Skip to content
EU Parl Watch

opinion parliamentary committee, 6 March 2023

On the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937

Document ECON-AD-736711 · (COM(2022)0071 – C90050/2022 – 2022/0051(COD))

Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs · Rapporteur: René Repasi

On Parliament’s site PDF Word

Full text

Jump to an amendment (154)
Text 623 paragraphs

(*) Associated committee – Rule 57 of the Rules of Procedure

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs calls on the Committee on Legal Affairs, as the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:

Amendment 1

Proposal for a directive

Recital 4

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(4) The behaviour of companies across all sectors of the economy is key to success in the Union’s sustainability objectives as Union companies, especially large ones, rely on global value chains. It is also in the interest of companies to protect human rights and the environment, in particular given the rising concern of consumers and investors regarding these topics. Several initiatives fostering enterprises which support value-oriented transformation already exist on Union77 , as well as national78 level.(4) The behaviour of companies across all sectors of the economy is key to success in the Union’s sustainability objectives as Union companies, including large ones, rely on global value chains. It is also in the interest of companies to respect human rights and the environment, in particular given the rising concern of consumers and investors regarding these topics. Several initiatives fostering enterprises which support value-oriented transformation already exist on Union77 , as well as national78 level. Further, binding due diligence legislation has been implemented in Member States such as France and Germany which heightens the need for a level playing field for companies to avoid fragmentation and to provide legal certainty for businesses operating in the single market.
77 ‘Enterprise Models and the EU agenda’, CEPS Policy Insights, No PI2021-02/ January 2021.77 ‘Enterprise Models and the EU agenda’, CEPS Policy Insights, No PI2021-02/ January 2021.
78 E.g. https://www.economie.gouv.fr/entreprises/societe-mission78 E.g. https://www.economie.gouv.fr/entreprises/societe-mission

Amendment 2

Proposal for a directive

Recital 5

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(5) Existing international standards on responsible business conduct specify that companies should protect human rights and set out how they should address the protection of the environment across their operations and value chains. The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights79 recognise the responsibility of companies to exercise human rights due diligence by identifying, preventing and mitigating the adverse impacts of their operations on human rights and by accounting for how they address those impacts. Those Guiding Principles state that businesses should avoid infringing human rights and should address adverse human rights impacts that they have caused, contributed to or are linked with in their own operations, subsidiaries and through their direct and indirect business relationships.(5) Well-established existing international standards on responsible business conduct such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD Guidelines for Due Diligence specify that companies should respect human rights and set out how they should address the protection of the environment across their operations and value chains. The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights79 recognise the responsibility of companies to exercise human rights due diligence by identifying, preventing and mitigating the adverse impacts of their operations on human rights and by accounting for how they address those impacts. Those Guiding Principles state that businesses should avoid infringing human rights and should address adverse human rights impacts that they have caused, contributed to or are linked with in their own operations, subsidiaries and through their direct and indirect business relationships.
79 United Nations’ “Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ Framework”, 2011, available at https://www.ohchr.org/documents/publications/guidingprinciplesbusinesshr_en.pdf.79 United Nations’ “Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ Framework”, 2011, available at https://www.ohchr.org/documents/publications/guidingprinciplesbusinesshr_en.pdf.

Amendment 3

Read the rest (611 paragraphs)

Proposal for a directive

Recital 15

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(15) Companies should take appropriate steps to set up and carry out due diligence measures, with respect to their own operations, their subsidiaries, as well as their established direct and indirect business relationships throughout their value chains in accordance with the provisions of this Directive. This Directive should not require companies to guarantee, in all circumstances, that adverse impacts will never occur or that they will be stopped. For example with respect to business relationships where the adverse impact results from State intervention, the company might not be in a position to arrive at such results. Therefore, the main obligations in this Directive should be ‘obligations of means’. The company should take the appropriate measures which can reasonably be expected to result in prevention or minimisation of the adverse impact under the circumstances of the specific case. Account should be taken of the specificities of the company’s value chain, sector or geographical area in which its value chain partners operate, the company’s power to influence its direct and indirect business relationships, and whether the company could increase its power of influence.(15) Companies should take appropriate steps to set up and carry out due diligence measures, with respect to their own operations, their subsidiaries, as well as their direct and indirect business relationships throughout their value chains in accordance with the provisions of this Directive. This Directive should not require companies to guarantee, in all circumstances, that adverse impacts will never occur or that they will be stopped. For example with respect to business relationships where the adverse impact results from State intervention, the company might not be in a position to arrive at such results. Therefore, the main obligations in this Directive should be ‘obligations of means’. The company should take the appropriate, proportionate and commensurate measures within their means, which can reasonably be expected to result in prevention or minimisation of the adverse impact under the circumstances of the specific case. Account should be taken of the specificities of the company’s value chain, sector or geographical area in which its value chain partners operate, the company’s power to influence its direct and indirect business relationships, and whether the company could increase its power of influence.

Amendment 4

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(17a) Global value chains, in particular critical raw materials value chains, are impacted by detrimental effects of natural or man-made hazards. The risks in critical value chains have been made apparent by the COVID-19 crisis while the frequency and impact of those shocks are likely to increase in the future, constituting a driver for inflation and leading to a subsequent increase of macroeconomic volatility as well as market and trade uncertainty. To address this, the EU should establish resilience stress tests for companies, akin to the stress tests for financial institutions, that would map, assess and provide potential responses to their value chain risks, including externalities as well as social, environmental and political risks.

Amendment 5

Proposal for a directive

Recital 18

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(18) The value chain should cover activities related to the production of a good or provision of services by a company, including the development of the product or the service and the use and disposal of the product as well as the related activities of established business relationships of the company. It should encompass upstream established direct and indirect business relationships that design, extract, manufacture, transport, store and supply raw material, products, parts of products, or provide services to the company that are necessary to carry out the company’s activities, and also downstream relationships, including established direct and indirect business relationships, that use or receive products, parts of products or services from the company up to the end of life of the product, including inter alia the distribution of the product to retailers, the transport and storage of the product, dismantling of the product, its recycling, composting or landfilling.(18) The value chain should cover activities related to the production of a good or provision of services by a company, including the development of the product or the service and the use and disposal of the product as well as the related activities of business relationships of the company. It should encompass upstream direct and indirect business relationships that design, extract, manufacture, transport, store and supply raw material, products, parts of products, or provide services to the company that are necessary to carry out the company’s activities, and also downstream relationships, including direct and indirect business relationships, that use or receive products, parts of products or services from the company up to the end of life of the product, including inter alia the distribution of the product to retailers, the transport and storage of the product, dismantling of the product, its recycling, composting or landfilling.

Amendment 6

Proposal for a directive

Recital 19

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(19) As regards regulated financial undertakings providing loan, credit, or other financial services, “value chain” with respect to the provision of such services should be limited to the activities of the clients receiving such services, and the subsidiaries thereof whose activities are linked to the contract in question. Clients that are households and natural persons not acting in a professional or business capacity, as well as small and medium sized undertakings, should not be considered to be part of the value chain. The activities of the companies or other legal entities that are included in the value chain of that client should not be covered.(19) As regards regulated financial undertakings providing loan, credit, or other financial services linked to the conclusion of a contract, “value chain” with respect to the provision of such services should include the activities of the clients receiving such services, the subsidiaries thereof whose activities are linked to the contract in question and the impacts of the clients and other companies belonging to the same group. Clients that are households and natural persons not acting in a professional or business capacity, as well as small and medium sized undertakings, should not be considered to be part of the value chain of regulated financial undertakings. However, a financial undertaking may, on a voluntary basis, decide to cover SMEs in its value chain. The activities of the companies or other legal entities that are included in the value chain of that client should not by priority be covered to avoid the overlap of due diligence exercises of regulated financial undertakings that have partially overlapping value chains.

Amendment 7

Proposal for a directive

Recital 20

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(20) In order to allow companies to properly identify the adverse impacts in their value chain and to make it possible for them to exercise appropriate leverage, the due diligence obligations should be limited in this Directive to established business relationships. For the purpose of this Directive, established business relationships should mean such direct and indirect business relationships which are, or which are expected to be lasting, in view of their intensity and duration and which do not represent a negligible or ancillary part of the value chain. The nature of business relationships as “established” should be reassessed periodically, and at least every 12 months. If the direct business relationship of a company is established, then all linked indirect business relationships should also be considered as established regarding that company.deleted

Amendment 8

Proposal for a directive

Recital 25

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(25) In order to achieve a meaningful contribution to the sustainability transition, due diligence under this Directive should be carried out with respect to adverse human rights impact on protected persons resulting from the violation of one of the rights and prohibitions as enshrined in the international conventions as listed in the Annex to this Directive. In order to ensure a comprehensive coverage of human rights, a violation of a prohibition or right not specifically listed in that Annex which directly impairs a legal interest protected in those conventions should also form part of the adverse human rights impact covered by this Directive, provided that the company concerned could have reasonably established the risk of such impairment and any appropriate measures to be taken in order to comply with the due diligence obligations under this Directive, taking into account all relevant circumstances of their operations, such as the sector and operational context. Due diligence should further encompass adverse environmental impacts resulting from the violation of one of the prohibitions and obligations pursuant to the international environmental conventions listed in the Annex to this Directive.(25) In order to achieve a meaningful contribution to the sustainability transition, due diligence under this Directive should be carried out with respect to adverse human rights impact on protected persons resulting from the violation of one of the rights and prohibitions as enshrined in the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct and the UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights. In order to ensure a comprehensive coverage of human rights, a violation of a prohibition or right not specifically listed in these guidelines which directly impairs a legal interest protected in international conventions should also form part of the adverse human rights impact covered by this Directive, provided that the company concerned could have reasonably established the risk of such impairment and any appropriate measures to be taken in order to comply with the due diligence obligations under this Directive, taking into account all relevant circumstances of their operations, such as the sector and operational context. Due diligence should further encompass adverse environmental impacts resulting from the violation of one of the prohibitions and obligations pursuant to the international environmental conventions listed in the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct and the UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights.

Amendment 9

Proposal for a directive

Recital 27

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(27) In order to conduct appropriate human rights, and environmental due diligence with respect to their operations, their subsidiaries, and their value chains, companies covered by this Directive should integrate due diligence into corporate policies, identify, prevent and mitigate as well as bring to an end and minimise the extent of potential and actual adverse human rights and environmental impacts, establish and maintain a complaints procedure, monitor the effectiveness of the taken measures in accordance with the requirements that are set up in this Directive and communicate publicly on their due diligence. In order to ensure clarity for companies, in particular the steps of preventing and mitigating potential adverse impacts and of bringing to an end, or when this is not possible, minimising actual adverse impacts should be clearly distinguished in this Directive.(27) In order to conduct appropriate human rights, and environmental due diligence with respect to their operations, their subsidiaries, and their value chains, companies covered by this Directive should embed the company's commitment to due diligence into corporate policies and management systems, identify, prevent and mitigate as well as bring to an end and minimise the extent of potential and actual adverse human rights and environmental impacts that they cause or contribute or are directly linked to, establish and maintain a complaints procedure, monitor the effectiveness of the taken measures in accordance with the requirements that are set up in this Directive and communicate publicly on their due diligence. In order to ensure clarity for companies, in particular the steps of preventing and mitigating potential adverse impacts and of bringing to an end, or when this is not possible, minimising actual adverse impacts should be clearly distinguished in this Directive.

