Accountability of NGOs: The Potential of Business and Human Rights Frameworks for NGO Due Diligence

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Civicus, 2022 State of Civil Society Report, <https://www.civicus.org/documents/reports-and-publications/SOCS/2022/CIVICUS2022SOCSReport.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023.

2 Antonio Nicolini and Kurveena Pyneeandy, ‘The Role of Civil Society. A Look at the Organisations Behind the Work of the Human Rights Council’ (UNtoday, 1 March 2023) <https://untoday.org/the-role-of-civil-society/> accessed 23 April 2023.

3 Kersty McCourt, ‘Four Steps to Build Dialogue Between Government and Civil Society’ (Open Government Partnership, 24 January 2023) <https://www.opengovpartnership.org/stories/four-steps-to-build-dialogue-between-government-and-civil-society/> accessed 23 April 2023.

4 Alexander Jr. Ross, ‘Growing Role of NGOs and the UN’ (Beyond the Horizon, June 2017) <https://behorizon.org/ngos-and-the-un/> accessed 23 April 2023. See also UNGA Res. 60/251, Human Rights Council, UN Doc. A/RES/60/251, 3 April 2006.

5 Jeremy Springman, ‘The Political Economy of NGO Service Delivery: Evidence from an Ancillary Field Experiment’ (16 March 2020) <https://sites.duke.edu/jeremyspringman/files/2020/11/afe_draft.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023.

6 Expert Council on NGO Law, ‘Non-Governmental Organisations: Review of Developments in Standards, Mechanisms and Case Law 2017-2019’, Review Prepared by Mr Jeremy McBride on Behalf of the Expert Council on NGO Law of the Conference of INGOs of the Council of Europe (February 2020) <https://rm.coe.int/expert-council-conf-exp-2020-1-ngos-developments-in-standards-mechanis/16809ccd3a> accessed 23 April 2023.

7 Adam Jagiello-Rusilowski, ‘NGOs’ Impact and Sphere of Influence on Different Governments’ Policymaking around the World’ [2021] 16(3) Daena: International Journal of Good Conscience <http://www.spentamexico.org/v16-n3/A11.16(3)1-13.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023.

8 Marcel Kaba, ‘NGO Accountability: A Conceptual Review across the Engaged Disciplines’ [2021] 23 International Studies Review 958, 961-962; Focusright, ‘Human Rights Due Diligence for Non-Governmental Organisations: Why it is Needed and How it is Done’ (Working Paper, May 2022) <https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5a6ede6f268b96417e62cba6/t/62b2b9daef9ba32836f84514/1655880156266/focusright+working+paper+HRDD+for+NGOs+May+2022.pdf> accessed 3 November 2022; Diana Hortsch, ‘The Paradox of Partnership: Amnesty International, Responsible Advocacy, and NGO Accountability’ [2010] 42 Columbia Human Rights Law Review 119.

9 Maryam Zarnegar Deloffre, ‘Global Accountability Communities: NGO Self-Regulation in the Humanitarian Sector’ [2016] 42 Review of International Studies 725.

10 Financial dependence is also another influencing factor. AbouAssi finds a ‘moderate correlation between self-regulation and resource dependence’. (Khaldoun AbouAssi, ‘Testing Resource Dependency as a Motivator for NGO Self-Regulation’ [2014] 44 Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 1269).

11 Robert Lloyd, ‘The Role of NGO Self-Regulation in Increasing Stakeholder Accountability’ [2005] One World Trust 5-6.

12 Oonagh B. Breen and others, ‘Shifting Patterns of State Regulation and NGO Self-Regulation in Sub-Saharan Africa’, Regulatory Waves: Comparative Perspectives on State Regulation and Self-regulation Policies in the Nonprofit Sector (Cambridge University Press 2017) 72.

