What changed between the draft committee report and the plenary report

Changed:H.M. whereas, in recent years, the EU has shown great ambition when it comes to business and human rights and has initiated a number of legislative initiatives aimed at regulating business activities on human rights and environmental and climate-related obligations;obligations, such as the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, a proposal for a regulation on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market, the Regulation on deforestation-free products, the Conflict Minerals Regulation and the Batteries Regulation;

Changed:I.N. whereas severala number of EU Member StatesStates, such as France, Germany and the Netherlands, have recently adopted or proposed mandatory due diligence legislation, while a number of other Member States are considering following suit; whereas it is important to ensure coherence between due diligence legislation at Member State or EU level and the UN LBI;

Changed:J.O. whereas regulatory initiatives, including legislation, on business and human rights have been adopted, or are under discussion, in non-EU countries;countries such as Australia, Brazil, Canada, Ghana, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, South Korea, Switzerland and the USA; whereas numerous other countries have developed a national action plan on business and human rights;

Added:P. whereas the draft LBI contains a regional integration organisation clause to accommodate the respective roles of the EU and its Member States;

Added:Q. whereas there is substantial and growing interest in, mobilisation around and expectations from the UN-level discussions on the LBI among affected communities, indigenous peoples, trade unions, members of civil society, scholars and experts globally;

Changed:1. Stresses that the overall level of enjoyment of human rights worldwide is inevitablycontingent, contingentamong other things, on the behaviour of corporations, given the current scale of globalisation and the internationalisation of business activities and value chains; emphasises, in this context, the importance for business enterprises to be able to rely on good public governance and a comprehensive and well-functioning legal system and framework in order to fulfil their human rights obligations;

Changed:2. Strongly supports the full implementation, within and outside the EU, of the international standards on responsible business conduct to complement and strengthen the implementation of the UNGPs; underlines the importance of the UNGPs and the OECD Guidelines and the broad support they enjoy; recalls that the UNGPs constitute the only global framework detailing corporate responsibility for preventing and addressing the risk of adverse impacts on human rights linked to business activity; stresses that any work done on the LBI should ensure full alignment with these standards;

Changed:3. Stresses that since corporate social responsibility is solely on a voluntary basis and is therefore not embodied in enforceable instruments, it risks creating market distortions and unfair competition for the enterprises that choose to comply with international standards or that are subject to national or regional obligations; recognises that although some progress has been achieved, human rights violations continue to occur; welcomes, therefore, efforts to create a level playing field and the pursuit of a globally supported commitment to responsible business conduct; welcomes, further, the current shift in terms of normative developments from soft-law initiatives towards binding standards;

Changed:4. Underlines the importance of closing the legal and regulatory loopholes which are being exploited by transnationalsome corporationsbusiness andenterprises, investorsincluding investors, at the cost of human rights and the environment;

Changed:5. Notes,Notes with concern,concern that in many countries’ judicial systems, numerous procedural, substantive and practical barriers persist regarding victims’ access to justice for victims,justice, including difficulties in identifying the competent court, barriers related to jurisdictional standards, short statutory limitation periods, excessive evidentiary burdens, limited or unclear liability owing to thecomplex corporate veil,structures, access to legal representation and information, prohibitive costs of representation abroad, as well as other inequalities between claimants and defendants; notes with concern, further, cases of victims facing intimidation or violence from the businesses involved in response to their seeking justice; emphasises that vulnerable or marginalised persons or groups, who may require additional attention in the context of stakeholder engagement activities, are facing heightened barriers to benefiting equitably from compensation payments or other forms of restitution;

Removed:6. Strongly supports the work being carried out in the UN through the OEIGWG to develop the instrument; expresses its appreciation for the work of the successive Chairs from Ecuador in steering this complex endeavour and welcomes the supportive role of the ’Friends of the Chair’ group;

Added:6. Stresses the importance of including parent-company-based extraterritorial regulation and access to justice for victims of transnational corporate human rights violations in the home state of transnational corporations (TNCs); highlights, in particular, the need to define clear obligations for TNCs in relation to eradicating child labour and forced labour from their supply chains and operations;

Removed:7. Calls on the Chair of the OEIGWG and the UN member states to ensure that the negotiations are conducted in a transparent manner, with meaningful engagement with all stakeholders, including civil society, labour unions and the private sector; insists, moreover, on the importance of ensuring active engagement from all regions, with a view to developing an effective instrument that reflects the global diversity of the legal, economic and political realities affecting human rights and that draws on best practices implemented at domestic and regional level; encourages regional human rights and economic organisations to help facilitate this universal engagement;

