Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Horizontal Meta-effect? Theorising Human Rights in the AI Act and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
YSEC Yearbook of Socio-Economic Constitutions 2023

Part of the book series: YSEC Yearbook of Socio-Economic Constitutions ((YSEC,volume 2023))

  • 164 Accesses

Abstract

The indirect horizontal effect of human and fundamental rights has dominated European constitutional practice. In recent years, fractures have appeared in its face in courts and in regulatory practice. The EU has introduced multiple legislative initiatives that have pushed the rights towards apparent direct horizontal effect.

This article analyses the AI Act and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive as examples of a novel human and fundamental rights strategy. The article argues that the instruments first weaken the rights and then deploy them to normatively guide and condition intra-firm sense-plan-act cycles. The rights first create adverse human rights impacts and fundamental rights risks to serve as objects of concern in corporate information processing. The planning and acting stages transport the rights into real-world reduction in human and fundamental rights violations. While on its face weak, the novel strategy is likely an adaptation to political pressures, but contains the seeds of a possible progressive end-game.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Dürig (1956).

  2. 2.

    Leisner (1960); Nipperdey (1961).

  3. 3.

    On the German debate and its stakes, see der Walt (2014).

  4. 4.

    Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2012/C 326/02).

  5. 5.

    CJEU Case C-414/16, 7 April 2018, Vera Egenberger v Evangelisches Werk für Diakonie und Entwicklung eV, ECLI:EU:C:2018:257; CJEU Case C-68/17, 11 September 2018, IR v JQ, ECLI:EU:C:2018:696; CJEU Joined Cases C-569/16 and C-570/16, 11 June 2018, ECLI:EU:C:2018:871; CJEU Case C-684/16, 6 November 2018, Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften eV v Tetsuji Shimizu, ECLI:EU:C:2018:874.

  6. 6.

    For example, Ciacchi (2019); Frantziou (2019a); Krause (2021).

  7. 7.

    For example, Walkila (2016); Frantziou (2019b).

  8. 8.

    Article 17(9) and Recital 70 of the DSM copyright directive (EU) 2019/790.

  9. 9.

    Article 14(4) of the Digital Services Act (EU) 2022/2065.

  10. 10.

    De Gregorio (2019, 2022); Celeste (2022); Celeste et al. (2023).

  11. 11.

    For a critique, see e.g. Mylly (2021), pp. 69–70; De Gregorio (2022), pp. 199–203.

  12. 12.

    Bird et al. (2014); Baumann-Pauly and Nolan (2016).

  13. 13.

    United Nations (2011); OECD (2011).

  14. 14.

    Ruggie (2013), p. 83.

  15. 15.

    Timber regulation (EU) 2010/995; Non-financial reporting directive (EU) 2014/95; Conflict mineral regulation (EU) 2017/821.

  16. 16.

    For example, the French loi n° 2017-399 du 27 mars 2017 relative au devoir de vigilance des sociétés mères et des entreprises donneuses d’ordre and the German Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichtengesetz vom 16. Juli 2021 (BGBl. I S. 2959).

  17. 17.

    For an account of transnational sustainability laws, see e.g. Salminen and Rajavuori (2019).

  18. 18.

    De Gregorio (2019), pp. 97–98; De Gregorio (2022), pp. 92–97.

  19. 19.

    Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDRP).

  20. 20.

    European Commission (2021); Permanent Representatives Committee (2022a); European Parliament (2023b).

  21. 21.

    European Commission (2022); Permanent Representatives Committee (2022b); European Parliament (2023a).

  22. 22.

    Timber regulation (EU) 2010/995; Non-financial reporting directive 2014/95/EU; Conflict mineral regulation (EU) 2017/821; Taxonomy regulation (EU) 2020/852; Sustainability reporting directive (EU) 2022/2464.

  23. 23.

    Cf. on transnational environmental regulation Heyvaert (2018).

  24. 24.

    Waller (1999–2000); Avi-Yonah (2003).

  25. 25.

    Salminen and Rajavuori (2021).

  26. 26.

    Wai (2002).

  27. 27.

    European Commission (2020).

  28. 28.

    Data Governance Act (EU) 2022/868; Digital Markets Act (EU) 2022/1925; Digital Services Act (EU) 2022/2065.

  29. 29.

    High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence (2019).

  30. 30.

    OECD (2019).

  31. 31.

    European Commission (2021), p. 2.

  32. 32.

    The proposal refers to the Paris Agreement (United Nations (2015)), Article 15, but the Agreement is not listed as a core environmental instrument. The Directive would instruct firms to ‘adopt a plan to ensure that the business model and strategy of the company are compatible with the’ 1.5-degree goal. However, adverse climate impacts give no one a right to damages due to the careful drafting of Article 22 and its liability rule.

  33. 33.

    United Nations (1948).

  34. 34.

    United Nations (1966).

  35. 35.

    United Nations (1989).

  36. 36.

    La présidence française (2022), Article 9.