13 Oonagh B. Breen and others, ‘Waves of Nonprofit Regulation and Self-Regulation in Latin America’, Regulatory Waves: Comparative Perspectives on State Regulation and Self-regulation Policies in the Nonprofit Sector (Cambridge University Press 2017) 161. For other regional trends, see Angela L. Bies, ‘Evolution of Nonprofit Self-Regulation in Europe’ [2010] 39 Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 1057-1086. See also Shana Warren and Robert Lloyd, ‘Civil Society Self-Regulation’ [2009] One World Trust 1-17, and supra note 12.

14 Domenico Carolei and Nadia Bernaz, ‘Accountability for Human Rights: Applying Business and Human Rights Instruments to Non-Governmental Organizations’ (2021) 13 Journal of Human Rights Practice 507, 508.

15 Amnesty International, ‘Laws Designed to Silence: The Global Crackdown on Civil Society Organizations’ (Index Number: ACT 30/9647/2019, Amnesty International 2019).

16 Nils Muižnieks, ‘The Shrinking Space for Human Rights Organisations’ (Council of Europe, 4 April 2017) <https://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/-/the-shrinking-space-for-human-rights-organisations> accessed 25 May 2023. Some of those measures target foreign funded NGOs only (Darin Christensen and Jeremy M Weinstein, ‘Defunding Dissent: Restrictions on Aid to NGOs’ (2013) 24 Journal of Democracy 77, 79-80).

17 Kendra Dupuy, Luc Fransen and Aseem Prakash, ‘Restricting NGOs: From Pushback to Accommodation’ (2021) 12(S5) Global Policy 5, 8.

18 Oonagh B. Breen and others, ‘Shifting Patterns of State Regulation and NGO Self-Regulation in Sub-Saharan Africa’, Regulatory Waves: Comparative Perspectives on State Regulation and Self-regulation Policies in the Nonprofit Sector (Cambridge University Press 2017) 72. Examples of self-regulation are, among many others, the ‘Standards for Excellence’ Ethics and Accountability Code for the Non-profit Sector, by the Maryland Association of Non-profit Organizations’, which over 2000 non-profit organisations across the US have followed to achieve accreditation (ttps://standardsforexcellence.org/Home-2/code), or the ‘Principles and Practices for Non-profit Excellence, by the Minnesota Council of Non-profits (https://www.minnesotanonprofits.org/docs/default-source/publications/principles-and-practices---full-publication.pdf?sfvrsn = 93531894_4), the BOCONGO Code of Conduct, developed in 2007 by the Botswana Council of NGOs, in collaboration with various stakeholders, including NGOs, government agencies and donors, applied at least to 100 NGOs in Botswana (https://www.gdrc.org/ngo/codesofconduct/botswana-ngocode.html#:∼:text = their%20commitment%20to%3A-,i.,organisations%20or%20self%2Dgenerated%20activities. See also, Karla W. Simon, 'South Africa Update' (2005) 3 Int'l J Civ Soc'y L 111), or the Standards of Good Governance & Professional Practices (GPP) for NGOs in Cambodia (https://www.ccccambodia.org/backend/uploads/content/images/GPP%20Standards%20in%20English.pdf).

19 Carolei and Bernaz, supra note 508. See also Albert Anton Traxler, Dorothea Greiling, and Hannah Hebesberger, ‘GRI Sustainability Reporting by INGOs: A Way Forward for Improving Accountability?’ [2020] 31 Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 1294-310.

20 Other relevant examples are the World Association of NGOs (WANGO) code of ethics and conduct for NGOs (https://www.wango.org/codeofethics/COEEnglish.pdf), the Red Cross Code of Conduct (https://www.ifrc.org/sites/default/files/2021-07/code-of-conduct-movement-ngos-english.pdf).

21 GACs are groups of organisations for which accountability is a practice ‘defined by community members through social learning processes that create shared social identities, build trust, and foster mutual accountability’ (Maryam Zarnegar Deloffre, ‘Global Accountability Communities: NGO Self-Regulation in the Humanitarian Sector’ [2016] 42 Review of International Studies 725).