Amendment 10

Proposal for a directive

Recital 27 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(27a) In line with the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct, meaningful stakeholder engagement is a key component of the due diligence process. The consultation and involvement of stakeholders can help companies to identify risks more precisely and to set up a more effective due diligence strategy. Therefore, the consultation and involvement of stakeholders should be required in all stages of the due diligence process. Their involvement and consultation may help to push back against pressure from financial markets and short-term investors and give voice to those with a strong interest in the long-term sustainability of the company.

Amendment 11

Proposal for a directive

Recital 27 b (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(27b) Companies should provide meaningful information to stakeholders about actual and potential adverse human rights, environmental and climate impacts of particular operations, projects and investments, in a timely and accessible manner taking into account specificities of different stakeholders. Companies must respect the rights of Indigenous Peoples, as laid out in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including free, prior and informed consent and indigenous peoples’ right to self-determination.

Amendment 12

Proposal for a directive

Recital 28

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(28) In order to ensure that due diligence forms part of companies’ corporate policies, and in line with the relevant international framework, companies should integrate due diligence into all their corporate policies and have in place a due diligence policy. The due diligence policy should contain a description of the company’s approach, including in the long term, to due diligence, a code of conduct describing the rules and principles to be followed by the company’s employees and subsidiaries; a description of the processes put in place to implement due diligence, including the measures taken to verify compliance with the code of conduct and to extend its application to established business relationships. The code of conduct should apply in all relevant corporate functions and operations, including procurement and purchasing decisions. Companies should also update their due diligence policy annually.(28) In order to ensure that due diligence forms part of companies’ corporate policies, and in line with the relevant international framework, companies should integrate and carry out due diligence into all their corporate policies and have in place a due diligence policy. The due diligence policy should contain a description of the company’s approach, including in the short, medium and long term, to due diligence, a code of conduct describing the rules and principles to be followed by the company’s employees and subsidiaries; a description of the processes put in place to implement due diligence, including the measures taken to verify compliance with the code of conduct and to extend its application to business relationships. The code of conduct should apply in all relevant corporate functions and operations, including procurement and purchasing decisions. Companies should also update and publish their due diligence policy annually.

Amendment 13

Proposal for a directive

Recital 30

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(30) Under the due diligence obligations set out by this Directive, a company should identify actual or potential adverse human rights and environmental impacts. In order to allow for a comprehensive identification of adverse impacts, such identification should be based on quantitative and qualitative information. For instance, as regards adverse environmental impacts, the company should obtain information about baseline conditions at higher risk sites or facilities in value chains. Identification of adverse impacts should include assessing the human rights, and environmental context in a dynamic way and in regular intervals: prior to a new activity or relationship, prior to major decisions or changes in the operation; in response to or anticipation of changes in the operating environment; and periodically, at least every 12 months, throughout the life of an activity or relationship. Regulated financial undertakings providing loan, credit, or other financial services should identify the adverse impacts only at the inception of the contract. When identifying adverse impacts, companies should also identify and assess the impact of a business relationship’s business model and strategies, including trading, procurement and pricing practices. Where the company cannot prevent, bring to an end or minimize all its adverse impacts at the same time, it should be able to prioritize its action, provided it takes the measures reasonably available to the company, taking into account the specific circumstances.(30) Under the due diligence obligations set out by this Directive, a company should identify actual or potential adverse human rights and environmental impacts. In order to allow for a comprehensive identification of adverse impacts, such identification should be based on quantitative and qualitative information. For instance, as regards adverse environmental impacts, the company should obtain information about baseline conditions at higher risk sites or facilities in value chains. Identification of adverse impacts should include assessing the human rights, and environmental context in a dynamic way and in regular intervals: prior to a new activity or relationship, prior to major decisions or changes in the operation; in response to or anticipation of changes in the operating environment; and periodically, at least every 12 months, throughout the life of an activity or relationship. When identifying adverse impacts, companies should also identify and assess the impact of a business relationship’s business model and strategies, including trading, procurement and pricing practices. Where the company cannot prevent, bring to an end or minimize all its adverse impacts at the same time, it should be able to prioritize its action, provided it takes the measures reasonably available to the company, taking into account the specific circumstances.

Amendment 14

Proposal for a directive

Recital 31

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(31) In order to avoid undue burden on the smaller companies operating in high-impact sectors which are covered by this Directive, those companies should only be obliged to identify those actual or potential severe adverse impacts that are relevant to the respective sector.(31) In order to avoid undue burden on SMEs covered by this Directive, those companies should be supported with adequate and targeted measures and tools.

Amendment 15

Proposal for a directive

Recital 32

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(32) In line with international standards, prevention and mitigation as well as bringing to an end and minimisation of adverse impacts should take into account the interests of those adversely impacted. In order to enable continuous engagement with the value chain business partner instead of termination of business relations (disengagement) and possibly exacerbating adverse impacts, this Directive should ensure that disengagement is a last-resort action, in line with the Union`s policy of zero-tolerance on child labour. Terminating a business relationship in which child labour was found could expose the child to even more severe adverse human rights impacts. This should therefore be taken into account when deciding on the appropriate action to take.(32) In line with international standards, prevention and mitigation as well as bringing to an end and minimisation of adverse impacts should take into account the interests of those adversely impacted. In order to enable continuous engagement with the value chain business partner instead of termination of business relations (disengagement) and possibly exacerbating adverse impacts, this Directive should ensure that disengagement is a last-resort action used only in cases of severe or repeated infringements of obligations under this Directive, after repeated attempts at measures of risk mitigation have failed and only if it is in the best interest of those impacted (responsible disengagement), also in line with the Union`s policy of zero-tolerance on child labour. Terminating a business relationship in which child labour was found could expose the child to even more severe adverse human rights impacts. This should therefore be taken into account when deciding on the appropriate action to take. Moreover, disengagement should also take into account possible impacts for those depending on the product or affected by disruptions of supply chains.

Amendment 16

Proposal for a directive

Recital 34

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(34) So as to comply with the prevention and mitigation obligation under this Directive, companies should be required to take the following actions, where relevant. Where necessary due to the complexity of prevention measures, companies should develop and implement a prevention action plan. Companies should seek to obtain contractual assurances from a direct partner with whom they have an established business relationship that it will ensure compliance with the code of conduct or the prevention action plan, including by seeking corresponding contractual assurances from its partners to the extent that their activities are part of the companies’ value chain. The contractual assurances should be accompanied by appropriate measures to verify compliance. To ensure comprehensive prevention of actual and potential adverse impacts, companies should also make investments which aim to prevent adverse impacts, provide targeted and proportionate support for an SME with which they have an established business relationship such as financing, for example, through direct financing, low-interest loans, guarantees of continued sourcing, and assistance in securing financing, to help implement the code of conduct or prevention action plan, or technical guidance such as in the form of training, management systems upgrading, and collaborate with other companies.(34) So as to comply with the prevention and mitigation obligation under this Directive, companies should be required to develop and implement a prevention action plan. Companies may seek to obtain contractual assurances from a direct partner with whom they have business relationship that it will ensure compliance with the code of conduct or the prevention action plan, including by seeking corresponding contractual assurances from its partners to the extent that their activities are part of the companies’ value chain where possible. The contractual assurances may help to efficiently pool and share responsibilities, especially for SMEs. However, relying on contractual assurances does not exclude the possibility of a company to be in breach of its due diligence obligations. It should also be noted that for some companies, including institutional investors, contractual assurances are difficult to obtain because they typically do not have a contractual relationship with an investee company. The contractual assurances should be, where possible accompanied by appropriate measures to verify compliance. To ensure comprehensive prevention of actual and potential adverse impacts, including in their own operations, companies should also make investments which aim to prevent adverse impacts, provide targeted and proportionate support for an SME with which they have business relationship such as financing, for example, through direct financing, low-interest loans, guarantees of continued sourcing, and assistance in securing financing, to help implement the code of conduct or prevention action plan, or technical guidance such as in the form of training, management systems upgrading, and collaborate with other companies.

Amendment 17

Proposal for a directive

Recital 35

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(35) In order to reflect the full range of options for the company in cases where potential impacts could not be addressed by the described prevention or minimisation measures, this Directive should also refer to the possibility for the company to seek to conclude a contract with the indirect business partner, with a view to achieving compliance with the company’s code of conduct or a prevention action plan, and conduct appropriate measures to verify compliance of the indirect business relationship with the contract.(35) In order to reflect the full range of options for the company in cases where there is knowledge of severe adverse impacts in indirect business relationships outside the EU, this Directive should also refer to the possibility for the company to seek to conclude a contract with the indirect business partner, with a view to achieving compliance with the company’s code of conduct or a prevention action plan, and conduct appropriate measures to verify compliance of the indirect business relationship with the contract. This possibility should be taken into account on an ad-hoc basis.

Amendment 18

Proposal for a directive

Recital 36

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(36) In order to ensure that prevention and mitigation of potential adverse impacts is effective, companies should prioritize engagement with business relationships in the value chain, instead of terminating the business relationship, as a last resort action after attempting at preventing and mitigating adverse potential impacts without success. However, the Directive should also, for cases where potential adverse impacts could not be addressed by the described prevention or mitigation measures, refer to the obligation for companies to refrain from entering into new or extending existing relations with the partner in question and, where the law governing their relations so entitles them to, to either temporarily suspend commercial relationships with the partner in question, while pursuing prevention and minimisation efforts, if there is reasonable expectation that these efforts are to succeed in the short-term; or to terminate the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned if the potential adverse impact is severe. In order to allow companies to fulfil that obligation, Member States should provide for the availability of an option to terminate the business relationship in contracts governed by their laws. It is possible that prevention of adverse impacts at the level of indirect business relationships requires collaboration with another company, for example a company which has a direct contractual relationship with the supplier. In some instances, such collaboration could be the only realistic way of preventing adverse impacts, in particular, where the indirect business relationship is not ready to enter into a contract with the company. In these instances, the company should collaborate with the entity which can most effectively prevent or mitigate adverse impacts at the level of the indirect business relationship while respecting competition law.(36) In order to ensure that prevention and mitigation of potential adverse impacts is effective, companies should prioritize engagement with business relationships in the value chain, instead of terminating the business relationship, as a last resort action after attempting at preventing and mitigating adverse potential impacts without success. However, the Directive should also, for cases where potential adverse impacts could not be addressed by the described prevention or mitigation measures, refer to the obligation for companies to refrain from entering into new or extending existing relations with the partner in question and, where the law governing their relations so entitles them to, to either temporarily suspend commercial relationships with the partner in question, while pursuing prevention and minimisation efforts, if there is reasonable expectation that these efforts are to succeed in the short-term; or to terminate the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned if the potential adverse impact is severe. In order to allow companies to fulfil that obligation, Member States should provide for the availability of an option to terminate the business relationship in contracts governed by their laws. However, these options should only be considered if it is in the best interest of those impacted.