  37. 37.

    Permanent Representatives Committee (2022a), Article 9(2).

  38. 38.

    Duval (2023).

  39. 39.

    Keller et al. (2012); Bantekas and Oette (2020); Tistounet (2020).

  40. 40.

    On challenges, see Schilling-Vacaflor and Lenschow (2023).

  41. 41.

    The Parliament retained the approach in its amendments: European Parliament (2023b).

  42. 42.

    Market Surveillance Regulation (EU) 2019/1020.

  43. 43.

    Pacces (2023), p. 11.

  44. 44.

    See however Chamberlain (2023).

  45. 45.

    Parker (2002, 2009); Chiu (2015); Viljanen (2017); Heyvaert (2018).

  46. 46.

    Scott (1998).

  47. 47.

    Taylor (1984).

  48. 48.

    Mahler (2022).

  49. 49.

    General data protection regulation (EU) 2016/679, Article 35.

  50. 50.

    Digital Services Act (EU) 2022/2065, Articles 34 and 35.

  51. 51.

    Heyvaert (2018), pp. 92–98.

  52. 52.

    Patz (2022); Veale and Borgesius (2021).

References

  • Avi-Yonah RS (2003) National regulation of multinational enterprises: an essay on comity, extraterritoriality, and harmonisation. Colum J Transnatl Law 42:5–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Bantekas I, Oette L (2020) International human rights law and practice, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Baumann-Pauly D, Nolan J (2016) Business and human rights: from principles to practice. Routledge, Abingdon

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bird RC, Cahoy DR, Prenkert JD (eds) (2014) Law, business and human rights. Edgar Elgar, Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  • Celeste E (2022) Digital constitutionalism: the role of internet bills of rights. Routledge, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Celeste E, Palladino N, Redeker D, Yilma K (2023) The content governance dilemma: digital constitutionalism, social media and the search for a global standard. Springer, Cham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlain J (2023) The risk-based approach of the European Union’s Proposed Artificial Intelligence Regulation: some comments from a tort law perspective. Eur J Risk Reg 13:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2022.38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu IH-Y (2015) Regulating (from) the inside: the legal framework for internal control in banks and financial institutions. Hart, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciacchi AC (2019) The direct horizontal effect of EU fundamental rights. Eur Const Law Rev 15:294–305. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019619000154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Gregorio G (2019) From constitutional freedoms to the power of the platforms: protecting fundamental rights online in the algorithmic society. Eur J Leg Stud 11:65–103

    Google Scholar 

  • De Gregorio G (2022) Digital constitutionalism in Europe: reframing rights and powers in the algorithmic society. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • der Walt J (2014) The horizontal effect revolution and the question of sovereignty. De Gruyter, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Directive (EU) 2014/95 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 amending Directive 2013/34/EU as regards disclosure of non-financial and diversity information by certain large undertakings and groups

    Google Scholar 

  • Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC

    Google Scholar 

  • Directive (EU) 2022/2464 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 amending Regulation (EU) No 537/2014, Directive 2004/109/EC, Directive 2006/43/EC and Directive 2013/34/EU, as regards corporate sustainability reporting

    Google Scholar 

  • Dürig G (1956) Grundrechte und zivilrechtsprechung. In: Maunz T (ed) Vom Bonner Grundgesetz zur gesamtdeutschen zerfassung: Festschrift zum 75. geburtstag von Hans Nawiasky. Isa Verlag, Goldbach, pp 157–190

    Google Scholar 

  • Duval A (2023) Ruggie’s double movement: assembling the private and the public through human rights due diligence. Nord J Hum Rights. https://doi.org/10.1080/18918131.2023.2171633

  • European Commission (2020) Shaping Europe’s digital future. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, The European Social and Economic Committee and the Committee of the Regions. COM(2020) 67 final

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2021) Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act), COM(2021) 206 final

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2022) Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937, COM(2022) 71 final

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament (2023a) Amendments adopted by the European Parliament on 1 June 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 (COM(2022)0071, 2023

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament (2023b) Amendments adopted by the European Parliament on 14 June 2023 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) and amending certain Union legislative acts. (COM(2021)0206 – C9-0146/2021 – 2021/0106(COD)). P9_TA(2023)0236, 14 June 2023

    Google Scholar 

  • Frantziou E (2019a) (Most of) the Charter of Fundamental Rights is horizontally applicable. Eur Const Law Rev 15:306–323. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019619000166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frantziou E (2019b) Horizontal effect of fundamental rights in the European Union: a constitutional analysis. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Heyvaert V (2018) Transnational environmental regulation and governance: purpose, strategies and principles. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence (2019) Ethics guidelines for trust-worthy AI. EU, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller H, Ulfstein G, Grover L (eds) (2012) UN human rights treaty bodies: law and legitimacy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Krause R (2021) Horizontal effect of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Bauer and Willmeroth. Common Mark Law Rev 58:1173–1206. https://doi.org/10.54648/COLA2021070