22 In the early 2000s, a number of NGO scandals were revealed, mostly related to the misuse of funds. Those included fraud, mismanagement and misappropriation of funds by US organisations such as Freeport Day Care Centre (NY), Operation Smile or the Baptist Foundation of Arizona (Margaret Gibelman and Sheldon R Gelman, ‘Very Public Scandals: Nongovernmental Organizations in Trouble’ (2001) 12 Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 49, 56), questionable financial practices by the environmental INGO Nature Conservatory, or alleged embezzlement at the International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights (Angela M Crack, ‘INGO Accountability Deficits: The Imperatives for Further Reform’ (2013) 10 Globalizations 293, 296). More recently, there have been high-profile human rights scandals in the NGO sector, including allegations against Oxfam for sexual abuse in Haiti; WWF for financing, arming, and training violent anti-poaching units in African and Asian national parks; Save the Children UK for sexual harassment and mishandling of complaints (Focusright supra note). These recent scandals in particular illustrate the need for a more effective approach to NGO accountability.

23 Angela M. Crack, ‘The Regulation of International NGOs: Assessing the Effectiveness of the Ingo Accountability Charter’ [2017] 29 Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 419-29; Albert Anton Traxler, Dorothea Greiling and Hannah Hebesberger, ‘GRI Sustainability Reporting by Ingos: A Way Forward for Improving Accountability?’ [2020] 31 Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 1294-310; Angela M. Crack, ‘INGO Accountability Deficits: The Imperatives for Further Reform’ [2013] 10 Globalizations 293-308; Alexandre Fontenelle-Weber, ‘International Human Rights Law and the Accountability of Civil Society Organizations: the Case of the INGO Accountability Charter/Accountable Now’ [2019] 8 Brazilian Journal of International Relations 215-35.

24 Maryam Zarnegar Deloffre, ‘Global Accountability Communities: NGO Self-Regulation in the Humanitarian Sector’ [2016] 42 Review of International Studies 725.

25 Denis Kennedy, ‘The Inherently Contested Nature of Nongovernmental Accountability: The Case of Hap International’ [2019] 30 Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 1393.

26 Conservation and Human Rights Framework, Conservation Initiative on Human Rights (2010) <https://wwfint.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/cihrframeworkfeb2010.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023. The framework has been endorsed by several international organizations and networks, including the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), BirdLife International, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Other examples are the Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in disaster relief (https://www.ifrc.org/our-promise/do-good/code-conduct-movement-ngos); the IFC Environmental and Social Performance Standards, oriented to the development finance sector and considered the leading environmental and social standards in this sector; or the Humanitarian Accountability Partnership-International (HAP, ‘The 2010 HAP Standard in Accountability and Quality Management’ <https://pseataskforce.org/uploads/tools/the2010hapstandardinaccountabilityandqualitymanagement_hapinternational_english.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023, 3).

27 Michael Windfuhr, ‘Safeguarding Human Rights in Land Related Investments: Comparison of the Voluntary Guidelines Land with the IFC Performance Standards and the World Bank Environmental and Social Safeguard Framework’ (German Institute for Human Rights 2017).

28 Dorothea Hilhorst, ‘Dead Letter or Living Document? Ten Years of the Code of Conduct for Disaster Relief’ [2005] 29 Disasters 351; see also Ana Borovecki and others, ‘20 Years of the ICRC Code of Conduct for Disaster Relief: What Do We Need to Improve?’ [2015] 385 The Lancet 1391.

29 Dorothea Hilhorst, ‘Dead Letter or Living Document? Ten Years of the Code of Conduct for Disaster Relief’ [2005] 29 Disasters 351.

30 Carolei and Bernaz supra note, 508-509, citing Lindblom 2005 and Ben-Ari 2013.

31 Tosca Bruno-van Vijfeijken, ‘“Culture Is What You See When Compliance Is Not in the Room”: Organizational Culture as an Explanatory Factor in Analyzing Recent INGO Scandals’ (2019) 10(4) Nonprofit Policy Forum 1, 5.