Amendment 19

Proposal for a directive

Recital 38

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(38) Under the due diligence obligations set out by this Directive, if a company identifies actual human rights or environmental adverse impacts, it should take appropriate measures to bring those to an end. It can be expected that a company is able to bring to an end actual adverse impacts in their own operations and in subsidiaries. However, it should be clarified that, as regards established business relationships, where adverse impacts cannot be brought to an end, companies should minimise the extent of such impacts. Minimisation of the extent of adverse impacts should require an outcome that is the closest possible to bringing the adverse impact to an end. To provide companies with legal clarity and certainty, this Directive should define which actions companies should be required to take for bringing actual human rights and environmental adverse impacts to an end and minimisation of their extent, where relevant depending on the circumstances.(38) Under the due diligence obligations set out by this Directive, if a company identifies actual human rights or environmental adverse impacts, it should take appropriate measures to bring those to an end. It can be expected that a company is able to bring to an end actual adverse impacts in their own operations and in subsidiaries. However, it should be clarified that, as regards to business relationships, where adverse impacts cannot be brought to an end, companies should minimise the extent of such impacts. Minimisation of the extent of adverse impacts should require an outcome that is the closest possible to bringing the adverse impact to an end. To provide companies with legal clarity and certainty, this Directive should define which actions companies should be required to take for bringing actual human rights and environmental adverse impacts to an end and minimisation of their extent, where relevant depending on the circumstances.

Amendment 20

Proposal for a directive

Recital 39

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(39) So as to comply with the obligation of bringing to an end and minimising the extent of actual adverse impacts under this Directive, companies should be required to take the following actions, where relevant. They should neutralise the adverse impact or minimise its extent, with an action proportionate to the significance and scale of the adverse impact and to the contribution of the company’s conduct to the adverse impact. Where necessary due to the fact that the adverse impact cannot be immediately brought to an end, companies should develop and implement a corrective action plan with reasonable and clearly defined timelines for action and qualitative and quantitative indicators for measuring improvement. Companies should also seek to obtain contractual assurances from a direct business partner with whom they have an established business relationship that they will ensure compliance with the company’s code of conduct and, as necessary, a prevention action plan, including by seeking corresponding contractual assurances from its partners, to the extent that their activities are part of the company’s value chain. The contractual assurances should be accompanied by the appropriate measures to verify compliance. Finally, companies should also make investments aiming at ceasing or minimising the extent of adverse impact, provide targeted and proportionate support for an SMEs with which they have an established business relationship and collaborate with other entities, including, where relevant, to increase the company’s ability to bring the adverse impact to an end.(39) So as to comply with the obligation of bringing to an end and minimising the extent of actual adverse impacts under this Directive, companies should be required to take the following actions. They should neutralise the adverse impact or minimise its extent, with an action proportionate to the significance and scale of the adverse impact and to the contribution of the company’s conduct to the adverse impact. Where necessary due to the fact that the adverse impact cannot be immediately brought to an end, companies should develop and implement a corrective action plan with reasonable and clearly defined timelines for action and qualitative and quantitative indicators for measuring improvement. Companies may also, where appropriate, seek to obtain contractual assurances from a direct business partner that they will ensure compliance with the company’s code of conduct and a prevention action plan, including by seeking corresponding contractual assurances from its partners, to the extent that their activities are part of the company’s value chain. The contractual assurances should be accompanied by the appropriate measures to verify compliance. Finally, companies should also make investments aiming at ceasing or minimising the extent of adverse impact, provide targeted and proportionate support for an SMEs with which they have a business relationship and collaborate with other entities, including, where relevant, to increase the company’s ability to bring the adverse impact to an end.

Amendment 21

Proposal for a directive

Recital 41

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(41) In order to ensure that bringing actual adverse impacts to an end or minimising them is effective, companies should prioritize engagement with business relationships in the value chain, instead of terminating the business relationship, as a last resort action after attempting at bringing actual adverse impacts to an end or minimising them without success. However, this Directive should also, for cases where actual adverse impacts could not be brought to an end or adequately mitigated by the described measures, refer to the obligation for companies to refrain from entering into new or extending existing relations with the partner in question and, where the law governing their relations so entitles them to, to either temporarily suspend commercial relationships with the partner in question, while pursuing efforts to bring to an end or minimise the extent of the adverse impact, or terminate the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned, if the adverse impact is considered severe. In order to allow companies to fulfil that obligation, Member States should provide for the availability of an option to terminate the business relationship in contracts governed by their laws.(41) In order to ensure that bringing actual adverse impacts to an end or minimising them is effective, companies should prioritize engagement with business relationships in the value chain, instead of terminating the business relationship, as a last resort action after attempting at bringing actual adverse impacts to an end or minimising them without success and taking into consideration the best interest of those affected by the impact. However, this Directive should also, for cases where actual adverse impacts could not be brought to an end or adequately mitigated by the described measures, refer to the obligation for companies to refrain from entering into new or extending existing relations with the partner in question and, where the law governing their relations so entitles them to, to either temporarily suspend commercial relationships with the partner in question, while pursuing efforts to bring to an end or minimise the extent of the adverse impact, or terminate the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned, if the adverse impact is considered severe and if this is in the best interest of those affected by the adverse impact in question. In order to allow companies to fulfil that obligation, Member States should provide for the availability of an option to terminate the business relationship in contracts governed by their laws.

Amendment 22

Proposal for a directive

Recital 42

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(42) Companies should provide the possibility for persons and organisations to submit complaints directly to them in case of legitimate concerns regarding actual or potential human rights and environmental adverse impacts. Organisations who could submit such complaints should include trade unions and other workers’ representatives representing individuals working in the value chain concerned and civil society organisations active in the areas related to the value chain concerned where they have knowledge about a potential or actual adverse impact. Companies should establish a procedure for dealing with those complaints and inform workers, trade unions and other workers’ representatives, where relevant, about such processes. Recourse to the complaints and remediation mechanism should not prevent the complainant from having recourse to judicial remedies. In accordance with international standards, complaints should be entitled to request from the company appropriate follow-up on the complaint and to meet with the company’s representatives at an appropriate level to discuss potential or actual severe adverse impacts that are the subject matter of the complaint. This access should not lead to unreasonable solicitations of companies.(42) Companies should provide the possibility for persons and organisations to submit complaints directly to them in case of legitimate concerns regarding actual or potential human rights and environmental adverse impacts. The complaints must be factually justified and reasonably documented. Organisations who could submit such complaints should include trade unions and other workers’ representatives representing individuals working in the value chain concerned and civil society organisations active in the areas related to the value chain concerned where they have knowledge about a potential or actual adverse impact. Companies should establish a procedure for dealing with those complaints and inform workers, trade unions and other workers’ representatives about such processes. Recourse to the complaints and remediation mechanism should not prevent the complainant from having recourse to judicial remedies. In accordance with international standards, complaints should be entitled to request from the company appropriate follow-up on the complaint, which may include meetings with the company’s representatives at an appropriate level to discuss potential or actual severe adverse impacts that are the subject matter of the complaint. This access should not lead to unreasonable solicitations of companies.

Amendment 23

Proposal for a directive

Recital 42 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(42a) If a company is causing or contributing to an actual or potential adverse impact, it should prevent or mitigate the impact, use its leverage and remediate or contribute to remediating the harm. Companies that are linked to an actual or potential adverse impact without causing or contributing to it, should make use of their leverage to the greatest extent possible to mitigate the impact and should assist in remedy. Due to their particular nature and relationship with clients and investees, institutional investors and asset managers can only be considered linked to an adverse impact. As a result, they cannot be held liable for adverse impacts.

Amendment 24

Proposal for a directive

Recital 43

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(43) Companies should monitor the implementation and effectiveness of their due diligence measures. They should carry out periodic assessments of their own operations, those of their subsidiaries and, where related to the value chains of the company, those of their established business relationships, to monitor the effectiveness of the identification, prevention, minimisation, bringing to an end and mitigation of human rights and environmental adverse impacts. Such assessments should verify that adverse impacts are properly identified, due diligence measures are implemented and adverse impacts have actually been prevented or brought to an end. In order to ensure that such assessments are up-to-date, they should be carried out at least every 12 months and be revised in-between if there are reasonable grounds to believe that significant new risks of adverse impact could have arisen.(43) Companies should monitor the implementation and effectiveness of their due diligence measures. They should carry out continous assessments of their own operations, those of their subsidiaries and, where related to the value chains of the company, those of their business relationships, to monitor the effectiveness of the identification, prevention, minimisation, bringing to an end and mitigation of human rights and environmental adverse impacts. Such assessments should verify that adverse impacts are properly identified, due diligence measures are implemented and adverse impacts have actually been prevented or brought to an end. The assessments should be carried out regularly and be revised in-between if there are reasonable grounds to believe that significant new risks of adverse impact could have arisen. Financial undertakings should assess the company before providing the financial service and, where appropriate, after the provision of the service if it can be reasonably expected that the company in question is causing or contributing to an adverse impact. The appropriate frequency of verification in a given time period implied by the term 'regularly' should be determined in relation to the likelihood and severity of adverse impacts. The more likely and severe the impacts, the more regularly the verification of compliance should be carried out.

Amendment 25

Proposal for a directive

Recital 44

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(44) Like in the existing international standards set by the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD framework, it forms part of the due diligence requirement to communicate externally relevant information on due diligence policies, processes and activities conducted to identify and address actual or potential adverse impacts, including the findings and outcomes of those activities. The proposal to amend Directive 2013/34/EU as regards corporate sustainability reporting sets out relevant reporting obligations for the companies covered by this directive. In order to avoid duplicating reporting obligations, this Directive should therefore not introduce any new reporting obligations in addition to those under Directive 2013/34/EU for the companies covered by that Directive as well as the reporting standards that should be developed under it. As regards companies that are within the scope of this Directive, but do not fall under Directive 2013/34/EU, in order to comply with their obligation of communicating as part of the due diligence under this Directive, they should publish on their website an annual statement in a language customary in the sphere of international business.(44) Like in the existing international standards set by the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD framework, it forms part of the due diligence requirement to communicate externally relevant information on due diligence policies, processes and activities conducted to identify and address actual or potential adverse impacts, including the findings and outcomes of those activities. The proposal to amend Directive 2013/34/EU as regards corporate sustainability reporting sets out relevant reporting obligations for the companies covered by this directive. In order to avoid duplicating reporting obligations, this Directive should therefore not introduce any new reporting obligations in addition to those under Directive 2013/34/EU for the companies covered by that Directive as well as the reporting standards that should be developed under it. When information that should be reported according to this Directive is reported in accordance with another reporting requirement, the location of the information and, where applicable, a link to access the relevant report should be provided to ensure that users find it easily. As regards companies that are within the scope of this Directive, but do not fall under Directive 2013/34/EU, in order to comply with their obligation of communicating as part of the due diligence under this Directive, they should publish on their website an annual statement in an official language of the Member State.

Amendment 26

Proposal for a directive

Recital 45

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(45) In order to facilitate companies’ compliance with their due diligence requirements through their value chain and limiting shifting compliance burden on SME business partners, the Commission should provide guidance on model contractual clauses.(45) In order to facilitate companies’ compliance with their due diligence requirements through their value chain and limiting shifting compliance burden on SME business partners, the Commission should provide guidance on model contractual clauses. The development of contractual clauses to manage environmental and human rights risks shall be prioritized, particularly in the sectors regarded as high-impact for the purposes of this Directive.

