Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Human Rights Due Diligence in International Law: Where Do We Go from Here?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Judicial Power in a Globalized World

Abstract

This study outlines the case for mandatory human rights due diligence for the garment sector at the European Union level. There is growing world-wide attention paid to problems related to garment supply chains since the Rana Plaza disaster. Several domestic initiatives are currently hardening the standards established by the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. There is only one international binding resolution on human rights due diligence, established by the European Union, for conflict minerals.On the basis of the comparative analysis of the EU regulation on conflict minerals and the most interesting initiatives at domestic level, this study makes several recommendations for the advancement of binding legislation on human rights due diligence for the garment sector. The European Union has the capacity to level the currently fragmented playing field in Europe by establishing harmonised rules for the garment supply chains, focusing on human rights due diligence.

Beatriz Mateus de Albuquerque holds a LLM on Transnational Law from King’s College London, a LLM on Law in a European and Global Context from Católica Global School of Law and a law degree from the Portuguese Catholic University Lisbon.

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 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
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.

    Un Doc A/HRC/17/31.

  2. 2.

    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 (OJ L 130, 19.5.2017, p. 1–20). (Conflict Minerals Regulation).

  3. 3.

    Guiding Principle (‘UNGP’) 15.

  4. 4.

    Harrison (2013), p. 107.

  5. 5.

    Bonnitcha and McCorquodale (2017a), p. 900.

  6. 6.

    Nolan (2017), p. 246.

  7. 7.

    Lundan and Muchlinski (2012), p. 189.

  8. 8.

    Since this is not the topic of this article, I am not addressing the scholarly debate on this issue. I will only briefly refer to the official position of the UNHCHR. See Bonnitcha and McCorquodale (2017b), and Ruggie and Sherman (2017), pp. 921–928.

  9. 9.

    UN Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: An Interpretive Guide’ (OHCHR, 2012). (p. 4).

  10. 10.

    UNGP 17.

  11. 11.

    Commentary to UNGP 17.

  12. 12.

    McCorquodale et al. (2017), p. 200.

  13. 13.

    McCorquodale and Smit (2017), p. 224.

  14. 14.

    OECD, Guidelines on Multinational Enterprises, 2011.

  15. 15.

    The OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct was adopted in May 2018.

  16. 16.

    See Sect. 4.

  17. 17.

    McCorquodale et al. (2018), p. 67.

  18. 18.

    Corporate Human Rights Benchmark – Key Findings 2017. https://www.corporatebenchmark.org/sites/default/files/2017-03/CHRB_Findings_web_pages.pdf [16/07/18] See the explanation for the score system on p. 6.

  19. 19.

    Clean Clothes Campaign – Position Paper on HRDD, March 2016, p. 4.

  20. 20.

    Therefore, I will not address the UK Modern Slavery Act, although it includes a ‘transparency in supply chains’ provision that requires annual reporting by certain companies on the steps they took to avoid modern slavery in their supply chains. A report of the Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights recommends the creation of legislation on a duty to prevent human rights abuses and an offence for the failure to prevent those, along the entire supply chain. This would include conducting HRDD. See 6th report of the session 2016/17, ‘Human Rights and Business 2017: Promoting responsibility and ensuring accountability’, §193.

  21. 21.

    Loi no. 2017-399 du 27 mars 2017 relative au devoir de vigilance des sociétés mères et des entreprises donneuses d’ordre (JORF n°0074 du 28 mars 2017).

  22. 22.

    Cossart et al. (2017), p. 317.

  23. 23.

    Decision 2017-750 DC of 23 March 2017.

  24. 24.

    Companies must be incorporated or registered in France for 2 consecutive fiscal years that employ either at least 5000 people themselves and through their French subsidiaries or employ at least 10,000 themselves and through subsidiaries located in France and abroad.

  25. 25.

    Loi no. 2017-399, art. 1: avec lesquels est entretenue une relation commerciale établie.

  26. 26.

    Huyse and Verbrugge (2018), p. 37.

  27. 27.

    Ibid, p. 37.

  28. 28.

    Loi no. 2017-399, art. 2.