32 Ibid, p. 6.

33 Ibid, p. 6.

34 Carolei and Bernaz supra note 508, citing Traxle et al. 2018; Crack 2016; Hammad and Morton 2011. The UK House of Commons International Development Committee has called the NGO sector to move beyond self-regulation, which had failed to ensure that safeguarding and accountability standards were being upheld by NGOs (UK House of Commons, International Development Committee, Follow-up: Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in the Aid Sector. First Report Session 2019-20).

35 Angela M Crack, ‘Reversing the Telescope: Evaluating NGO Peer Regulation Initiatives’ (2016) 28 Journal of International Development 40.

36 Ibid, 50-52, Tosca supra note 6-7.

37 Asmita Naik, ‘Tackling Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by Aid Workers: What Has Changed 20 Years On?’ (2021) 81 Humanitarian Exchange Magazine 20.

38 Ibid, 21-22.

39 Ibid, 22-23.

40 Focus Rightsupra note 15.

41 Nada Abdelmagid and others, ‘Defining, Measuring and Interpreting the Appropriateness of Humanitarian Assistance’ [2019] 4 Journal of International Humanitarian Action 1.

42 Norwegian Refugee Council, 2015, cited in Shukri Muhomed, Jerome Puri, Helen Stickler and Divya Sugand ‘NGO's Due Diligence and Risk Mitigation: A Holistic Approach’ (March 2021) <https://charityandsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/NGOs-Due-Diligence-and-Risk-Mitigation.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023, p 26.

43 Shukri Muhomed, Jerome Puri, Helen Stickler and Divya Sugand, ‘NGO's Due Diligence and Risk Mitigation: A Holistic Approach’ (March 2021) <https://charityandsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/NGOs-Due-Diligence-and-Risk-Mitigation.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023, p 26.

44 John Gerard Ruggie and John F. Sherman, III, ‘The Concept of ‘Due Diligence’ in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: A Reply to Jonathan Bonnitcha and Robert McCorquodale’ [2017] 28(3) EJIL 921 p 923.

45 Claire Bright, ‘Creating a Legislative Level Playing Field in Business and Human Rights at the European Level: Is the French Law on the Duty of Vigilance the Way Forward?’ (2020) EUI Working Paper MWP 2020/01, p 13.

46 Gabriela Quijano and Carlos Lopez, ‘Rise of Mandatory Human Rights Due Diligence: A Beacon of Hope or a Double-Edged Sword?’ [2021] 6 BHRJ 241.

47 Charlotte Villiers, ‘New Directions in the European Union's Regulatory Framework for Corporate Reporting, Due Diligence and Accountability: The Challenge of Complexity’ [2022] 13 EJRR.

48 Organisations pursuing charitable aims do fall under section 54 of the UK Modern Slavery Act if they engage in ‘commercial activities and [have] a total turnover of £36m – irrespective of the purpose for which profits are made’. NGOs, charities, and think tanks are complying with it, including Amnesty International, Oxfam BG, Save the Children, or WWF UK.

49 The guidance for reporting entities from the Home Affairs department establishes that. The Act applies to a wide range of entity types, including individuals, partnerships, associations, and legal entities such as companies, trusts, superannuation funds, and other types of investment organisations. This includes both commercial entities and not-for-profit entities, such as charities.’ Again, examples of NGOs complying are the Australian Red Cross, Save the Children Australia or the Salvation Army Australia.

50 German Act on Corporate Due Diligence Obligations in Supply Chains (Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichtengesetz – LkSG).

51 Amendments to the Swiss Code of Obligations (and Swiss Criminal Code) and Ordinance.

52 The Netherlands Bill for Responsible and Sustainable International Business Conduct defines its scope using the expression ‘regardless of its legal form’.

53 Norwegian Act relating to enterprises’ transparency and work on fundamental human rights and decent working conditions (Transparency Act).

54 Belgian Bill establishing a duty of vigilance and a duty of responsibility for companies throughout their value chains.

55 Edward T. Bristol-Alagbariya, ‘IFC Environmental & Social Performance Standards: Soft Law Project & Company Financing Partnerships towards Good Environmental Governance, Business Sustainability and Sustainable Development in Developing Countries’ [2020] 81 International Affairs and Global Strategy.