Amendment 27

Proposal for a directive

Recital 46

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(46) In order to provide support and practical tools to companies or to Member State authorities on how companies should fulfil their due diligence obligations, the Commission, using relevant international guidelines and standards as a reference, and in consultation with Member States and stakeholders, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the European Environment Agency, and where appropriate with international bodies having expertise in due diligence, should have the possibility to issue guidelines, including for specific sectors or specific adverse impacts.(46) In order to provide support and practical tools to companies or to Member State authorities on how companies should fulfil their due diligence obligations, the Commission, using relevant international guidelines and standards as a reference, and in consultation with Member States and stakeholders, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the European Environment Agency, and where appropriate with international bodies having expertise in due diligence, should have the possibility to issue guidelines, including for specific sectors or specific adverse impacts. This should include practical guidance on how proportionality and prioritisation may be applied.

Amendment 28

Proposal for a directive

Recital 47

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(47) Although SMEs are not included in the scope of this Directive, they could be impacted by its provisions as contractors or subcontractors to the companies which are in the scope. The aim is nevertheless to mitigate financial or administrative burden on SMEs, many of which are already struggling in the context of the global economic and sanitary crisis. In order to support SMEs, Member States should set up and operate, either individually or jointly, dedicated websites, portals or platforms, and Member States could also financially support SMEs and help them build capacity. Such support should also be made accessible, and where necessary adapted and extended to upstream economic operators in third countries. Companies whose business partner is an SME, are also encouraged to support them to comply with due diligence measures, in case such requirements would jeopardize the viability of the SME and use fair, reasonable, non-discriminatory and proportionate requirements vis-a-vis the SMEs.(47) Although SMEs are not included in the scope of this Directive, they could be impacted by its provisions as contractors or subcontractors to the companies which are in the scope. The aim is nevertheless to mitigate financial or administrative burden in order to support SMEs, many of which are already struggling in the context of the global economic and sanitary crisis and to mitigate the financial or administrative burden on them. Member States should set up and operate, either individually or jointly, dedicated websites, portals or platforms, and Member States should also financially support SMEs and help them build capacity. Such support should also be made accessible, and where necessary adapted and extended to upstream economic operators in third countries. Companies whose business partner is an SME, are also encouraged to support them to comply with due diligence measures, in case such requirements would jeopardize the viability of the SME and use fair, reasonable, non-discriminatory and proportionate requirements vis-a-vis the SMEs.

Amendment 29

Proposal for a directive

Recital 54

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(54) In order to ensure effective enforcement of national measures implementing this Directive, Member States should provide for dissuasive, proportionate and effective sanctions for infringements of those measures. In order for such sanction regime to be effective, administrative sanctions to be imposed by the national supervisory authorities should include pecuniary sanctions. Where the legal system of a Member State does not provide for administrative sanctions as foreseen in this Directive, the rules on administrative sanctions should be applied in such a way that the sanction is initiated by the competent supervisory authority and imposed by the judicial authority. Therefore, it is necessary that those Member States ensure that the application of the rules and sanctions has an equivalent effect to the administrative sanctions imposed by the competent supervisory authorities.(54) In order to ensure effective enforcement of national measures implementing this Directive, Member States should provide for harmonised, dissuasive, proportionate and effective sanctions for infringements of those measures. In order for such sanction regime to be effective, administrative sanctions to be imposed by the national supervisory authorities should include pecuniary sanctions. Such administrative fines should be comparable in magnitude to fines currently provided for in competition law and data protection law. Where the legal system of a Member State does not provide for administrative sanctions as foreseen in this Directive, the rules on administrative sanctions should be applied in such a way that the sanction is initiated by the competent supervisory authority and imposed by the judicial authority. Therefore, it is necessary that those Member States ensure that the application of the rules and sanctions has an equivalent effect to the administrative sanctions imposed by the competent supervisory authorities.

Amendment 30

Proposal for a directive

Recital 57

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(57) As regards damages occurring at the level of established indirect business relationships, the liability of the company should be subject to specific conditions. The company should not be liable if it carried out specific due diligence measures. However, it should not be exonerated from liability through implementing such measures in case it was unreasonable to expect that the action actually taken, including as regards verifying compliance, would be adequate to prevent, mitigate, bring to an end or minimise the adverse impact. In addition, in the assessment of the existence and extent of liability, due account is to be taken of the company’s efforts, insofar as they relate directly to the damage in question, to comply with any remedial action required of them by a supervisory authority, any investments made and any targeted support provided as well as any collaboration with other entities to address adverse impacts in its value chains.(57) As regards damages occurring at the level of indirect business relationships, the liability of the company should be subject to specific conditions. The company should not be liable if it carried out specific due diligence measures. However, it should not be exonerated from liability through implementing such measures in case it was unreasonable to expect that the action actually taken, including as regards verifying compliance, would be adequate to prevent, mitigate, bring to an end or minimise the adverse impact. In addition, in the assessment of the existence and extent of liability, due account is to be taken of the company’s efforts, insofar as they relate directly to the damage in question, to comply with any remedial action required of them by a supervisory authority, any investments made and any targeted support provided as well as any collaboration with other entities to address adverse impacts in its value chains.

Amendment 31

Proposal for a directive

Recital 58

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(58) The liability regime does not regulate who should prove that the company’s action was reasonably adequate under the circumstances of the case, therefore this question is left to national law.deleted

Amendment 32

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(a) on obligations for companies regarding actual and potential human rights adverse impacts and environmental adverse impacts, with respect to their own operations, the operations of their subsidiaries, and the value chain operations carried out by entities with whom the company has an established business relationship and(a) on obligations for companies regarding actual and potential human rights adverse impacts and actual and potential environmental adverse impacts, with respect to their own operations, the operations of their subsidiaries, and the operations carried out by entities in their value chain using a risk-based approach;

Amendment 33

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(b) on liability for violations of the obligations mentioned above.(b) on liability for harm that occurred in the operations described above where the company has caused or contributed to the harm by acts or omissions in accordance with national law;

Amendment 34

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(ba) on access to justice and legal remedies to victims for damages suffered in relations to these impacts.

Amendment 35

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
The nature of business relationships as ‘established’ shall be reassessed periodically, and at least every 12 months.deleted

Amendment 36

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
2. This Directive shall not constitute grounds for reducing the level of protection of human rights or of protection of the environment or the protection of the climate provided for by the law of Member States at the time of the adoption of this Directive.2. This Directive shall not constitute grounds for reducing the level of protection of human rights or of protection of the environment or the protection of the climate provided for by the law of Member States, nor shall it constitute grounds for reducing access to justice and legal remedies for victims.

Amendment 37

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv – indent 19 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
- a market operator as defined in Article 4(1), point (18), of Directive 2014/65/EU1a;
1a Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on markets in financial instruments and amending Directive 2002/92/EC and Directive 2011/61/EU (OJ L 173, 12.6.2014, p. 349–496).

Amendment 38

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv – indent 19 b (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
- a credit rating agency as defined in Article 3(1), point (b), of Regulation (EC) 1060/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a;
1a Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 on credit rating agencies (OJ L 302, 17.11.2009, p.1).

Amendment 39

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv – indent 19 c (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
- an administrator as defined in Article 3(1), point (6), of Regulation (EU) 2016/1011 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a.
1a Regulation (EU) 2016/1011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on indices used as benchmarks in financial instruments and financial contracts or to measure the performance of investment funds and amending Directives 2008/48/EC and 2014/17/EU and Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 (OJ L 171, 29.6.2016, p. 1).

Amendment 40

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(aa) 'investee company' means a company in which an institutional investor or asset manager invests which cannot be considered as a controlled undertaking;

Amendment 41

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(ab) 'institutional investor' means an entity as defined by Article 2(e) of Directive 2007/36/EC, within the scope of Article 2 of this Directive;

Amendment 42

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a c (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(ac) 'asset manager' means an entity as defined by Article 2(f) of Directive 2007/36/EC, within the scope of Article 2 of this Directive;

Amendment 43

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(e) ‘business relationship’ means a relationship with a contractor, subcontractor or any other legal entities (‘partner’)(e) ‘business relationship’ means a relationship with a contractor, subcontractor or any other legal entities (‘partner’) throughout its value chain.

Amendment 44

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e – point ii a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(iia) that is directly linked to the business operations, products or services;

Amendment 45

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(f) ‘established business relationship’ means a business relationship, whether direct or indirect, which is, or which is expected to be lasting, in view of its intensity or duration and which does not represent a negligible or merely ancillary part of the value chain;deleted

Amendment 46

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(g) ‘value chain’ means activities related to the production of goods or the provision of services by a company, including the development of the product or the service and the use and disposal of the product as well as the related activities of upstream and downstream established business relationships of the company. As regards companies within the meaning of point (a)(iv), ‘value chain’ with respect to the provision of these specific services shall only include the activities of the clients receiving such loan, credit, and other financial services and of other companies belonging to the same group whose activities are linked to the contract in question. The value chain of such regulated financial undertakings does not cover SMEs receiving loan, credit, financing, insurance or reinsurance of such entities;(g) ‘value chain’ means activities of the business partners of a company related to the production and supply of goods or the provision of services by a company, including the development or use of a product or service. As regards companies within the meaning of point (a)(iv), ‘value chain’ with respect to the provision of these specific services shall by priority include the activities of the clients receiving such loan, credit, and other financial services and of other companies belonging to the same group whose activities are linked to the contract in question, as well as cover the impact of such activities. The value chain of regulated financial undertakings within the meaning of point (a) (iv) does not cover SMEs receiving loan, credit, financing, insurance or reinsurance, investment services and activities or other financial services of such entities;

Amendment 47

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(ga) ‘leverage’ means the ability of a company to effect change in the wrongful practices of the entity that causes or contributes to the adverse impact;

Amendment 48

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(h) ‘independent third-party verification’ means verification of the compliance by a company, or parts of its value chain, with human rights and environmental requirements resulting from the provisions of this Directive by an auditor which is independent from the company, free from any conflicts of interests, has experience and competence in environmental and human rights matters and is accountable for the quality and reliability of the audit;(h) ‘independent third-party verification’ means verification of the compliance by a company, or parts of its value chain, with human rights and environmental requirements resulting from the provisions of this Directive by an auditor that is accredited in a Member State for conducting certifications that are based on internationally recognised standards that address human rights and environmental matters and which is independent from the company, free from any conflicts of interests, has experience and competence in environmental and human rights matters and is accountable for the quality and reliability of the audit;

Amendment 49

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point k

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(k) ‘authorised representative’ means a natural or legal person resident or established in the Union who has a mandate from a company within the meaning of point (a)(ii) to act on its behalf in relation to compliance with that company’s obligations pursuant to this Directive;(k) ‘authorised representative’ means a natural or legal person who has a mandate from a company within the meaning of point (a)(ii) to act on its behalf in relation to compliance with that company’s obligations pursuant to this Directive;

Amendment 50

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point n

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(n) ‘stakeholders’ means the company’s employees, the employees of its subsidiaries, and other individuals, groups, communities or entities whose rights or interests are or could be affected by the products, services and operations of that company, its subsidiaries and its business relationships;(n) ‘stakeholders’ means individuals, groups, communities or entities whose rights or interests are or could be affected by the potential or actual adverse environmental or human rights impacts connected to the products, services and operations of that company, its subsidiaries and its business relationships, including workers and their representatives, local communities, children, indigenous peoples, citizens’ associations, trade unions, civil society organisations and the undertakings’ shareholders, as well as organisations whose statutory purpose is the defence of human rights, including social and labour rights, the environment land or good governance;

Amendment 51

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point q

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(q) ‘appropriate measure’ means a measure that is capable of achieving the objectives of due diligence, commensurate with the degree of severity and the likelihood of the adverse impact, and reasonably available to the company, taking into account the circumstances of the specific case, including characteristics of the economic sector and of the specific business relationship and the company’s influence thereof, and the need to ensure prioritisation of action.(q) ‘appropriate measure’ means a measure that is capable of achieving the objectives of due diligence, commensurate with the degree of severity and the likelihood of the adverse impact, and reasonably available to the company, taking into account the circumstances of the specific case, including characteristics of the economic sector and of the specific business relationship and the company’s influence thereof, the company’s ability to increase its influence thereof and the need to ensure prioritisation of action.