  29. 29.

    ECCJ, ‘French Corporate Duty of Vigilance Law – Frequently Asked Questions’, 24 March 2017, p. 5.

  30. 30.

    Triponel and Sherman (2017), p. 3.

  31. 31.

    Eckert (2016), p. 55.

  32. 32.

    Assemblée Nationale, Rapport n°3582 (2016), p. 6.

  33. 33.

    Directive 2014/95/EU 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 (OJ L 330, 15.11.2014, p. 1–9).

  34. 34.

    German NAP on Business and Human Rights (2016–2020), p. 12.

  35. 35.

    Amnesty International, Brot für die Welt, Germanwatch and Oxfam, ‘Legislative Proposal: Corporate Responsibility and Human Rights’, 15 June 2017, p. 3.

  36. 36.

    Ibid, p. 6.

  37. 37.

    Ibid, p. 4.

  38. 38.

    Ibid, p. 5.

  39. 39.

    Huyse, ‘Belgium’, p. 32.

  40. 40.

    Wet Zorgplicht Kinderarbeid.

  41. 41.

    MVO Platform, ‘Frequently Asked Questions about the Dutch Child Labour Due Diligence law’, 14 April 2017 https://www.mvoplatform.nl/en/frequently-asked-questions-about-the-new-dutch-child-labour-due-diligence-law/ [27/07/18].

  42. 42.

    Ibid.

  43. 43.

    Ibid.

  44. 44.

    Huyse, ‘Belgium’, p. 30.

  45. 45.

    Ibid.

  46. 46.

    See Sect. 3.2.

  47. 47.

    Consult the RBI with an Explanatory Report in www.corporatejustice.ch. [27/07/18].

  48. 48.

    Peter Burckhardt and Anya George, ‘Business and Human Rights – What Swiss companies need to know’, Schellenberg Wittmer newsletter, November 2017 https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=483d670c-93cb-4480-b518-a604b7aa9489 [17/07/18], p. 3.

  49. 49.

    I will not address the Federal Act on Private Security Services Provided Abroad, which includes a disclosure requirement, but only for security purposes.

  50. 50.

    Swiss Coalition for Corporate Justice, ‘Another step towards the adoption of a mandatory HRDD in Switzerland’, 16 July 2018. http://corporatejustice.org/news/7046-another-step-towards-the-adoption-of-a-mandatory-hrdd-bill-in-switzerland [20/07/18].

  51. 51.

    Simon Bradley, ‘Swiss firms lack ‘unified approach’ on business and human rights’, Swissinfo, 14 June 2018.

  52. 52.

    Such as the Non-Financial Reporting Directive, which was not addressed in detail here, precisely because it only establishes a reporting obligation and does not contain a substantive HRDD requirement.

  53. 53.

    Such as the French law or the Swiss Initiative.

  54. 54.

    Eckert, ‘The French Attempt’, p. 52.

  55. 55.

    Recommendation CM/Rec(2016)3 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on human rights and business.

  56. 56.

    ECCJ, ‘Members of 8 European Parliaments support duty of care legislation for EU corporations’, 31 May 2016 http://corporatejustice.org/news/132-members-of-8-european-parliaments-support-duty-of-care-legislation-for-eu-corporations [20/07/18].

  57. 57.

    Huyse, ‘Belgium’, p. 38.

  58. 58.

    Hofmann et al. (2018), p. 115.

  59. 59.

    EC, FAQ Responsible Sourcing of Minerals Originating Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas: Towards an Integrated EU Approach, memo/14/157 of 5 Mar. 2014, p. 7.

  60. 60.

    Prendergast and Lezhnev, cited in Hofmann, ‘Conflict minerals’, p. 119.

  61. 61.

    BSR, Conflict minerals and the democratic Republic of Congo (2010) https://www.bsr.org/reports/BSR_Conflict_Minerals_and_the_DRC.pdf [15/06/18].

  62. 62.

    ‘Advice Note to Companies, Member States and The European Commission’, p. 2.

  63. 63.

