the Ombudsman will cooperate more closely with international organisations in the fields of enforcing, promoting and developing human rights and fundamental freedoms, including in the framework of the Global Alliance for National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI), the European Network of National Human Rights Institutions (ENNHRI), the United Nations (Human Rights Council), the Council of Europe, the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and the European Union. (pg. 34)
The Council of Human Rights, the establishment of which also arises from the amended Human Rights Ombudsman Act, promotes quality cooperation in the framework of international multilateral mechanisms, its tasks include dealing with reports of the Republic of Slovenia submitted to international organisations in the sphere of human rights, and participating in the drafting of independent reports of the Human Rights Ombudsman on meeting the Republic of Slovenia’s international obligations regarding human rights. (pg. 34)
Principle 27 – Human Rights Ombudsman
According to the Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions (the Paris Principles), Slovenia’s Human Rights Ombudsman has been accredited with B-status. To provide the legal basis for A-status, the Ministry of Justice and the Human Rights Ombudsman prepared the Act Amending the Human Rights Ombudsman Act. (pg. 39)
The Council of Human Rights started its work in June 2018, and it may provide views on development policies on human rights and fundamental freedoms, and, on the initiative of the Ombudsman, address wider issues concerning the promotion, protection and monitoring of human rights and fundamental freedoms. (pg. 39)
The Act Amending the Human Rights Ombudsman Act was adopted by the National Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia in September 2017; it establishes the Centre for Human Rights. (pg. 39)
The Centre for Human Rights, which will start its work in January 2019, will provide information, education, training, analyses and reports fields of human rights and fundamental freedoms promotion and protection, as well as organising consultations related to the enforcement, promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. (pg. 39-40)
Regarding initiatives under Article 26 of the Human Rights Ombudsman Act, the Ombudsman’s broader mandate does not include initiatives in the private sector; however, the proposed amendments to the Act will enable a general consideration of issues concerning the human rights situation in the business sector. (pg. 40)
Principle 27 – Planned Measures
With the Act Amending the Human Rights Ombudsman Act, Slovenia expanded the mandate of the Human Rights Ombudsman, thus enabling an upgrade of the Ombudsman’s current scope of activities and ensuring comprehensive provision of informal human rights protection both when dealing with cases and initiatives, and in addressing systemic irregularities, while at the same time strengthening the Ombudsman’s research and educational activities. In this context, a more prominent role is foreseen for the Ombudsman in the sphere of business and human rights as well. (pg. 41)
Implementation of the National Action Plan
The implementation of the National Action Plan of the Republic of Slovenia on Business and Human Rights is monitored by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Slovenia in cooperation with other ministries and government offices; the Ministry may invite representatives of the Government, Human Rights Ombudsman, business sphere, trade unions, NGOs and academia to cooperate. (pg. 43)
… The National Human Rights Commission of Korea recommended the Korean government to establish a NAP on business and human rights in September 2016.
C. Current Status
1. Domestic Status [page 3]
Following the adoption of the ‘UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights’ in 2011, various follow-up measures are being pursued to realize the guiding principle internationally.
…
– The National Human Rights Commission of Korea also announced ’National Human Rights Policy Basic Plan Recommendation of Business and Human Rights’ on September 2016.
“In relation to human rights abuses caused by companies, if there is, or might be, a presumed irregular action by the Public Administration, any citizen can go to the Ombudsman and demand their intervention.”
Monitoring and Update
“The Monitoring Commission may invite the Ombudsman, who will have a voice but not a vote. The Commission may also appoint experts of recognized prestige who support their work with their knowledge and experience. These experts may come from the public sector, academia, business, business, trade unions and social organizations, or be professionals in the protection and defense of human rights. These experts will be able to participate in the meetings of the Monitoring Commission as advisors or be consulted on specific issues, but they will not have decision-making capacity.”
“The different ombudsmen monitor compliance with human rights. Any person who feels that they or anyone else has been treated incorrectly or unfairly by a public authority or official at a central or local government authority can lodge a complaint with the Parliamentary Ombudsmen, also known as the Ombudsmen for Justice.
The Parliamentary Ombudsmen supervise the application of laws and other statutes in public activities. According to their instructions, supervision also covers “other individuals whose employment or assignment involves the exercise of public authority, insofar as this aspect of their activities is concerned” and “officials and those employed by public enterprises, while carrying out, on behalf of such an enterprise, activities in which through the agency of the enterprise the Government exercises decisive influence”.
Certain supervisory functions are also exercised by the Chancellor of Justice, who is appointed by the Government. The duties of the Chancellor of Justice include examining complaints and settling claims for damages directed at the State.
The Office of the Equality Ombudsman is a government agency responsible for monitoring compliance with the Discrimination Act. The Ombudsman is to try in the first instance to induce those to whom the Act applies to comply with it voluntarily. However, the Ombudsman may also bring a court action on behalf of an individual who consents to this. Those who violate the Discrimination Act may be found liable to pay compensation for discrimination to the person discriminated against.
The Ombudsman for Children in Sweden is a government agency whose main task is to represent the rights and interests of children and young people, based on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. It monitors society’s compliance with the Convention and drives implementation in municipalities, county councils, regions and government agencies. It is responsible for drawing attention to deficiencies in the application of the Convention and proposing amendments to laws and ordinances. The Children’s Ombudsman submits an annual report to the Government, containing analyses and recommendations to improve the situation of children and young people. The Ombudsman does not monitor other government agencies and, by law, is not able to intervene in individual cases.”