Amendment 52

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
For the purposes of point (h) of the first paragraph, the Commission shall adopt a delegated act in accordance with Article 28 to specify the minimum standards for the independent third-party verification.

Amendment 53

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(a) integrating due diligence into their policies in accordance with Article 5;(a) embedding due diligence into their policies and management systems in accordance with Article 5;

Amendment 54

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(b) identifying actual or potential adverse impacts in accordance with Article 6;(b) identifying and prioritising actual or potential adverse impacts in accordance with Article 6;

Amendment 55

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(c) preventing and mitigating potential adverse impacts, and bringing actual adverse impacts to an end and minimising their extent in accordance with Articles 7 and 8;(c) preventing or mitigating potential adverse impacts, and, where applicable bringing actual adverse impacts to an end or minimising their extent in accordance with Articles 7 and 8;

Amendment 56

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
1a. Where it is not feasible to address all identified impacts at once, Member States shall ensure that companies, when carrying out the actions referred to in paragraph 1, points (b) and (c), shall prioritise adverse impacts according to their severity and their likelihood, and shall take into consideration the nature and context of their operations, including geographic location. Severity is understood as a function of the scale, scope and irremediably character of the adverse impact. Actions carried out in accordance with paragraph 1, point (c), may address adverse impacts in the order of their prioritisation.

Amendment 57

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
1. Member States shall ensure that companies integrate due diligence into all their corporate policies and have in place a due diligence policy. The due diligence policy shall contain all of the following:1. Member States shall ensure that companies embed due diligence into all their corporate policies and management systems and have in place a due diligence policy. The due diligence policy shall contain all of the following:

Amendment 58

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(b) a code of conduct describing rules and principles to be followed by the company’s employees and subsidiaries;(b) a code of conduct describing rules and principles to be followed by the company’s employees and subsidiaries. The code of conduct shall be designed to ensure the respect of human rights and the environment by the company;

Amendment 59

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(c) a description of the processes put in place to implement due diligence, including the measures taken to verify compliance with the code of conduct and to extend its application to established business relationships.(c) a description of the processes put in place to implement due diligence across the value chain, including the measures taken to verify compliance with the code of conduct.

Amendment 60

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
2. Member States shall ensure that the companies update their due diligence policy annually.2. Member States shall ensure that the companies update and publish their due diligence policy annually. Undertakings’ due diligence policies should be publicly accessible through the European Single Access Point for at least 30 years.

Amendment 61

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
2a. Member States shall ensure that companies carry out a due diligence policy which is proportionate and commensurate to the likelihood and severity of their potential or actual adverse impacts and their specific circumstances, particularly their sector of activity, the size and length of their value chain, the size of the company, its capacity, resources and leverage.

Amendment 62

Proposal for a directive

Article 6 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
1. Member States shall ensure that companies take appropriate measures to identify actual and potential adverse human rights impacts and adverse environmental impacts arising from their own operations or those of their subsidiaries and, where related to their value chains, from their established business relationships, in accordance with paragraph 2, 3 and 4.1. Member States shall ensure that companies take appropriate measures within their means to identify and assess whether they cause, contribute to or are directly linked to actual and potential adverse human rights impacts as well as actual and potential adverse environmental impacts arising from their own operations or those of their subsidiaries and, where related to their value chains, from their business relationships, taking a risk-based approach in accordance with paragraph 2, 3 and 4.

Amendment 63

Proposal for a directive

Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
1a. Member States shall ensure companies identify whether they cause, contribute to or are directly linked to actual and potential adverse human rights impacts and adverse environmental impacts based on a risk assessment and risk-based monitoring methodology, taking into account the likelihood, severity and urgency of adverse impacts, the nature and context of their operations, including sector and geographic location, and whether their operations and business relationships cause or contribute to or are directly linked to any of those adverse impacts.

Amendment 64

Proposal for a directive

Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
1b. Member States shall ensure that companies map their value chain and, with due regard for commercial confidentiality, publicly disclose relevant information including names, locations, types of products and services supplied, and other relevant information concerning subsidiaries, and business relationships.

Amendment 65

Proposal for a directive

Article 6 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, companies referred to in Article 2(1), point (b), and Article 2(2), point (b), shall only be required to identify actual and potential severe adverse impacts relevant to the respective sector mentioned in Article 2(1), point (b).deleted

Amendment 66

Proposal for a directive

Article 6 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
3. When companies referred to in Article 3, point (a)(iv), provide credit, loan or other financial services, identification of actual and potential adverse human rights impacts and adverse environmental impacts shall be carried out only before providing that service..deleted

Amendment 67

Proposal for a directive

Article 6 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
4. Member States shall ensure that, for the purposes of identifying the adverse impacts referred to in paragraph 1 based on, where appropriate, quantitative and qualitative information, companies are entitled to make use of appropriate resources, including independent reports and information gathered through the complaints procedure provided for in Article 9. Companies shall, where relevant, also carry out consultations with potentially affected groups including workers and other relevant stakeholders to gather information on actual or potential adverse impacts.4. Member States shall ensure that, for the purposes of identifying and assessing the adverse impacts referred to in paragraph 1 based on, where appropriate, quantitative and qualitative information, companies are entitled to make use of appropriate resources, including independent reports and information gathered through the complaints procedure provided for in Article 9. Companies shall, where relevant, also carry out consultations with potentially affected groups including trade unions, workers’ representatives and other relevant stakeholders to gather information on actual or potential adverse impacts. This approach in the financial services sector will be informed by clear financial sector guidelines. Regulated financial institutions as well as other companies shall refer to relevant information derived from sources other than credit rating agencies, sustainability rating agencies or benchmark administrators.

Amendment 68

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
1. Member States shall ensure that companies take appropriate measures to prevent, or where prevention is not possible or not immediately possible, adequately mitigate potential adverse human rights impacts and adverse environmental impacts that have been, or should have been, identified pursuant to Article 6, in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 of this Article.1. Member States shall ensure that companies take appropriate and commensurate measures to prevent, or where prevention is not possible or not immediately possible, adequately mitigate potential adverse human rights impacts and adverse environmental impacts that have been, or should have been, identified pursuant to Article 6, using a risk-based approach in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 of this Article. Companies that are linked to the potential adverse impact without causing or contributing to it are required to make use of their leverage to the greatest extent possible, to prevent or mitigate any remaining impacts and are required to assist in remediation.

Amendment 69

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
2. Companies shall be required to take the following actions, where relevant:2. In order to comply with paragraph 1 of this Article, companies shall be required to take the following actions, where relevant:

Amendment 70

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(aa) set up a prioritisation strategy in line with Principle 17 of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Companies shall consider the level of severity, likelihood and urgency of the different potential or actual adverse impacts on human rights or actual impacts on the environment, the nature and context of their operations, including geographic location, the scope of the risks, their scale and how irremediable they might be, and if necessary, use the prioritisation policy in dealing with them. When prioritising their response to risks to human rights, companies shall treat the severity of an adverse impact, such as where a delayed response would make the impact irremediable, as the predominant factor;

Amendment 71

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a b (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(ab) companies shall ensure that their purchase policies do not cause or contribute to potential or actual adverse impacts on human rights or actual adverse impacts on the environment;

Amendment 72

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(b) seek contractual assurances from a business partner with whom it has a direct business relationship that it will ensure compliance with the company’s code of conduct and, as necessary, a prevention action plan, including by seeking corresponding contractual assurances from its partners, to the extent that their activities are part of the company’s value chain (contractual cascading). When such contractual assurances are obtained, paragraph 4 shall apply;(b) seek, if possible, proportionate and taking into account competition law contractual and other assurances from a business partner that it will ensure compliance with the company’s code of conduct and, as necessary, a prevention action plan. When such assurances are obtained, paragraph 4 shall apply;

Amendment 73

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(c) make necessary investments, such as into management or production processes and infrastructures, to comply with paragraph 1;(c) establish appropriate processes and procedures infrastructures, to comply with paragraph 1;

Amendment 74

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(d) provide targeted and proportionate support for an SME with which the company has an established business relationship, where compliance with the code of conduct or the prevention action plan would jeopardise the viability of the SME;(d) provide targeted and proportionate support for an SME with which the company has business relationship, where compliance with the code of conduct or the prevention action plan would jeopardise the viability of the SME;

Amendment 75

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
3. As regards potential adverse impacts that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated by the measures in paragraph 2, the company may seek to conclude a contract with a partner with whom it has an indirect relationship, with a view to achieving compliance with the company’s code of conduct or a prevention action plan. When such a contract is concluded, paragraph 4 shall apply.deleted

Amendment 76

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
The contractual assurances or the contract shall be accompanied by the appropriate measures to verify compliance. For the purposes of verifying compliance, the company may refer to suitable industry initiatives or independent third-party verification.Assurances, contractual or non-contractual, shall be accompanied by the appropriate measures to assess their effectiveness. For the purposes of assessing effectiveness, the company may refer to suitable industry initiatives or independent third-party verification. The terms used shall be fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory.

Amendment 77

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
When contractual assurances are obtained from, or a contract is entered into, with an SME, the terms used shall be fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory. Where measures to verify compliance are carried out in relation to SMEs, the company shall bear the cost of the independent third-party verification.Where measures to assess the effectiveness are carried out in relation to SMEs, the company shall bear the cost of the independent third-party verification.

Amendment 78

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
Member States shall ensure that the general due diligence duty always clearly prevails over any contractual assurances. Contractual assurances shall always be assessed against the general duty.

Amendment 79

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
As regards potential adverse impacts within the meaning of paragraph 1 that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated by the measures in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4, the company shall be required to refrain from entering into new or extending existing relations with the partner in connection with or in the value chain of which the impact has arisen and shall, where the law governing their relations so entitles them to, take the following actions:As regards potential adverse impacts within the meaning of paragraph 1 that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated by the measures in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 and taking due account of the efforts of the company to make use of its leverage to prevent or adequately mitigate adverse potential impacts, the company shall be required to refrain from entering into new or extending existing relations with the partner in connection with or in the value chain of which the impact has arisen and shall, where the law governing their relations so entitles them to, take the following actions, if they are in the best interest of the potential victims of the potential and actual adverse impacts, in line with responsible disengagement, also taking into account proportionality, the consequences of disrupting supply chains and the potential adverse impacts of such decisions:

Amendment 80

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(b) terminate the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned if the potential adverse impact is severe.(b) terminate, as a last resort, the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned if the potential adverse impact is severe or irreversible.