    Council Regulation (EC) No. 2368/2002 of 20 December 2002 implementing the UN certification of the Kimberley process for the international trade in rough diamonds (OJ L 358, 31.12.2002, pp. 28–48).

  64. 64.

    Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19–76).

  65. 65.

    OECD, Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas, version 3 (2016) (‘OECD Guidance’).

  66. 66.

    Ibid, p. 2.

  67. 67.

    Voland and Daly (2018), p. 48.

  68. 68.

    Commission Staff Working Document, Impact Assessment, 5 March 2014, SWD(2014) 53 final, p. 14 (Impact Assessment).

  69. 69.

    Voland and Daly (2018), p. 48.

  70. 70.

    EP, Opinion of the Committee on Development for the Committee on International Trade on the proposal for a regulation on conflict minerals (COM(2014)0111 – C7-0092/2014 – 2014/0059(COD)), p. 3.

  71. 71.

    See definitions for ‘upstream’ and ‘downstream’ actors in OECD Guidance, p. 32.

  72. 72.

    EP, At a glance, plenary - 13 May 2015, p. 2.

  73. 73.

    EP, texts adopted, P8_TA(2015)0204, amend.43.

  74. 74.

    Ibid, amends.71 and 91.

  75. 75.

    Voland and Daly (2018), p. 61.

  76. 76.

    Ibid, p. 54.

  77. 77.

    ‘Impact assessment’, p. 25.

  78. 78.

    ‘Advice note’, p. 1.

  79. 79.

    Although the Regulation does not specify that it is HRDD, it will be assumed to be so since most of the risks are related to possible human rights violations.

  80. 80.

    Hofmann et al. (2018), p. 117.

  81. 81.

    Bergkamp (2017).

  82. 82.

    Art.1502(e)(4) Dodd-Frank Act.

  83. 83.

    The EU Regulation covers 3TG sourced from mines that can be spread all over the world in case the countries where they are located export to the EU.

  84. 84.

    Regulation Art.4.

  85. 85.

    Regulation Art.5.

  86. 86.

    Regulation Art.6.

  87. 87.

    Regulation Art.7.

  88. 88.

    Regulation Art.9.

  89. 89.

    ‘Impact Assessment’, p. 4.

  90. 90.

    See Sect. 5.2.

  91. 91.

    CIDSE, Securing a strong and effective EU regulation for supply chain due diligence to stop complicity in funding conflicts (2015) https://www.cidse.org/publications/business-and-human-rights/securing-a-strong-and-effective-eu-regulation-for-supply-chain-due-diligence.html [08/06/2018].

  92. 92.

    Constantin Blome, ‘Policy Brief’, University of Sussex, May 2016, p. 4.

  93. 93.

    Schwartz (2016), p. 182.

  94. 94.

    Hofmann et al. (2018), p. 129.

  95. 95.

    See Annex I of the OECD Guidance.

  96. 96.

    OECD, ‘OECD Forum on Due Diligence in the garment and footwear sector – session notes’, January 2018, p. 16.

  97. 97.

    Cullen (2016), p. 776.

  98. 98.

    Ibid, p. 778.

  99. 99.

    European Parliament resolution of 27 April 2017 on the EU flagship initiative on the garment sector (2016/2140(INI)).

  100. 100.

    EP Committee on Development, ‘Report on the EU Flagship Initiative on the garment sector’, A8-0080/2017, 28 March 2017, p. 18.

  101. 101.

    Business & Human Rights Resource Centre, Briefing ‘European textile industry and human rights due diligence: key developments, human rights allegations & best practices’, April 2018, p. 2.

  102. 102.

    Steve Banker, ‘The Risk of Human Trafficking in the Supply chain’, Forbes, 27 July 2015. https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2015/07/27/the-risk-of-human-trafficking-in-the-supply-chain/#17a479db17ed [06/08/18].

  103. 103.

    The World Bank (2017): In Bangladesh, Empowering and Employing Women in the Garments Sector, http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2017/02/07/in-bangladesh-empowering-and-employing-women-in-the-garments-sector and Human Rights Watch (2015): “Work Faster or Get Out”, https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/03/11/work-faster-or-get-out/labor-rights-abuses-cambodias-garment-industry [06/08/18].