Promotion of consistency in human rights policies (page 5)
‘Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan passed the “Organic Act of the Control Yuan National Human Rights Commission” in 2019. Then the National Human Rights Commission was formally established on 1 August 2020 to serve as the government’s single human rights authority. The Commission monitors whether the legislative, executive, and judicial branches operate in compliance with international human rights requirements, and whether any government policies or actions infringe upon human rights. It is also authorized to provide suggestions to the executive, legislative, and judicial branches for their reference.’
This information is also covered under Appendix 4: Overview of the implementation of the state duty to protect and the access to remedy, The state duty to protect, UNGP8, Actions taken (page 47).
3. The core content of the National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights
3.2 Action plan for community, land, natural resources and the environment
3.2.3 Action Plan (2019–2022)
Pillar 1: State duties in protecting (Protect)
No.
Issues
Activities
Responsible agencies
Time-frame (2019–2022)
Indicators (wide frame)
Compliance with National Strategy/ SDGs/UNGPs
1.
Developing and improving laws, regulations, policies and related measures
Relevant agencies took the comments and recommendations of the National Human Rights Commission of Thailand, which the Cabinet has resolved to consider improving the Act to Promote and Conserve National Environmental Quality Act B.E. 2535 (1992) and expedite enactment of the Act on People Participation in the Public Policy Process B.E. (draft) and issue regulations on the Report of Pollutant Release and Transfer Registers (PRTR)
– Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
2019–2022
– Consideration has been taken in accordance with recommendations of the National Human Rights Commission of Thailand
– Meeting for consideration of the Act on People Participation in the Public Policy Process B.E. (draft) and Regulations on the Report of Pollutant Release and Transfer Registers report
– National Strategy for Eco-Friendly Development and Growth
– SDG 11, 13, 14
and 15
– UNGPs Articles 1, 3, 5 and 7
3.4 Action Plan on Cross Border Investment and Multinational Enterprises
3.4.1 Overview of the situation
The National Human Rights Commission of Thailand has received complaints regarding the impact of cross-border business operations of Thai entrepreneurs, such as a Thai private company that was granted a land concession for sugarcane cultivation and established a sugar factory in Cambodia and violated the human rights of the Cambodian people. The National Human Rights Commission of Thailand has investigated and has ruled that though the company is not the action maker, the impact is considered a part of their direct responsibility in the case of affecting human rights. In the case that a private company has entered into a Memorandum of Agreement with the Port Authority of the Union of Myanmar to operate a deep-sea port project in the Dawei Special Economic Zone Project in Myanmar, the National Human Rights Commission has investigated and found that the construction of infrastructure of the project caused human rights violation to the Myanmar people. The National Human Rights Commission of Thailand has recommendations for relevant government agencies to consider establishing mechanisms or defining the Investment Supervision to respect the basic principles of human rights by using The UNGPs as a framework.
CHAPTER FOUR: STRATEGIES AND INTERVENTIONS STRATEGIES
(…)
OBJECTIVE 2: To promote human rights compliance and accountability by business actors
(…)
2.2.1 Promoting compliance to human rights observance
(…)
ii. Supporting the UHRC (Uganda Human Rights Commission), EOC (Equal Opportunities Commission), and other relevant government institutions in their engagements with businesses.
CHAPTER 5: INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
5.3 Uganda Human Rights Commission
Promoting and disseminating the national action plan.
Monitor human rights compliance by government and companies in business operations.
Advise government and businesses on matters of human rights observance.
Conduct human rights education and awareness to business operators and communities.
Receive, investigate and adjudicate cases of human rights violations in business operations.
Enforce compensations for the awards of human rights violations.
Conduct research and documentation on business and human rights.
Review and inform laws and policies on matters of business and human rights.
Enforce human rights compliance in line with international human rights standards.
The UK Updated 2016 NAP refers to NHRIs and Ombudsman with regards to non-judicial mechanisms [page 20]:
“We also provide a number of state-based non-judicial mechanisms, including: (…)
Equality and Human Rights Commission which monitors and promotes human rights compliance and can conduct inquiries, for example it has conducted inquiries into the meat and poultry processing and home care sectors;
a considerable number of Ombudsman, Regulators and other Government Complaints Offices in industry sectors that have various mechanisms to hear complaints, impose sanctions and award compensation. For example, the Health and Safety Executive, Financial Conduct Authority, Financial Ombudsman Service and Advertising Standards Authority. The Groceries Code Adjudicator is an independent adjudicator that oversees the relationship between supermarkets and their suppliers. It ensures that large supermarkets treat their direct suppliers lawfully and fairly, investigates complaints and arbitrates in disputes.”
Belgium (2017 - open)
Chile (2017-2020)
Colombia (2020-2022)
Czechia (2017-2022)
Denmark (2014-open)
Finland (2014-2016)
France (2017-open)
Georgia (2018-2020)
Germany (2016-2020)
Ghana (2025 - 2029)
Ireland (2017-2020)
Italy (2021-2026)
Japan (2020-2025)
Kenya (2020-2025)
Liberia (2024 - 2028)
Lithuania (2015-open)
Luxembourg (2020-2022)
Malaysia (2025-2030)
Mongolia (2023-2027)
Netherlands (2022-2026)
Nigeria (2024-2028)
Norway (2015-open)
Pakistan (2021-2026)
Peru (2021-2025)
Poland (2021-2024)
Slovenia (2018-open)
South Korea (2018-2022)
Spain (2017-2020)
Sweden (2017-open)
Switzerland (2024-2027)
Thailand (2019-2022)
Uganda (2021-2026)
United Kingdom (2016-open)
United States (2024 - open)