Amendment 81

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
6. By way of derogation from paragraph 5, point (b), when companies referred to in Article 3, point (a)(iv), provide credit, loan or other financial services, they shall not be required to terminate the credit, loan or other financial service contract when this can be reasonably expected to cause substantial prejudice to the entity to whom that service is being provided.6. By way of derogation from paragraph 5, point (b), when companies referred to in Article 3, point (a)(iv), provide credit, loan or other financial services, to entities that cause or contribute to potential adverse impacts within the meaning of paragraph 1 they shall not be required to terminate the credit, loan or other financial service contract if this is strictly necessary to prevent bankruptcy to the entity to whom that service is being provided. A decision to terminate the credit, loan or other financial service contract in derogation from paragraph 5, point (b) may only be taken, as a last resort, if the leverage efforts of companies referred to in Article 3, point (a)(iv) have ultimately failed to influence the entity to whom that service is being provided to prevent or adequately mitigate adverse potential impacts and if the continuation of the credit, loan or other financial service contract is proportionate to the severity and the likelihood of the potential adverse impact.

Amendment 82

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
1. Member States shall ensure that companies take appropriate measures to bring actual adverse impacts that have been, or should have been, identified pursuant to Article 6 to an end, in accordance with paragraphs 2 to 6 of this Article.1. Member States shall ensure that companies take appropriate and commensurate measures within their means to mitigate and bring to an end actual adverse impacts that they have caused or contributed to and that have been, or should have been, identified pursuant to Article 6, in accordance with paragraphs 2 to 6 of this Article. Companies that are linked to the adverse impact without causing or contributing to it are required to make use of their leverage to the extent possible, to bring actual adverse impacts to an end.

Amendment 83

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
2. Where the adverse impact cannot be brought to an end, Member States shall ensure that companies minimise the extent of such an impact.2. Where the adverse impact cannot be brought to an end, Member States shall ensure that companies try to minimise the extent of such an impact to the greatest extent possible, while continuing to try to bring the adverse impact to an end.

Amendment 84

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point a

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(a) neutralise the adverse impact or minimise its extent, including by the payment of damages to the affected persons and of financial compensation to the affected communities. The action shall be proportionate to the significance and scale of the adverse impact and to the contribution of the company’s conduct to the adverse impact;(a) neutralise the adverse impact or minimise its extent, including, where reasonable and applicable by the payment of damages to the affected persons and of financial compensation to the affected communities. The action shall be proportionate and commensurate to the significance and scale of the adverse impact and to the contribution of the company’s conduct to the adverse impact as well as to its resources and leverage;

Amendment 85

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(ba) set up a prioritisation strategy in line with Principle 17 of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights;

Amendment 86

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point c

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(c) seek contractual assurances from a direct partner with whom it has an established business relationship that it will ensure compliance with the code of conduct and, as necessary, a corrective action plan, including by seeking corresponding contractual assurances from its partners, to the extent that they are part of the value chain (contractual cascading). When such contractual assurances are obtained, paragraph 5 shall apply.(c) if applicable, seek assurances, contractual or non-contractual from a business partner that it will ensure compliance with the code of conduct and, as necessary, a corrective action plan. When such assurances are obtained, paragraph 5 shall apply.

Amendment 87

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point d

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(d) make necessary investments, such as into management or production processes and infrastructures to comply with paragraphs 1, 2 and 3;(d) make, where necessary and applicable investments, such as into management or production processes and infrastructures to comply with paragraphs 1, 2 and 3;

Amendment 88

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point e

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(e) provide targeted and proportionate support for an SME with which the company has an established business relationship, where compliance with the code of conduct or the corrective action plan would jeopardise the viability of the SME;(e) provide targeted and proportionate support for an SME with which the company has a business relationship, where compliance with the code of conduct or the corrective action plan would jeopardise the viability of the SME;

Amendment 89

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
4. As regards actual adverse impacts that could not be brought to an end or adequately mitigated by the measures in paragraph 3, the company may seek to conclude a contract with a partner with whom it has an indirect relationship, with a view to achieving compliance with the company’s code of conduct or a corrective action plan. When such a contract is concluded, paragraph 5 shall apply.deleted

Amendment 90

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
The contractual assurances or the contract shall be accompanied by the appropriate measures to verify compliance. For the purposes of verifying compliance, the company may refer to suitable industry initiatives or independent third-party verification.Assurances, contractual or non-contractual shall be accompanied by the appropriate measures to assess their effectiveness. For the purposes of assessing the effectiveness, the company may refer to suitable industry initiatives or independent third-party verification. The terms used shall be fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory.

Amendment 91

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
When contractual assurances are obtained from, or a contract is entered into, with an SME, the terms used shall be fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory. Where measures to verify compliance are carried out in relation to SMEs, the company shall bear the cost of the independent third-party verification.Where measures to assess the effectiveness are carried out in relation to SMEs, the company shall bear the cost of the independent third-party verification.

Amendment 92

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
As regards actual adverse impacts within the meaning of paragraph 1 that could not be brought to an end or the extent of which could not be minimised by the measures provided for in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5, the company shall refrain from entering into new or extending existing relations with the partner in connection to or in the value chain of which the impact has arisen and shall, where the law governing their relations so entitles them to, take one of the following actions:As regards actual adverse impacts within the meaning of paragraph 1 that could not be brought to an end or the extent of which could not be minimised by the measures provided for in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5, and taking due account of the efforts of the company to make use of its leverage to bring actual adverse impacts to an end or to minimise their extent, the company shall refrain from entering into new or extending existing relations with the partner in connection to or in the value chain of which the impact has arisen and shall, where the law governing their relations so entitles them to, take one of the following actions if they are in the best interest of the potential victims of the potential and actual adverse impacts, in line with responsible disengagement, also taking into account proportionality and the potential adverse impacts of such decisions:

Amendment 93

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(b) terminate the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned, if the adverse impact is considered severe.(b) as a last resort, responsibly disengage in the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned, if the adverse impact is considered severe.

Amendment 94

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
7. By way of derogation from paragraph 6, point (b), when companies referred to in Article 3, point (a)(iv), provide credit, loan or other financial services, they shall not be required to terminate the credit, loan or other financial service contract, when this can be reasonably expected to cause substantial prejudice to the entity to whom that service is being provided.7. By way of derogation from paragraph 6, point (b), when companies referred to in Article 3, point (a)(iv), provide credit, loan or other financial services to entities that cause or contribute to actual adverse impacts in the meaning of paragraph 1, they shall not be required to terminate the credit, loan or other financial service contract, if this is strictly necessary to prevent bankruptcy to the entity to whom that service is being provided. A decision to terminate the credit, loan or other financial service contract in derogation from paragraph 6, point (b) may only be taken, as a last resort, if the leverage efforts of companies referred to in Article 3, point (a)(iv) have ultimately failed to influence the entity to whom that service is being provided to bring actual adverse impacts to an end or to minimise their extent and if the continuation of the credit, loan or other financial service contract is proportionate to the severity of the actual adverse impact.

Amendment 95

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
Article 8a
Appropriate measures by institutional investors and asset managers to induce their investee companies to bring actual adverse impacts caused by them to an end
1. Member States shall ensure that institutional investors and asset managers take appropriate measures as described in paragraph 3 of this Article to induce their investee companies to bring actual adverse impacts that have been, or should have been identified pursuant to Article 6 to an end, in accordance with Article 2, paragraphs 2 to 6.
2. Where the adverse impact cannot be brought to an end, Member States shall ensure that institutional investors and asset managers induce their investee companies to minimise the extent of such an impact.
3. Where relevant, institutional investors and asset managers shall be required to engage with the investee company and exercise voting rights in line with Article 3g (1), point (a) of Directive 2007/36/EC [SRD2], in order to induce the management body of an investee company to bring the actual impact to and end or minimise its extent. The action sought from the investee company shall be proportionate to the significance and scale of the adverse impact and to the contribution of the investee company’s conduct to the adverse impact. Likewise, the actions required from institutional investors and asset managers shall be proportionate and commensurate, and shall take due account of the degree of control they have over the investee company.

Amendment 96

Proposal for a directive

Article 9 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
1. Member States shall ensure that companies provide the possibility for persons and organisations listed in paragraph 2 to submit complaints to them where they have legitimate concerns regarding actual or potential adverse human rights impacts and adverse environmental impacts with respect to their own operations, the operations of their subsidiaries and their value chains.1. Member States shall ensure that companies establish or participate in effective complaint mechanisms at operational level that can be used by providing the possibility for persons and organisations listed in paragraph 2 to submit complaints to them where they have legitimate information regarding actual or potential adverse human rights impacts and adverse environmental impacts with respect to their own operations, the operations of their subsidiaries and their value chains. The complaint must be factually justified and reasonably documented. The complaint procedure shall serve both as an early-warning mechanism for risk-awareness and as a mediation system and shall be safe, legitimate, accessible and equitable, and shall provide for the possibility to raise complaints anonymously and confidentially. Recourse to such procedures shall not preclude claimants from having access to judicial mechanisms.

Amendment 97

Proposal for a directive

Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
1a. Member States shall ensure that companies are enabled to provide such a mechanism through collaborative arrangements with other companies, industry schemes or organisations, by participating in multi-stakeholder grievance mechanisms or joining a Global Framework Agreement.

Amendment 98

Proposal for a directive

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(a) persons who are affected or have reasonable grounds to believe that they might be affected by an adverse impact,(a) persons who are affected or have reasonable grounds to believe that they will be affected by an adverse impact,

Amendment 99

Proposal for a directive

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(b) trade unions and other workers’ representatives representing individuals working in the value chain concerned,(b) trade unions and other workers’ representatives representing individuals working in the value chain concerned, which have a legitimate concern,

Amendment 100

Proposal for a directive

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(c) civil society organisations active in the areas related to the value chain concerned.(c) civil society organisations active in the areas related to the value chain concerned, with a legitimate interest.

Amendment 101

Proposal for a directive

Article 9 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
3. Member States shall ensure that the companies establish a procedure for dealing with complaints referred to in paragraph 1, including a procedure when the company considers the complaint to be unfounded, and inform the relevant workers and trade unions of those procedures. Member States shall ensure that where the complaint is well-founded, the adverse impact that is the subject matter of the complaint is deemed to be identified within the meaning of Article 6.3. Member States shall ensure that the companies establish a procedure for dealing with complaints referred to in paragraph 1, including a procedure when the company considers the complaint to be unfounded, and inform the relevant workers and trade unions of those procedures. Member States shall ensure that where the complaint is well-founded, the adverse impact that is the subject matter of the complaint is deemed to be identified within the meaning of Article 6. This can be done in cooperation with industry schemes or multi-stakeholder initiatives.

Amendment 102

Proposal for a directive

Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
4. Member States shall ensure that complainants are entitled4. Member States shall ensure that complainants are entitled to request appropriate follow-up on the complaint from the company with which they have filed a complaint pursuant to paragraph 1.