Added:7. Reiterates its strong support for the work being carried out in the UN through the OEIGWG to develop the instrument; expresses its appreciation for the work of the successive Chairs from Ecuador in steering this complex endeavour and welcomes the supportive role of the ‘Friends of the Chair’ group;

Changed:8.9. Recalls that the EU has a Treaty-based commitment to promote human rights worldwide and UN multilateral solutions within the UN to common problems, which has yet to be reflected in its participation in the OEIGWG;OEIGWG with a negotiating mandate;

Changed:9.10. Acknowledges the OEIGWG as the only global and multilateral forum where mandatory rules on business and human rights are being discussed and, therefore, considers it crucial for the EU to actively participateengage in this process;process, alongside a critical mass of UN members, in order to reach a consensus-based outcome that can rely on broad support globally;

Changed:10.11. Underscores that the latest normative developments at EU level on business and human rights haveare scarcelyimportant addressedinitial steps towards addressing access to justice and victims’ rights, which lie at the centre of the LBI as a core human rights treaty; stresses, in this regard, the complementary nature, objectives and scope ofof, as well as the need for coherence between, both normative tracks, which will operate at different levels;

Changed:11.12. Believes that the EU should actively engage in the ongoing negotiations, in particular to further develop the draft LBI, while focusing on victims of business-related abuses,abuses across the value chain, dismantling barriers to justice and effective remedy, ensuring a level playing field and legal certainty for businesses, taking into account the particular character of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and enhancing cooperation by drawing on international perspectives and best practices; considers that this engagement would ultimately contribute to securing better implementation and enforcement of human rights internationally, while equally contributing to an international level playing field and delivering a global instrument that is both widely supported and ratified among states across all regions, including but not limited to Europe,the European Union, and that remains relevant in the face of constantly evolving business-related threats to human rights;

Changed:12.13. Welcomes the Council’s commitment that the EU will strengthen its engagement and actively participate in the OEIGWG; considers, however, that the only meaningful and tangible way to enact this stated commitment is by adopting an EU mandate for negotiations; urges, therefore,urges the Commission to recommend thatCouncil, thetherefore, Councilto adopt an ambitious mandate for negotiations as soon as possible so that the EU is able to actively participate in the negotiations with a view to shaping the future LBI,LBI; whichstresses isthat alreadythe atEU anposition advancedmust stage;aim for strong provisions in terms of enforcement and monitoring mechanisms, as well as in relation to access to justice for those affected by violations;

Changed:13.14. Calls on the Member States, in the meantime, to coordinateengage in the process individually while coordinating their positions ahead ofthroughout the negotiations, so as to defend a strong, common and clear EU position;position, presenting in a constructive manner the legislative initiatives aimed at regulating business activities in relation to human rights and climate-related obligations, while showing appreciation for the progress made to date; expects the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the Commission, in particular the EU Delegation to the UN in Geneva, to play a proactive and constructive role in this process;

Changed:14.15. Calls on the Commission, the European External Action ServiceEEAS and the Member States to engage proactively with all partner states and prioritiseinclude the topic in their dialogues with non-EU countries and regional organisations;organisations, in particular in the framework of the EU’s structured human rights dialogues; encourages the EU to reach out, in particular, to key partners which are currently developing their own frameworks on business and human rights at national level, such as Brazil and Japan, and at regional level, such as the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights;

Changed:15.16. Welcomes the updated draft LBI, published in July 2023, and considers that it offers a solid and promising basis for advancing negotiations, while also recognising the need for improvement;improvement and alignment with the UNGPs, the OECD Guidelines and other current international standards;

Changed:16.17. Believes that the EU should strive for an LBI wouldthat beis compatible with and complementary to the ongoing normative developments at EU level, and thus would contributecontributes to creating a more coherent global legal framework on business and human rights;

Changed:17.18. Supports a broad scope for the LBI, which aims toLBI coverthat allwould businessensure enterprises,that includingresponsibility transnationalapplies businessthroughout activitiesthe andglobal state-ownedvalue enterprises;chains; considers that allowing states parties the flexibility to differentiate, under their domestic legislation, how business enterprisesenterprises, particularly SMEs, discharge the prevention obligations under the LBI, commensurate with their size, sector, ownership, operational context and the severity of impacts on human rights, would provide important leeway for national adaptation and would be consistent with the universal scope of the UNGPs; highlights that in many regions of the world, micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) are often the driving force of local economies; underlines that MSMEs account for 90 % of businesses, 60 to 70 % of employment and 50 % of gross domestic product worldwide; reiterates the importance of ensuring that obligations and requirements in the instrument are commensurate and proportionate to the size, resources and leverage of companies, and calls for the EU to provide safeguards for MSMEs in the negotiations concerning the instrument;