56 Alwyn Lim, ‘Nonprofits as Socially Responsible Actors: Neoliberalism, Institutional Structures, and Empowerment in the United Nations Global Compact’ [2021] 70 Current Sociology 463.

57 Alnoor Ebrahim, ‘Accountability in Practice: Mechanisms for NGOs’ [2003] 31(5) World Development 813.

58 Eoghan Walsh, Helena Lenihan, ‘Accountability and Effectiveness of NGOs: Adapting Business Tools Successfully’ [2006] 16(5) Development in Practice 412, p.412.

59 UNGP 17.

60 Julie Wynne and Tomás Navarro Blakemore, ‘The UN guiding principles on business and human rights and their role for non-profit organisations’ [2017] 15 Philanthropy Impact Magazine <https://www.philanthropy-impact.org/sites/default/files/user-uploads/pi_magazine_15_final_wynn_blakemore.pdf> accessed 23April 2023.

61 Domenico Carolei and Nadia Bernaz, ‘Accountability for Human Rights: Applying Business and Human Rights Instruments to Non-Governmental Organizations’ [2021] 13(3) JHRP 507, p 508.

62 Ibid.

63 Ibid, p 523. See also John Morrison, (2018) ‘Charities Should Be Held to the Same Human Rights Standards as Business’ <http://www.ethicalcorp.com/charities-should-be-held-same-human-rights-standards-business> accessed 23 April 2023, supporting the applicability of UNGPs to NGOs.

64 See supra Wynne and Navarro, p. 14.

65 Ibid.

66 Ibid.

67 Claire Apodaca, ‘The Human Rights Costs of NGOs’ Naming and Shaming Campaigns’ in Alison Byrsk and Michael Stohl (ed), Contracting Human Rights Crisis, Accountability and Opportunity (1st edition, Elgar, 2018) p 83.

68 Jael E. Makagon, Harry Jonas and Dilys Roe, Human Rights Standards for Conservation (IIED 2014), p 29.

69 Ibid.

70 Ibid.

71 Ibid, p 30.

72 FIFA (Federation International de Football Association), FIFA's Human Rights Policy, 2017.

73 UEFA (Union of European Football Association), Football and Social Responsibility <https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/social-responsibility/overview/> accessed 23 April 2023.

74 IOC (International Olympic Committee), ‘IOC Continues Working on Human Rights and Takes First Steps on a Strategy’ <https://www.olympic.org/news/ioc-continues-working-on-human-rights-and-takes-first-steps-on-a-strategy> accessed 23 April 2023.

75 Council of Europe, ‘Expert Council on NGOs Law of the Conference of INGOs. Review of Developments in Standards, Mechanisms and Case Law Related to NGOs 2017-2019’ (2020).

76 Domenico Carolei, ‘Survival International v World-Wide Fund for Nature: Using the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises as a Means of Ensuring NGO Accountability’ [2018] 18 Human Rights Law Review 371.

77 National Contact Point Norway (2011) ‘Initial Assessment and Final Conclusion. Roma in Kosovo v. Norwegian Church Aid (NCA)’.

78 National Contact Point of Switzerland (2015) ‘Initial Assessment, Specific Instance regarding the Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) submitted by the Building and Wood Workers’ International (BWI)’.

79 Ibid.

80 National Contact Point of Switzerland (2016) ‘Initial Assessment, Specific Instance regarding the Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) submitted by Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain (ADHRB)’.

81 National Contact Point of Switzerland (2016) ‘Initial Assessment, Specific Instance regarding the World-Wide Fund for Nature International (WWF) submitted by Survival International Charitable Trust (SI)’.

82 Carolei and Bernaz, supra note, p 11.

83 National Contact Point of Switzerland (2018) ‘Initial Assessment, Specific Instance regarding the Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) submitted by Transformation for Justice (TuK)’.

84 National Contact Point of United Kingdom (2019) ‘Initial Assessment by the UK National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises: Complaint from IDI, EC and LICADHO against Bonsucro Ltd’.

