A RECORDING OF THIS SESSION IS AVAILABLE HERE.Session organized by OHCHRInterpretation will be provided in English, French and SpanishBrief description of the sessionFor
the third phase of its Accountability and Remedy Project (ARP III), the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) spent two years analysing challenges, opportunities, best practices and lessons learned with regard to a range of non-state-based grievance mechanisms in cases of business-related human rights abuse. In July 2020, OHCHR presented its findings to the Human Rights Council through a
final report and
accompanying addendum, in which several recommendations were made to enhance the effectiveness of different types of non-State-based mechanisms. Numerous recommendations concern how States and designers and operators of grievance mechanisms can prevent instances of retaliation against those seeking remedy, as well as people associated with them and people contributing to the effective functioning of grievance mechanisms (
see relevant excerpts here). This session will provide an opportunity for different stakeholders to reflect on these recommendations and discuss how non-State-based grievance mechanisms can better ensure safe access to remedy.
Key objectives of the session- Enhance rights holders’ safe access to effective remedy in cases of business-related human rights abuse.
- Explore the potential of non-State-based grievance mechanisms to prevent risks of retaliation when rights holders seek to access them.
- Share good practices and methods for preventing risks of retaliation at company-based grievance mechanisms; grievance mechanisms developed by industry, multi-stakeholder, or other collaborative initiatives; and independent accountability mechanisms.
- Discuss how best to implement the recommendations of the ARP III report and addendum with respect to preventing retaliation.
Key questions- How can the recommendations of the ARP III report and addendum help prevent retaliation when rights holders seek remedy through non-State-based grievance mechanisms?
- What should designers and operators of grievance mechanisms be aware of and do with respect to risks of retaliation?
- How could rights holders know what levels of risk they face when seeking remedy through non-State-based grievance mechanisms, and what can be done to mitigate these risks?
Background to the discussionRetaliation and fears of retaliation (whether by State or non-State actors) pose serious barriers to remedy for business-related human rights cases in practice. Retaliation can take many forms, and can result in many different types of harm (e.g., physical, psychological or economic), the effects of which can be exacerbated for certain groups (e.g., women) as a result of entrenched social attitudes and discrimination. Further, it is important to keep in mind that those potentially at risk of retaliation may go beyond people seeking remedies directly and include people associated with rights holders (e.g., family members, friends, and human rights defenders), as well as people who contribute to the effective functioning of certain grievance mechanisms (e.g., interpreters and witnesses).
The
Accountability and Remedy Project has therefore prioritised this issue for study at each phase of the project, noting that this risk is not confined to any one type of mechanism, but can seriously undermine the effectiveness of all categories of mechanisms relevant to remedying business-related human rights harms (i.e., State-based or non-State-based, judicial or non-judicial). In the latest phase of the project (
ARP III), significant work went into (i) analysing the risks involved when grievances are raised in non-State-based mechanisms, and (ii) identifying ways of preventing retaliation from occurring in such cases. The
ARP III report and its
accompanying addendum provide numerous recommendations for designing and operating grievance mechanisms in such a way to mitigate risks of retaliation (
see relevant excerpts here). The panel for this session will reflect on how these recommendations can be useful and implemented.
Additional background documents
The session will help inform the WG’s project ‘
Business and human rights: towards a decade of global implementation' (also known as “UNGPs 10+ / Next Decade BHR”). Centred around the upcoming tenth anniversary of the UNGPs in 2021, the project is taking stock of practice to date, identifying gaps and challenges, and developing a vision and roadmap for scaling up implementation of the UNGPs over the course of the next decade.
Session documents