Added:19. Believes that business activities should be understood in line with the UNGPs;

Changed:19.21. Regrets the fact that several references to the environment and climate changechange, including with regard to liability, were removed from the scope of the LBI in the latest draft; considers that the EU and the Member States should strive for the environmental and climate impact of business activities to be included within the scope of the LBI;LBI, in line with EU legislation, policies and ambition in this area, and therefore reflect the growing realisation of the impact of business activities in relation to climate change and environmental degradation, which in turn impact on human rights;

Changed:20.22. Stresses that the LBI should provide for an ambitious, comprehensive, responsive and compulsory framework for the prevention of human rights abuses by corporations;corporations, in particular by establishing the obligation for states parties to adopt appropriate and effective legislative, regulatory and other measures to prevent corporate abuse and to ensure the practice of environmental due diligence and respect of human rights by all business enterprises; notes, in this regard, that allowing states parties the flexibility to adapt their preventive frameworks to their own legal systemssystems, while preserving the primacy of human rights, would be a key factor in securing broad adherence to the LBI;

Changed:21.23. Calls for the EU and the Member States to ensure, in line with the provisions under the UNGPs, that the LBI prevention framework obliges corporate actors to payconduct particularenhanced attentiondue todiligence theirwhen activitiesoperating in relation to conflict-affected areas or territories under occupation or annexation, where the risk of gross human rights violations is heightened, such as conflict-affected areas or territories under occupation or annexation, including by adding references to international humanitarian law, international criminal law and customary international law in the scope of the LBI; believes that the LBI should also address aspects related to corporate activities in disaster-affected areas or in relation to climate-vulnerable communities, which are becoming ever more relevant in the context of the climate crisis;

Changed:22.24. Believes that the obligation for companies to adopt a risk-based approach and undertake regular human rights impact assessments prior to and throughout operations, and to take into account the needs of those at heightened risk, constitute particularly important elements for the LBI prevention framework, including by integrating a gender perspective, but also by taking into account issues concerning groups at risk of vulnerability or marginalisation;marginalisation, such as indigenous and traditional communities, minorities and human rights and environmental defenders;

Changed:23.25. Calls for the LBI to provide a central role to affected stakeholders, in particular through the obligation to promote the active and meaningful participation of relevant stakeholders, including trade unions, non-governmental organisations, indigenous peoples and community-based organisations, as well as the private sector, in the implementation of legislation, policies and other measures;measures, with special attention to access to justice and remedies;

Removed:24. Stresses the importance for the EU and the Member States to ensure that the LBI includes the duty to protect the safety of human rights defenders, defenders of the environment, journalists, workers and indigenous peoples and other marginalised groups, and to mainstream consideration for these groups throughout the instrument;

Added:26. Calls for the LBI to provide a definition of active and meaningful participation of relevant stakeholders, including through interactive engagement carried out in good faith, on an ongoing basis, with proper follow-through, involving the identification and removal of potential barriers to engagement, and ensuring the safe participation of stakeholders without fear of reprisal;

Removed:25. Emphasises the need to ensure that states implement robust and effective, yet practical enforcement and compliance monitoring mechanisms; insists, furthermore, on the need for regular and in-depth reporting to be required from corporations and states parties;

Added:27. Stresses the importance for the EU and the Member States to ensure that the LBI includes the duty to protect the rights and the safety of human rights defenders, defenders of the environment, journalists, workers and indigenous peoples and other marginalised groups, and to mainstream consideration for these groups throughout the instrument; insists, in particular, on the importance of enshrining the principle of the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples;

Added:35. Insists that the LBI should confer sufficient powers on the Conference of Parties to establish mechanisms for monitoring the implementation of the LBI and make recommendations for possible further steps; considers that the committee established under the LBI should be empowered to receive and consider communications and complaints from individuals, communities or their representatives concerning human rights abuses by business enterprises covered by the LBI which are contrary to the provisions of the LBI, and concerning violations by a state party of any of the rights laid down in the LBI;

Added:36. Calls on the Commission to step up its financial and technical support to national authorities in non-EU countries concerning business and human rights, in particular through (i) the adoption and implementation of national action plans under the UNGPs, (ii) the development of non-judicial mechanisms, such as ombudsman offices or national contact points, (iii) legislative initiatives aiming to protect whistle-blowers and to regulate business activities in relation to human rights and environment-related obligations, and (iv) the promotion and the provision of accessible and efficient remedies for victims; encourages the Commission to increase its support for civil society organisations in these areas;