Amendment 103

Proposal for a directive

Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point a

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(a) to request appropriate follow-up on the complaint from the company with which they have filed a complaint pursuant to paragraph 1, anddeleted

Amendment 104

Proposal for a directive

Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point b

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(b) to meet with the company’s representatives at an appropriate level to discuss potential or actual severe adverse impacts that are the subject matter of the complaint.deleted

Amendment 105

Proposal for a directive

Article 10 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
Member States shall ensure that companies carry out periodic assessments of their own operations and measures, those of their subsidiaries and, where related to the value chains of the company, those of their established business relationships, to monitor the effectiveness of the identification, prevention, mitigation, bringing to an end and minimisation of the extent of human rights and environmental adverse impacts. Such assessments shall be based, where appropriate, on qualitative and quantitative indicators and be carried out at least every 12 months and whenever there are reasonable grounds to believe that significant new risks of the occurrence of those adverse impacts may arise. The due diligence policy shall be updated in accordance with the outcome of those assessments.Member States shall ensure that companies carry out continuous assessments of their own operations and measures, those of their subsidiaries and, where related to the value chains of the company, those of their business relationships, to monitor the effectiveness of the identification, prevention, mitigation, bringing to an end and minimisation of the extent of human rights and environmental adverse impacts. Such assessments shall be undertaken with trade union, workers’ representatives and in consultation with stakeholders. They shall be based, where appropriate, on qualitative and quantitative indicators and be carried out regularly and whenever there are reasonable grounds to believe that significant new risks of the occurrence of those adverse impacts may arise. The due diligence policy shall be updated in accordance with the outcome of those assessments.

Amendment 106

Proposal for a directive

Article 11 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
Member States shall ensure that companies that are not subject to reporting requirements under Articles 19a and 29a of Directive 2013/34/EU report on the matters covered by this Directive by publishing on their website an annual statement in a language customary in the sphere of international business. The statement shall be published by 30 April each year, covering the previous calendar year.Member States shall ensure that companies that are not subject to reporting requirements under Articles 19a and 29a of Directive 2013/34/EU report on the matters covered by this Directive by publishing on their website an annual statement in an official language of the Member State. The statement shall be published by 30 April each year, covering the previous calendar year.

Amendment 107

Proposal for a directive

Article 11 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 28 concerning the content and criteria for such reporting under paragraph 1, specifying information on the description of due diligence, potential and actual adverse impacts and actions taken on those.The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 28 concerning the content and criteria for such reporting under paragraph 1, specifying information on the description of due diligence, its design, methodology, potential and actual adverse impacts and actions taken on those. The Commission shall ensure that reporting is possible via a simplified reporting form and shall, no later than one year after the entry into force of this Directive, provide guidelines to support companies in fulfilling their obligations.

Amendment 108

Proposal for a directive

Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
When adopting delegated acts, the Commission shall ensure that there is no duplication in reporting requirements for companies referred to in Article 3, point (a)(iv), that are subject to reporting requirements and consider principal adverse impacts under Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2019/2088 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a, while maintaining in full the minimum obligations stipulated in this Directive.
1a Regulation (EU) 2019/2088 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2019 on sustainability-related disclosures in the financial services sector (OJ L 317, 9.12.2019, p. 1).

Amendment 109

Proposal for a directive

Article 11 – paragraph 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
Member States shall ensure that annual statements prepared by companies pursuant to this Article are submitted to the collection body referred to in Regulation [insert ESAP Regulation] in order to make that information accessible on the European Single Access Point (ESAP).

Amendment 110

Proposal for a directive

Article 12 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
In order to provide support to companies to facilitate their compliance with Article 7(2), point (b), and Article 8(3), point (c), the Commission shall adopt guidance about voluntary model contract clauses.In order to provide support to companies to facilitate their compliance with Article 7(2), point (b), and Article 8(3), point (c), the Commission shall adopt guidance about voluntary model contract clauses no later than one year after the entry into force of this Directive. It shall prioritise the development of contractual clauses to manage environmental and human rights risks.

Amendment 111

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
In order to provide support to companies or to Member State authorities on how companies should fulfil their due diligence obligations, the Commission, in consultation with Member States and stakeholders, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the European Environment Agency, and where appropriate with international bodies having expertise in due diligence, may issue guidelines, including for specific sectors or specific adverse impacts.In order to provide support to companies or to Member State authorities on how companies should fulfil their due diligence obligations, the Commission, in consultation with Member States and stakeholders, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the European Environment Agency, the Executive Agency for Small and Medium Enterprises, and with international bodies having expertise in due diligence, shall issue guidelines:

Amendment 112

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(a) in digital, free of charge and easily accessible format;

Amendment 113

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(b) including for specific sectors, specific contexts and areas, or specific adverse impacts;

Amendment 114

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(c) including practical guidance on how companies and sectors covered by this Directive may apply their due diligence obligations drawing on relevant sectoral and horizontal guidance by the OECD and the UN;

Amendment 115

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(d) including an overview on applicable industry initiatives;

Amendment 116

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point e (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(e) including practical guidance on how proportionality and prioritisation, in terms of impacts, sectors and geographical areas, may be applied to due diligence obligations depending on the size and sector of the undertaking;

Amendment 117

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point f (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(f) adopt and adapt guidance as appropriate about competition law in relation to their due diligence obligations in order to provide support to companies to facilitate their compliance with Article 7(2), point (b), and Article 8(3), point (c), through the use of collective leverage.

Amendment 118

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
The guidelines shall be made available no later than ... [18 months after the date of entry into force of this Directive]. The Commission shall periodically review the relevance of its guidelines, adapt them to new best practices and issue new guidelines where needed.

Amendment 119

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
Country factsheets shall be updated regularly by the Commission and made publicly available in order to provide up-to-date information on the international Conventions and Treaties ratified by each of the Union’s trading partners. The Commission shall collect and publish trade and customs data on origins of raw materials, and intermediate and finished products, and publish information on human rights, environmental and governance potential or actual adverse impacts risks associated with certain countries or regions, sectors and sub-sectors, and products.

Amendment 120

Proposal for a directive

Article 14 – paragraph -1 (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
-1. Member States shall provide information and effective support to stakeholders, which may include dedicated websites, platforms or portals, legal counsel and administrative support to claim rights provided to them by this Directive.

Amendment 121

Proposal for a directive

Article 14 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
1. Member States shall, in order to provide information and support to companies and the partners with whom they have established business relationships in their value chains in their efforts to fulfil the obligations resulting from this Directive, set up and operate individually or jointly dedicated websites, platforms or portals. Specific consideration shall be given, in that respect, to the SMEs that are present in the value chains of companies.1. The Commission in cooperation with Member States shall, in order to provide information and support to companies and the partners with whom they have business relationships in their value chains in their efforts to fulfil the obligations resulting from this Directive, set up and operate individually or jointly dedicated websites, platforms or portals. Specific consideration shall be given, in that respect, to the SMEs that are present in the value chains of companies.

Amendment 122

Proposal for a directive

Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
2a. Member States may decide not to provide state support to companies that do not comply with the objectives of this Directive.

Amendment 123

Proposal for a directive

Article 14 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
3. The Commission may complement Member States’ support measures building on existing Union action to support due diligence in the Union and in third countries and may devise new measures, including facilitation of joint stakeholder initiatives to help companies fulfil their obligations.3. The Commission shall complement Member States’ support measures building on existing Union action to support due diligence in the Union and in third countries and may devise new measures, including facilitation of joint stakeholder initiatives to help companies fulfil their obligations.

Amendment 124

Proposal for a directive

Article 14 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
3a. The Commission shall develop and coordinate on a bi-annual basis resilience stress tests for companies. These shall be based on common methodologies that would map, assess the sustainability of companies’ value chains and provide preventative and remedial responses to address risks and vulnerabilities relating to adverse impacts in their value chains.

Amendment 125

Proposal for a directive

Article 14 – paragraph 3 b (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
3b. The Commission shall, once a year, and more frequently where necessary, provide a summary of the assessments under paragraph 3a to the European Parliament and the Council, including the main identified risks and vulnerabilities.

Amendment 126

Proposal for a directive

Article 14 – paragraph 3 c (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
3c. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt a delegated act in accordance with Article 28 to specify information required from companies for the purpose of paragraph 1, points (a) to (f), by October 2024.

Amendment 127

Proposal for a directive

Article 14 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
4. Companies may rely on industry schemes and multi-stakeholder initiatives to support the implementation of their obligations referred to in Articles 5 to 11 of this Directive to the extent that such schemes and initiatives are appropriate to support the fulfilment of those obligations. The Commission and the Member States may facilitate the dissemination of information on such schemes or initiatives and their outcome. The Commission, in collaboration with Member States, may issue guidance for assessing the fitness of industry schemes and multi-stakeholder initiatives.4. Companies may rely on industry schemes and multi-stakeholder initiatives to support the implementation of their obligations referred to in Articles 5 to 11 of this Directive to the extent that such schemes and initiatives are appropriate to support the fulfilment of those obligations. The Commission and the Member States shall facilitate the dissemination of information on such schemes or initiatives and their outcome. The Commission, in collaboration with Member States, shall issue guidance for assessing the fitness of industry schemes and multi-stakeholder initiatives.

Amendment 128

Proposal for a directive

Article 14 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
4a. Reliance on industry schemes and multi-stakeholder initiatives shall not absolve the company of its individual responsibility to perform due diligence or prevent it from being held liable.

Amendment 129

Proposal for a directive

Article 15 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
1. Member States shall ensure that companies referred to in Article 2(1), point (a), and Article 2(2), point (a), shall adopt a plan to ensure that the business model and strategy of the company are compatible with the transition to a sustainable economy and with the limiting of global warming to 1.5 °C in line with the Paris Agreement. This plan shall, in particular, identify, on the basis of information reasonably available to the company, the extent to which climate change is a risk for, or an impact of, the company’s operations.1. Member States shall ensure that companies referred to in Article 2(1), point (a), and Article 2(2), point (a) shall draw up and publish a transition plan as defined in Article 19a, paragraph 2, point (iii) of Directive 2022/2464 in which they identify, on the basis of information reasonably available to the company, the extent to which climate change is a risk for, or an impact of, the company’s operations.

Amendment 130

Proposal for a directive

Article 15 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
2. Member States shall ensure that, in case climate change is or should have been identified as a principal risk for, or a principal impact of, the company’s operations, the company includes emission reduction objectives in its plan.2. Member States shall ensure that, in case climate change is or should have been identified as a principal risk for, or a principal impact of, the company’s operations, the company includes emission reduction objectives in its transition plan.

Amendment 131

Proposal for a directive

Article 15 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
3. Member States shall ensure that companies duly take into account the fulfilment of the obligations referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 when setting variable remuneration, if variable remuneration is linked to the contribution of a director to the company’s business strategy and long-term interests and sustainability.deleted

Amendment 132

Proposal for a directive

Article 17 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
7. The Commission shall make publicly available, including on its website, a list of the supervisory authorities. The Commission shall regularly update the list on the basis of the information received from the Member States.7. The Commission shall make publicly available, including on its website, a list of the supervisory authorities, and when applicable, the respective competences of those authorities. The Commission shall regularly update the list on the basis of the information received from the Member States.

Amendment 133

Proposal for a directive

Article 18 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
7. Member States shall ensure that each natural or legal person has the right to an effective judicial remedy against a legally binding decision by a supervisory authority concerning them.7. Member States shall ensure that each natural or legal person has the right to an effective judicial remedy against a legally binding decision by a supervisory authority concerning them, in accordance with national law.

Amendment 134

Proposal for a directive

Article 18 – paragraph 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
7a. Member States shall ensure that decisions of supervisory authorities regarding a company’s compliance with the Directive shall be without prejudice to the company’s civil liability under Article 22.

Amendment 135

Proposal for a directive

Article 20 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
1. Member States shall lay down the rules on sanctions applicable to infringements of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive, and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The sanctions provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.1. The Commission shall lay down harmonised rules on administrative sanctions applicable to infringements of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive, and Member States shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The sanctions provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.

Amendment 136

Proposal for a directive

Article 20 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
2a. Any sanction adopted shall be made public.

Amendment 137

Proposal for a directive

Article 20 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
3. When pecuniary sanctions are imposed, they shall be based on the company’s turnover.deleted

Amendment 138

Proposal for a directive

Article 21 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
2a. The Authority shall set up a public database listing all undertakings subject to this Directive. Member States should cooperate with the Authority in order to identify all non-European undertakings covered by this Directive.
a) the list of undertakings shall link each undertaking’s name to the statement published pursuant to Article 11 or otherwise display that the undertaking has not published a statement;
b) the Authority shall set up a public database of high risk areas, as defined in Article 3;
c) each high risk area should be associated with a description of the specific risks it is subject to and relevant documentation on such risks.

Amendment 139

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(a) they failed to comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 7 and 8 and;(a) the companies failed to comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 7 and 8 and;

Amendment 140

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(b) as a result of this failure an adverse impact that should have been identified, prevented, mitigated, brought to an end or its extent minimised through the appropriate measures laid down in Articles 7 and 8 occurred and led to damage.(b) this failure to comply caused or contributed to the adverse impact.

Amendment 141

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
1a. This Article will not apply to situations where a company has not caused or contributed to an adverse impact, but there is a direct link between the operations, products or services of the company and an adverse impact.

Amendment 142

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
Notwithstanding paragraph 1, Member States shall ensure that where a company has taken the actions referred to in Article 7(2), point (b) and Article 7(4), or Article 8(3), point (c), and Article 8(5), it shall not be liable for damages caused by an adverse impact arising as a result of the activities of an indirect partner with whom it has an established business relationship, unless it was unreasonable, in the circumstances of the case, to expect that the action actually taken, including as regards verifying compliance, would be adequate to prevent, mitigate, bring to an end or minimise the extent of the adverse impact.Notwithstanding paragraph 1, Member States shall ensure that where a company has demonstrated to have complied with the obligations under this Directive, it shall not be liable for damages caused by an adverse impact arising as a result of the activities of an indirect partner, unless it was unreasonable, in the circumstances of the case, to expect that the action actually taken, including as regards verifying compliance, would be adequate to prevent, mitigate, bring to an end or minimise the extent of the adverse impact.

Amendment 143

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
If an adverse impact was not prioritised following the prioritization of adverse impacts in accordance with Article 4(1a), a company cannot be held liable for a risk materialising from such an adverse impact provided the risk prioritisation was accurate according to the severity and the likelihood of the adverse impacts identified under Article 6.

Amendment 144

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
In the assessment of the existence and extent of liability under this paragraph, due account shall be taken of the company’s efforts, insofar as they relate directly to the damage in question, to comply with any remedial action required of them by a supervisory authority, any investments made and any targeted support provided pursuant to Articles 7 and 8, as well as any collaboration with other entities to address adverse impacts in its value chains.deleted

Amendment 145

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
4. The civil liability rules under this Directive shall be without prejudice to Union or national rules on civil liability related to adverse human rights impacts or to adverse environmental impacts that provide for liability in situations not covered by or providing for stricter liability than this Directive.4. The civil liability rules under this Directive shall be without prejudice to Union or national rules on civil liability related to adverse human rights impacts or to adverse environmental impacts that provide for liability in situations not covered by or providing for stricter liability than this Directive. This Directive shall not affect any rights which an injured person may have according to the rules of the law of contractual or non-contractual liability or a special liability system existing at the moment when this Directive is notified.

Amendment 146

Proposal for a directive

Article 24

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
Article 24deleted
Public support
Member States shall ensure that companies applying for public support certify that no sanctions have been imposed on them for a failure to comply with the obligations of this Directive.

Amendment 147

Proposal for a directive

Article 28 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 11 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time.2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 3(1a), Article 14(3c) and Article 11 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time.

Amendment 148

Proposal for a directive

Article 28 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 11 may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 3(1a), Article 14(3c) and Article 11 may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.

Amendment 149

Proposal for a directive

Article 28 a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
Article 28a
Amendment to Directive (EU) 2020/1828 on Representative Actions for the Protection of the Collective Interests of Consumers
The following is added to Annex I: "(67) Directive (EU) .../... of the European Parliament and of the Council on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937 (OJ L ..., ..., p. ...).”.

Amendment 150

Proposal for a directive

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
No later than … [OP please insert the date = 7 years after the date of entry into force of this Directive], the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the implementation of this Directive. The report shall evaluate the effectiveness of this Directive in reaching its objectives and assess the following issues:No later than … [OP please insert the date = 7 years after the date of entry into force of this Directive], the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the implementation of this Directive. The report shall evaluate the effectiveness of this Directive in reaching its objectives, in particular regarding its effectiveness in preventing potential adverse impacts, bringing actual adverse impacts to an end or minimising their extent globally and assess the following issues:

Amendment 151

Proposal for a directive

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(ca) whether the definition of "value chain" as regards regulated financial undertakings should be extended to include SMEs;

Amendment 152

Proposal for a directive

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(da) whether additional legislative measures need to be adopted with a view to specific adverse impacts;

Amendment 153

Proposal for a directive

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(db) the achievement of the objectives of this Directive, including the convergences in the implementation of measures between the Member State;

Amendment 154

Proposal for a directive

Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point d c (new)

Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment
(dc) whether the impact of the Directive was justified and reached the targeted goals, including the associated indirect costs and the economic, social and environmental benefits thereof, on SMEs.

ANNEX: List of entities or persons

from whom the rapporteur FOR THE OPINION has received input

The following list is drawn up on a purely voluntary basis under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur for the opinion. The rapporteur has received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the opinion, until the adoption thereof in committee:

Entity and/or person
Deutscher Industrie- und Handelskammertag e.V. (German Chambers of Industry and Commerce)
Bundesministerium der Justiz (Federal Ministry of Justice (Germany))
European Coalition for Corporate Justice (ECCJ)
Global Witness
Südwind e.V.
European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC)
Responsible Business Alliance (RBA)
Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
Open Society European Policy Institute
Andreas STIHL AG & Co. KG
Bundesarbeitskammer Österreich (Federal Chamber of Labor Austria)
Shift
American Chamber of Commerce to the European Union (AmCham EU)
Bundesverband der Deutschen Volksbanken und Raiffeisenbanken e.V. ( National Association of German Cooperative Banks
Kirkland & Ellis International LPP
Business Europe (Roundtable)
BlackRock Inc.
Deutsche Kreditwirtschaft (Association of German Banks)
Gesamtverband der Deutschen Versicherungswirtschaft (German Insurance Association)
Hans-Böckler Stiftung (Hans Böckler Foundation)
Arbeitgeberverband Gesamtmetall e.V. ( Federation of German Employers' Associations in the Metal and Electrical Engineering Industries)

Procedure pages

How the committees handled the text, and how their members voted on it.

Procedure – committee asked for opinion 1 paragraph
TitleCorporate Sustainability Due Diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937
ReferencesCOM(2022)0071 – C9-0050/2022 – 2022/0051(COD)
Committee responsible Date announced in plenaryJURI 4.4.2022
Opinion by Date announced in plenaryECON 4.4.2022
Associated committees - date announced in plenary15.9.2022
Rapporteur for the opinion Date appointedRené Repasi 3.3.2022
Discussed in committee17.11.2022
Date adopted24.1.2023
Result of final vote+: –: 0:32 23 1
Members present for the final voteRasmus Andresen, Anna-Michelle Asimakopoulou, Marek Belka, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Stefan Berger, Gilles Boyer, Engin Eroglu, Markus Ferber, Jonás Fernández, Giuseppe Ferrandino, Frances Fitzgerald, José Manuel García-Margallo y Marfil, Valentino Grant, Claude Gruffat, José Gusmão, Eero Heinäluoma, Michiel Hoogeveen, Danuta Maria Hübner, Stasys Jakeliūnas, Billy Kelleher, Georgios Kyrtsos, Philippe Lamberts, Aušra Maldeikienė, Pedro Marques, Csaba Molnár, Denis Nesci, Dimitrios Papadimoulis, Piernicola Pedicini, Eva Maria Poptcheva, Dorien Rookmaker, Joachim Schuster, Ralf Seekatz, Paul Tang, Irene Tinagli, Ernest Urtasun, Inese Vaidere, Johan Van Overtveldt, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin, Marco Zanni
Substitutes present for the final voteHerbert Dorfmann, Gianna Gancia, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Valérie Hayer, Eugen Jurzyca, Chris MacManus, Ville Niinistö, Erik Poulsen, René Repasi
Substitutes under Rule 209(7) present for the final voteSusanna Ceccardi, Andor Deli, Pascal Durand, José Manuel Fernandes, Pierre Larrouturou, Marian-Jean Marinescu, Theresa Muigg, Alessandro Panza
Final vote by roll call in committee asked for opinion 3 paragraphs

32 · For

Renew
Gilles Boyer, Engin Eroglu, Giuseppe Ferrandino, Valérie Hayer, Billy Kelleher, Georgios Kyrtsos, Eva Maria Poptcheva, Erik Poulsen, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin
S&D
Marek Belka, Pascal Durand, Jonás Fernández, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Eero Heinäluoma, Pierre Larrouturou, Pedro Marques, Csaba Molnár, Theresa Muigg, René Repasi, Joachim Schuster, Paul Tang, Irene Tinagli
The Left
José Gusmão, Chris MacManus, Dimitrios Papadimoulis
Greens
Rasmus Andresen, Claude Gruffat, Stasys Jakeliūnas, Philippe Lamberts, Ville Niinistö, Piernicola Pedicini, Ernest Urtasun

23 · Against

ECR
Michiel Hoogeveen, Eugen Jurzyca, Denis Nesci, Dorien Rookmaker, Johan Van Overtveldt
ID
Susanna Ceccardi, Gianna Gancia, Valentino Grant, Alessandro Panza, Marco Zanni
No group
Andor Deli
EPP
Anna-Michelle Asimakopoulou, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Stefan Berger, Herbert Dorfmann, Markus Ferber, José Manuel Fernandes, José Manuel García-Margallo y Marfil, Danuta Maria Hübner, Aušra Maldeikienė, Marian-Jean Marinescu, Ralf Seekatz, Inese Vaidere

1 · Abstained

EPP
Frances Fitzgerald