85 OECD Guidelines, 2023 update, p 12.

86 Carolei and Bernaz, supra note, 523.

87 UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights, ‘Raising the Ambition – Increasing the Pace, UNGPs 10+: A Roadmap for the Next Decade of Business and Human Rights’ (2021) <https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/ungps10plusroadmap.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023.

88 OECD Guidelines, 2023 update, p 60.

89 Ibid, pp 25-7.

90 Ibid, p 40-2.

91 The Business and Human Rights Resource Centre provides regular updates on relevant business and human rights cases, as well as on law and policy developments: https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/big-issues/.

92 UNPGs 10+, Goal 1.4.

93 Human Rights Council, Panel Discussion on the Tenth Anniversary of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, UN Doc. A/HRC/49/CRP.3, 10 February 2022, <https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2022-02/report-panel-10th-anniversary-ungps.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023.

94 Goal 2.2.

95 Goal 3.2.

96 UNGPs 20, 21.

97 Angela M. Crack, ‘The Regulation of International NGOs: Assessing the Effectiveness of the Ingo Accountability Charter’ [2017] 29 Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Non-profit Organizations 419-29.

98 Goal 2.1.

99 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, ‘Civil Society and the Global Pandemic: Building Back Different?, Carnegie Civic Research Network, 30 September 2021, <https://carnegieendowment.org/2021/09/30/civil-society-and-global-pandemic-building-back-different-pub-85446> accessed 23 April 2023; Ágnes Kövér, ‘The Relationship between Government and Civil Society in the Era of Covid-19’ [2021] Nonprofit Policy Forum <https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/npf-2021-0007/html> accessed 23 April 2023; Dupuy, Fransen and Prakash supra note 9.

100 Goal 4.

101 Roadmap, supra note.

102 Proposal of the European Commission 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, 23 February 2022, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri = CELEX%3A52022PC0071.

103 Clare Bright and Lise Smit, ‘The New European Directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence’, British Institute of International and Comparative Law, NOVA School of Law (2022) <https://www.biicl.org/documents/11164_ec_directive_briefing_bright_and_smit_1_march_update.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023; Christopher Patz, ‘The EU's Draft Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive: A First Assessment’, [2022] 7(2) Business and Human Rights Journal 291-7.

104 See Articles 5-11 of the proposed Directive.

105 Article 17 of the proposed Directive.

106 Article 22 of the proposed Directive.

107 Luca Enriques, ‘The Extraterritorial Impact of the Proposed EU Directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence: Why Corporate America Should Pay Attention’, Oxford Business Law Blog, 21 April 2022, <https://blogs.law.ox.ac.uk/business-law-blog/blog/2022/04/extraterritorial-impact-proposed-eu-directive-corporate> accessed 23 April 2023.

108 Anggraeni and Partners, ‘The Extraterritorial Application of European Commission's Draft Directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence: What Does it Mean to Indonesian Companies?’, Lexology, 2 March 2023, <https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g = 96ae88a2-6eb5-4093-8bdc-a2fba531094b> accessed 23 April 2023.

109 Michael Littenberg, Samantha Elliott, Austin Bohn, ‘A Q&A on the European Commission's Proposed Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive’, Oxford Business Law Blog, 10 May 2022, <https://blogs.law.ox.ac.uk/business-law-blog/blog/2022/05/qa-european-commissions-proposed-corporate-sustainability-due> accessed 23 April 2023.

110 Anti-Slavery International, Analysis of the European Commission Proposal for a Directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence, May 2022 <https://www.antislavery.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/ASI_CS3D_.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023, p 5.

111 Carolei and Bernaz, p. 510.

112 For more information about the legal forms NGOs usually adopt in various countries, see Advocates for International Development, EU registration options for NGOs. Preparing UK-based NGOs for Brexit. A guide to establishing NGOs in Europe (2017) <https://www.a4id.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/EU-registration-options-for-UK-NGOs-post-Brexit-FINAL-PDF-1.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023.

113 Examples of this can be found by looking at the Companies House Register for Oxfam (https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/00612172) and Amnesty International (https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/01606776). For more information on the various forms that non-profits can take in England & Wales, see here (https://cof.org/country-notes/nonprofit-law-england-wales).

114 Advocates for International Development (2017).

115 DRAFT REPORT 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 – C9-0050/2022 - 2022/0051(COD)), Committee on Legal Affairs, Rapporteur: Lara Wolters, 7 November 2022, <https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-PR-738450_EN.html>.

116 To companies with more than 500 employees and a net worldwide turnover of more than EUR 150 million; and non-EU companies with a net EU turnover of more than EUR 150 million.

117 To companies with more than 250 employees and a net worldwide turnover of more than EUR 40 million and non-EU companies with a net EU turnover of more than EUR 40 million, provided at least 50% of their worldwide turnover was generated in a ‘high impact’ sector (https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-15024-2022-REV-1/en/pdf).

118 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 – C9-0050/2022–2022/0051(COD).

119 Begum Kilimcioğlu, ‘How Does the Financial Sector Relate to the European Commission's Proposal For a Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive?’ (EJIL: Talk!, 22 February 2023) <https://www.ejiltalk.org/how-does-the-financial-sector-relate-to-the-european-commissions-proposal-for-a-corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive/?utm_source = mailpoet&utm_medium = email&utm_campaign = ejil-talk-newsletter-post-title_2> accessed 23 April 2023.

120 Amendments adopted by the European Parliament supra note, Amendment 26.

121 Ibid., Amendment 25.

122 Ibid., Amendment 27.

123 Examples of NGOs complying with the UK Modern Slavery Act, which also operate in the EU, include Oxfam (See pages 5-6 of Oxfam's Modern Slavery Statement 2022: https://www.oxfam.org.uk/documents/610/Modern_Slavery_Statement_2022.pdf); Amnesty International (See p. 2 of its Modern Slavery Statement, 2021: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/org20/5700/2022/en/); and Save the Children International: See its Modern Slavery Statement, 2021: https://www.savethechildren.net/modern-slavery-statement-2021).

124 See OHCHR, Feedback on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence, 23 May 2022 <https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2022-05/eu-csddd-feedback-ohchr.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023; PRI, EUROSIF, Investor Alliance for Human Rights, Investor Statement of Support for an Ambitious and Effective European Direcive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence, 24 November 2022 <https://www.eurosif.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/INVEST1-2.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023; Civil society statement on the proposed EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, May 2022 <https://www.care-international.org/sites/default/files/2022-05/CSO_statement_CSDDD_EN.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023. German institute for Human Rights, Statement on the European Commission's Proposal on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence, 23 May 2022 <https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12548-Sustainable-corporate-governance/F3263285_en> accessed 23 April 2023.

125 Anti-Slavery International, Analysis of the European Commission Proposal for a Directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence, May 2022 <https://www.antislavery.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/ASI_CS3D_.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023, p. 5. The analysis also indicates that Art. 2 thresholds are not in line with the threshold of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD).

126 ‘Europe Can Do Better – How EU Policy Makers Can Strengthen the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive’ <https://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/duediligence.pdf> accessed 23 April 2023, pp 3-5.

127 Luc Hendrickx, ‘Due Diligence Directive has to be Feasible for SMEs’ (SME United, 13 October 2022) <https://www.smeunited.eu/news/due-diligence-directive-has-to-be-feasible-for-smes> accessed 23 April 2023; Gian Domenico Mosco, Raffaele Felicetti, ‘The EU's Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive: An Excessively Diligent Proposal’, (Oxford Business Law Blog, 7 September 2022) <https://blogs.law.ox.ac.uk/blog-post/2022/09/eus-corporate-sustainability-due-diligence-directive-excessively-diligent> accessed 23 April 2023.

128 See also paras. 45-48 of the preamble.

129 Amendments 161, 163.

130 Amendments adopted by the European Parliament supra note, Amendment 234-40.