  104. 104.

    AETS, ‘Study on the responsible management of the supply chain in the garment sector’, December 2016, p. 117.

  105. 105.

    Ibid, p. 16.

  106. 106.

    Nina Ascoly, ‘The Global Garment Industry and the Informal Economy: Critical Issues for Labor Rights Advocates’, IRENE/CCC Discussion Paper, September 2004, p. 6.

  107. 107.

    EP Committee on Development, ‘Report’, p. 7.

  108. 108.

    Halldin, ‘H&M’s comments on EU-Garment Initiative and National Initiatives’, June 2016.

  109. 109.

    Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, ‘Briefing’, p. 11.

  110. 110.

    Ibid, p. 7.

  111. 111.

    EP Committee on International Trade, ‘Opinion of the Committee on International Trade for the Committee on Development on the EU Flagship initiative on the garment sector’, 28 February 2017.

  112. 112.

    The Initiative, p. 5.

  113. 113.

    EP, Briefing ‘Improving global value chains key for EU trade’, June 2016, p. 5.

  114. 114.

    SWD(2017) 147 final.

  115. 115.

    The Initiative, §5.

  116. 116.

    OECD, ‘OECD due diligence guidance for responsible supply chains in the garment sector and footwear sector’, 2017. (OECD Garment Guidance).

  117. 117.

    See ILO Resolution of 10 June 2016 on decent work in supply chains and the ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy (2017, 5ed.).

  118. 118.

    Cécile Barbière, ‘MEPs demand tough rules for textiles’, Euractiv, 28 April 2017 https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/meps-demand-tough-rules-for-textiles-importers/ [25/07/18].

  119. 119.

    EP Committee on Development, ‘Report’, §5.

  120. 120.

    Council of the European Union, ‘Sustainable Garment Value Chains – Council conclusions’, 9381/17, 19 May 2017, §2.

  121. 121.

    Ibid, §12.

  122. 122.

    See CSWD and the explanatory text of the report on the Initiative by the Committee on Development.

  123. 123.

    12249/15 - SWD(2015) 182 final.

  124. 124.

    CSWD, p. 20.

  125. 125.

    EC, ‘Proposal for a Regulation’, p. 6.

  126. 126.

    OECD Garment Guidance, p. 72.

  127. 127.

    AETS, ‘Study’, p. 36.

  128. 128.

    The Initiative, §17.

  129. 129.

    Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, ‘Briefing’, p. 16.

  130. 130.

    EP Committee on International Trade, ‘Opinion’, §8.

  131. 131.

    Open letter to the EC, ‘High time for the European Commission to impose transparency in the garment supply chain’, 24 April 2017.

  132. 132.

    OECD, ‘OECD Forum’, p. 9.

  133. 133.

    EP Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, ‘Opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs for the Committee on Development on the EU Flagship initiative on the garment sector’, 10 February 2017, §22.

  134. 134.

    The Initiative, §14.

  135. 135.

    Clean Clothes Campaign, Human Rights Watch, Global Union et al., ‘Follow the thread – the need for a supply chain transparency in the garment and footwear industry’, 2017, p. 13.

  136. 136.

    Angelica Dziedzic, Celine Lelievre and Jonathan Povilonis, ‘Towards EU legislation on human rights due diligence – case study of the garment and textile sector’, HEC-NYU EU Clinic, 2017, p. 28.

  137. 137.

    OECD Garment Guidance, p. 90.

  138. 138.

    EP Committee on International Trade, ‘Opinion’, §20.

  139. 139.

    AETS, ‘Study’, p. 118.

  140. 140.

    OECD, ‘OECD Forum’, p. 6.

  141. 141.

    Ibid, p. 6.

  142. 142.

    EP Committee on International Trade, ‘Opinion’, §4.

  143. 143.

    See the Regulation, art.1(3).

  144. 144.

    OECD Garment Guidance, chapter 6.

  145. 145.

    Clean Clothes Campaign, ‘Follow’, p. 1. regarding the Rana Plaza disaster.