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La présidence française (2022) Proposition de Règlement du Parlement européen et du Conseil établissant des règles harmonisées concernant l’intelligence artificielle (législation sur l’intelligence artificielle) et modifiant certains actes législatifs de l’Union - Texte de compromis de la présidence - Articles 8-15 et Annexe IV, 13 January 2022

    Google Scholar 

  • Leisner W (1960) Grundrechte und Privatrecht. Beck, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahler T (2022) Between risk management and proportionality: the risk-based approach in the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act proposal. Nord Yearb Law Inform:247–270. https://doi.org/10.53292/208f5901.38a67238

  • Mylly T (2021) The new constitutional architecture of intellectual property. In: Griffiths J, Mylly T (eds) Global intellectual property protection and new constitutionalism: hedging exclusive rights. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 50–79

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nipperdey HC (1961) Grundrechte und Privatrecht. Scherpe, Krefeld

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2011) OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, 2011 Edition. OECD, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2019) Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence. OECD, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Pacces AM (2023) Civil liability in the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive proposal: a law & economics analysis. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4391121

  • Parker C (2002) The open corporation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Parker C (2009) Meta-regulation: legal accountability for corporate social responsibility. In: Kinley D (ed) Human rights and corporations. Routledge, London, pp 335–368

    Google Scholar 

  • Patz C (2022) The EU’s draft Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive: a first assessment. Bus Hum Rights J 7:291–297. https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2022.19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Permanent Representatives Committee (2022a) General approach. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) and amending certain Union legislative acts. 25 November 2022

    Google Scholar 

  • Permanent Representatives Committee (2022b) General Approach. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937. 30 November 2022

    Google Scholar 

  • Regulation (EU) 2010/995 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 laying down the obligations of operators who place timber and timber products on the market

    Google Scholar 

  • Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDRP) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation)

    Google Scholar 

  • Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 laying down supply chain due diligence obligations for Union importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas

    Google Scholar 

  • Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on market surveillance and compliance of products and amending Directive 2004/42/EC and Regulations (EC) No 765/2008 and (EU) No 305/2011

    Google Scholar 

  • Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment, and amending Regulation (EU) 2019/2088

    Google Scholar 

  • Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2022 on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector and amending Directives (EU) 2019/1937 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Digital Markets Act)

    Google Scholar 

  • Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act)

    Google Scholar 

  • Regulation (EU) 2022/868 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2022 on European data governance and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 (Data Governance Act)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie JG (2013) Just business: multinational corporations and human rights. Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Salminen J, Rajavuori M (2019) Transnational sustainability laws and the regulation of global value chains: comparison and a framework for analysis. Maastricht J Eur Comp Law 26:602–627. https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X19871025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salminen J, Rajavuori M (2021) Private international law, global value chains and the externalities of transnational production: towards alignment? Transnatl Leg Theory 12:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/20414005.2021.1970470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schilling-Vacaflor A, Lenschow A (2023) Hardening foreign corporate accountability through mandatory due diligence in the European Union? New trends and persisting challenges. Regul Gov. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12402

  • Scott JC (1998) Seeing like a state: how certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor S (1984) Making bureaucracies think: the environmental impact statement strategy of administrative reform. Stanford University Press, Stanford

    Google Scholar 

  • Tistounet E (2020) The UN Human Rights Council. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (1948) Universal Declaration of Human Rights

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (1966) International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (1989) Convention on the Rights of the Child

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (2011) Guiding principles on business and human Rights. Implementing the United Nations ‘protect, respect and remedy’ framework. United Nations, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Veale M, Borgesius FZ (2021) Demystifying the Draft EU Artificial Intelligence Act — analysing the good, the bad, and the unclear elements of the proposed approach. Comput Law Rev Int 22:97–112. https://doi.org/10.9785/cri-2021-220402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viljanen M (2017) A cyborg turn in law? Ger Law J 18:1277–1308. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200022331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wai R (2002) Transnational liftoff and juridical touchdown: the regulatory function of private international law in an era of globalisation. Colum J Transnatl Law 40:209–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Walkila S (2016) Horizontal effect of fundamental rights in EU law. Europa Law Publishing, Groningen

    Google Scholar 

  • Waller SW (1999–2000) The twilight of comity. Colum J Transnatl Law 38:563–580

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Turku, Turku, Finland

    Mika Viljanen

Authors
  1. Mika Viljanen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mika Viljanen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, Lund University, Lund, Sweden

    Eduardo Gill-Pedro

  2. Department of Law, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Andreas Moberg

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Viljanen, M. (2024). A Horizontal Meta-effect? Theorising Human Rights in the AI Act and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. In: Gill-Pedro, E., Moberg, A. (eds) YSEC Yearbook of Socio-Economic Constitutions 2023. YSEC Yearbook of Socio-Economic Constitutions, vol 2023. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/16495_2023_65

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/16495_2023_65

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-55831-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-55832-0

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation