Dividing the Indivisible

The absence of a number of important human rights instruments from the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, notably for indigenous peoples’ and migrants’ rights, are serious omissions and must be rectified at the EU level during the first review of the directive. Given the status of the CSDDD as a directive, Member States also have the freedom to add these missing instruments during national transposition and should do so in order to further honour their commitments under the UNGPs.

Unionsfeindlichkeit und Obstruktion

Am 9. Juni ist Europawahl. Mit dem zu erwartenden, starken Ergebnis der potenziell unionsfeindlichen Parteien bei der Europawahl wächst vor allem auch das Risiko für Angriffe aus dem Inneren des Europäischen Parlaments selbst. Ein Blick in die aktuelle Geschäftsordnung des EU-Parlaments (GOEP) zeigt bereits heute ein EU-Parlament, das sich im Bewusstsein dieser Obstruktionsgefahren selbst organisiert hat.

National Human Rights Institutions – Critical but, Overlooked Actors

National Human Rights Institutions are a critical but often overlooked actor in the context of the European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. As we enter the transposition and implementation phases, National Human Rights Institutions can leverage their unique mandate as human rights experts in their jurisdictions to act collectively and individually to ensure that transposition laws meet human rights standards for an effective implementation.

A Comparative Analysis between the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive and the French and German Legislation

This blog post offers an initial comparative glimpse of the most important changes that the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) will bring for the respective mandatory human rights and environmental (HREDD) legislation in Germany and France. While both the French Duty of Vigilance Law and the German Supply Chain Act already require effective HREDD, the CSDDD goes a long way in strengthening the requirements and bringing them more in line with international standards.

The Unbearable Lightness of Interfering with the Right to Privacy

The European Court of Justice has once again ruled on national data retention laws. In La Quadrature du Net II, the full court allowed the indiscriminate retention of IP addresses for the purpose of fighting copyright infringement. It seems that the Court is slowly but surely abandoning its role as guardian of the right to privacy, as it now allows member states to collect vast amounts of data on their citizens in order to solve even the most minor of crimes.

Conditions of Corporate Civil Liability in the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive

The civil liability provision of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) in Article 29 has been highly debated during the entire drafting and negotiation process of the Directive, but it held on. Where harm occurs, will Article 29 CSDDD fulfill its function to provide a right to remedy for the affected individuals and legal clarity for the companies at the same time?

Access to Supply Chain Justice?

One of the novel features of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive is a private law liability for damages caused upstream in the supply chain. However, liability under substantive law is worthless without procedural rules that allow for its enforcement. Within the context of supply chain liability there are at least two major procedural problems. First, victims affected by supply chain mishandlings might be unable to afford proceedings in Europe. Second, proving that a company has not exercised a sufficient level of diligence can be difficult. Art. 29 para. 3 CSDDD seeks to address those issues.

Harmonization Pains but Stakeholders‹ Gain

The Article 13 EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive is home of the meaningful engagement provision. It is significantly more robust than similar provisions in national due diligence legislation in France, Germany and Norway. Despite the fact that a number of differences between EU CSDDD and these national laws is likely to give rise to some “harmonization pains”, one silver lining exists: stakeholders gain some leverage.

Unboxing the New EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive

There is a lot to unpack in the now final text of the Directive. The German Institute for Human Rights offers initial analysis in this blog symposium, which starts with this contribution. The contributions engage with the final text of the Directive and give some initial guidance for interpretation and transposition requirements. Topics covered include a critical reflection on the neo-colonial context of the the law-making process, access to justice and administrative supervision measures for rightsholders, the scope of human and environmental rights that are covered by the Directive as well as the transposition phase with comparative analysis in the context of existing national due diligence legislation, its extraterritorial reach and the involvement of National Human Rights Institutions.