  146. 146.

    Martin-Ortega (2013), p. 45.

  147. 147.

    Open letter to the EC, ‘High time’, cited above.

References

Book Chapters

  • Lundan, S., & Muchlinski, P. (2012). Human rights due diligence in global value chains. In R. Van Tulder, A. Verbeke, & L. Voinea (Eds.), New policy challenges for European multinationals (pp. 181–201). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McCorquodale, R., & Smit, L. (2017). Human rights, responsibilities and due diligence – Key issues for a treaty. In S. Deva & D. Bilchitz (Eds.), Building a treaty on business and human rights (pp. 216–237). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nolan, J. (2017). Human rights and global corporate supply chains. In S. Deva & D. Bilchitz (Eds.), Building a treaty on business and human rights (pp. 238–265). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Journal Articles

  • Bonnitcha, J., & McCorquodale, R. (2017a). The concept of ‘due diligence’ in the UN guiding principles on business and human rights. European Journal of International Law, 28(3), 899–919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonnitcha, J., & McCorquodale, R. (2017b). The concept of ‘due diligence’ in the UN guiding principles on business and human rights: A Rejoinder to John Gerard Ruggie and John F. Sherman, III. European Journal of International Law, 28(3), 929–933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cossart, S., Chaplier, J., & Beau de Lomenie, T. (2017). The French law on duty of care: A historic step towards making globalization work for all. Business and Human Rights Journal, 2, 317–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, H. (2016). The irresistible rise of human rights due diligence: Conflict minerals and beyond. The George Washington International Law Review, 48, 743–780.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J. (2013). Establishing a meaningful human rights due diligence process for corporations: Learning from experience of human rights impact assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 31(2), 107–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, H., Schleper, M., & Blome, C. (2018). Conflict minerals and supply chain due diligence: An exploratory study of multi-tier supply chains. Journal of Business Ethics, 147, 115–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin-Ortega, O. (2013). Human rights due diligence for corporations: From voluntary standards to hard law at last? Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 31(4), 44–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCorquodale, R., Smit, L., Neely, S., & Brooks, R. (2017). Human rights due diligence in law and practice: Good practices and challenges for business enterprises. Business and Human Rights Journal, 2, 195–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie, J., & Sherman, J. (2017). The concept of ‘due diligence’ in the UN guiding principles on business and human rights: A reply to Jonathan Bonnitcha and Robert McCorquodale. European Journal of International Law, 28(3), 921–928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, J. (2016). The conflict minerals experiment. Harvard Business Law Review, 6, 129–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voland, T., & Daly, S. (2018). The EU regulation on conflict minerals: The way out of a vicious cycle? Journal of World Trade, 52, 37–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Policy Documents

  • AETS. (2016, December). Study on the responsible management of the supply chain in the garment sector.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amnesty International. (2017, June 15). Brot für die Welt, Germanwatch and Oxfam. Legislative Proposal: Corporate Responsibility and Human Rights.

    Google Scholar 

  • Business & Human Rights Resource Centre. (2018, April). Briefing ‘European textile industry and human rights due diligence: key developments, human rights allegations & best practices’.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clean Clothes Campaign. (2016, March). Position on Human Rights Due Diligence.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clean Clothes Campaign, Human Rights Watch, Global Union et al. (2017). Follow the thread – the need for a supply chain transparency in the garment and footwear industry. https://cleanclothes.org/resources/publications/follow-the-thread-the-need-for-supply-chain-transparency-in-the-garment-and-footwear-industry/view

  • Commission Staff Working Document, Impact Assessment, 5 March 2014, SWD(2014) 53 final.

    Google Scholar 

  • Committee on Development. (2017, March 28). Report on the EU flagship initiative on the garment sector. A8-0080/2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Committee on Employment and Social Affairs. (2017, February 10). Opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs for the Committee on Development on the EU Flagship initiative on the garment sector.

    Google Scholar 

  • Committee on International Trade. (2017, February 28). Opinion of the Committee on International Trade for the Committee on Development on the EU Flagship initiative on the garment sector.

    Google Scholar 

  • Constantin Blome. (2016, May). Policy Brief. University of Sussex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of the European Union. (2017, May 19). Sustainable Garment Value Chains – Council conclusions. 9381/17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development of the European Commission. (2017, March). The responsible management of global value chains in the garment sector.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dziedzic, A., Lelievre, C., & Povilonis, J. (2017). Towards EU legislation on human rights due diligence – case study of the garment and textile sector. HEC-NYU EU Clinic.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. FAQ Responsible Sourcing of Minerals Originating Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas: Towards an Integrated EU Approach, memo/14/157 of 5 March 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2017a, September 7). Follow up to the European Parliament resolution of 27 April 2017 on the EU Flagship initiative on the garment sector.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2017b, April 24). Commission Staff Working Document – Sustainable garment value chains through EU development action. SWD(2017) 147 final.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament. (2014, August). Briefing ‘Workers’ conditions in the textile and clothing sector: just an Asian affair? Issues at stake after the Rana Plaza tragedy’.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament, Opinion of the Committee on Development for the Committee on International Trade on the proposal for a regulation on conflict minerals (COM(2014)0111 – C7-0092/2014 – 2014/0059(COD).

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament. (2015, May 13). At a glance, Plenary.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament. (2016, June). Briefing ‘Improving global value chains key for EU trade.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament. (2017, April). EU flagship initiative on the garment sector – at a glance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huyse, H., & Verbrugge, B. (2018). Belgium and the sustainable supply chain agenda: Leader or laggard? KU Leuven.

    Google Scholar 

  • ILO. (2016, June 10). Resolution concerning decent work in global supply chains.

    Google Scholar 

  • ILO. (2017). Tripartite declaration of principles concerning multinational enterprises and social policy (5th ed.).

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2016). Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas, version 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2017). OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains in the Garment and Footwear Sector.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2018, January). OECD Forum on Due Diligence in the garment and footwear sector – session notes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Open Letter to the European Commission. (2017, April 24). High time for the European Commission to impose transparency in the garment supply chain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swiss Coalition for Corporate Justice. (2018, July 16). Another step towards the adoption of a mandatory HRDD in Switzerland. Retrieved July 20, 2018, from http://corporatejustice.org/news/7046-another-step-towards-the-adoption-of-a-mandatory-hrdd-bill-in-switzerland

  • Swiss Coalition for Corporate Justice, ‘The Initiative Text with Explanations – Factsheet V’. Retrieved July 17, 2018, from https://corporatejustice.ch/wp-content/uploads//2018/06/KVI_Factsheet_5_E.pdf

Online Sources

Others

  • Ascoly, N. (2004, September). The Global Garment Industry and the Informal Economy: Critical Issues for Labor Rights Advocates. IRENE/CCC Discussion Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, S. (2018, June 14). Swiss firms lack ‘unified approach’ on business and human rights. Swissinfo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corporate Human Rights Benchmark, Key Findings 2017 Retrieved July 16, 2018, from https://www.corporatebenchmark.org/sites/default/files/2017-03/CHRB_Findings_web_pages.pdf

  • ECCJ. (2017, March 24). French Corporate Duty of Vigilance Law – Frequently Asked Questions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckert, V. (2016). The French attempt to legalize human rights due diligence: Is France leading the European Union in Business and Human Rights? (Master Thesis, Lund University).

    Google Scholar 

  • Triponel, A. & Sherman, J. (2017, May). Legislating human rights due diligence: Opportunities and potential pitfalls to the French duty of vigilance law. Corporate and M&A Law Committee Newsletter.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. King’s College London, London, UK

    Beatriz Mateus de Albuquerque

Authors
  1. Beatriz Mateus de Albuquerque
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg, France

    Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque  & Krzysztof Wojtyczek  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mateus de Albuquerque, B. (2019). Human Rights Due Diligence in International Law: Where Do We Go from Here?. In: Pinto de Albuquerque, P., Wojtyczek, K. (eds) Judicial Power in a Globalized World. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20744-1_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20744-1_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-20743-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-20744-1

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

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation