Making human rights due diligence a legal requirement for companies including systems to identify, assess, mitigate or manage human rights risks and impacts to improve that process over time and to disclose the risks and impacts, the steps taken and the results.
The undersigned entities do not support the Omnibus proposal.
"On 26 February, the Commission published the Omnibus I proposal on EU sustainability regulation. The stated aim of the Omnibus proposal was to streamline and simplify the already agreed regulation while maintaining the original purpose of the legislation. We, the undersigned, fear that these objectives are not being achieved. International principles of corporate responsibility were established almost 15 years ago at the UN and OECD level. The original Corporate Responsibility Directive, adopted last year, sought to bring the above-mentioned principles to the level of legislation by imposing a risk-based human rights and environmental due diligence obligation on large companies. The Commission's Omnibus proposal no longer fully relies on risk-based approaches and therefore risks breaking the link between legislation and the above-mentioned principles."**Text translated, original language Finnish
The undersigned entities oppose the re-opening of the agreed and adopted legal texts of the CSRD and CSDDD. It indicates that this would lead to legal uncertainty and indicates necessary simplification should be done at level 2 of legislative process only.
"""The undersigned 28 Finnish companies and CSOs, are concerned about the uncertaintythat the Commission’s announcement of an upcoming Omnibus Simplification Package hascreated. We are calling on the Commission to ensure that the already agreed sustainabilitydue diligence rules are not opened for renegotiation.""""we continue to support the CSRD and CSDDD. What we need is certainty andtimely transposition of the CSDDD and guidance for smart implementation of both ofthese directives.""""The possibility of the CSRD and CSDDD being reopened creates political uncertainty andlegal unpredictability which are both detrimental to investment and competitiveness. Assuch, we are calling on you to clarify that this omnibus package, if embarked upon, will notlead to already agreed and adopted legal texts being opened for renegotiation. Any changesto the legislation should be at level 2 only."""
By endorsing this joint statement, the entity demonstrates unequivocal support for the establishment of mandatory due diligence legislation on human rights and environmental issues. The letter reinforces the urgency of adopting the legal text and the central role that regulation must play. The entity publicly supports the mandatory nature of the legislation and its alignment with international standards (UNGPs, OECD), which directly corresponds to the scope of indicator Q1.1. The language used reflects a proactive and affirmative stance.
Based on the document "EU Business Statement – February 2022," in which the entity is listed as a signatory, it states: “We... urge the European Commission to adopt a legislative proposal without further delay.” “We firmly believe that strong and ambitious EU legislation would make a tangible contribution to improving human rights and environmental conditions along global value chains...” “Our view has always been that the due diligence expectations set out in the UNGPs and in the OECD Guidelines should form the core requirements on business in HREDD legislation.”
Requiring Human rights due diligence of all companies, regardless of sector and size, while still reflecting their individual circumstances.
Based on the document "EU Business Statement – February 2022," in which the entity is listed as a signatory, it states: “All businesses established in the EU and/or active on the internal market, including financial actors, and regardless of size, should be covered by mHREDD legislation.” “Many European SMEs... acknowledge that responsibility... is not a matter of company size...”
The document advocates for the legislation to apply to all companies, regardless of size or sector, expressly including SMEs and financial actors. This position represents clear support for the universal scope of the regulation. The entity explicitly supports the universal application of the legislation, recognizing the importance of a level regulatory playing field, including for SMEs.
Implementing an enforcement mechanism where companies fail to carry out due diligence as described.
Based on the document "EU Business Statement – February 2022," in which the entity is listed as a signatory, it states: “The requirement needs to be accompanied by legal consequences – encompassing administrative penalties and provisions for civil liability – that will be strong enough to ensure that businesses... carry out HREDD to a high standard...”
The entity advocates for the existence of legal accountability mechanisms, including administrative sanctions and civil liability, as a means to ensure the effectiveness of the legislation. There is clear support for the implementation of robust enforcement mechanisms, covering both administrative penalties and civil liability, fully aligning with the scope of the indicator.
Including in the duties of directors and company law obligations to avoid human rights impacts or “harms”.
Based on the document "EU Business Statement – February 2022," in which the entity is listed as a signatory, it states: “HREDD should also be embedded in appropriate governance and accountability structures, including at board level.”
The letter argues that governance structures, including boards of directors, should integrate due diligence, implying an active role for directors in risk prevention and mitigation. Although the text does not explicitly propose a formal legal obligation for directors, it advocates for their incorporation into governance, justifying a positive score.
Require companies to provide remedy for human rights impacts they have caused or contributed to.
Based on the document "EU Business Statement – February 2022," in which the entity is listed as a signatory, the company states: "To level and harmonise the playing field in practice, the requirement needs to be accompanied by legal consequences – encompassing administrative penalties and provisions for civil liability – that will be strong enough to ensure that businesses falling within the personal scope of the legislation carry out HREDD to a high standard and that those that are harmed have access to remedy."
Analysis: The text reinforces the importance of corporate accountability and the guarantee of access to remediation for victims of negative impacts, in line with the spirit of the indicator. Score: +1 Justification: Despite being brief, the direct mention of the need for remediation justifies a positive score, as it aligns with the principle of repairing damages caused or contributed to
Require companies to exert leverage on and/or provide support to their counterparties in the remediation of human rights impacts that are linked to company activities through their business relationships (e.g their value chains).
Based on the document "EU Business Statement – February 2022," in which the entity is listed as a signatory, it states: "The legislation should reflect the wide spectrum of avenues, including adjustments to own purchasing practices, to effectively influence and enable business partners as well as increase leverage if needed, rather than honing in narrowly on the extent to which a company can deploy contractual or commercial leverage."
The letter explicitly advocates that companies should adopt measures to influence and support their business partners, including adjusting their own purchasing practices, which aligns with the use of leverage for remediation purposes. There is clear and active support for the use of leverage to influence business partners, as outlined in the indicator.
Require companies to actively engage, consult and involve rights-holders at all stages of the remediation process.
Based on the document "EU Business Statement – February 2022," in which Acciona Energía is listed as a signatory, it states:"A key component of qualitative HREDD is meaningful engagement with affected stakeholders – those people that are at risk of negative impacts from business activity. Listening to the voices of workers, community members and others is vital to a company’s understanding of risks to people and planet and strengthens its due diligence. To ensure that the EU legislation encourages people-centric HREDD, robust engagement with affected groups, workers and other relevant stakeholders including unions and human rights and environmental defenders should inform all stages of the required due diligence process. Engagement must also be safe, so that those speaking out can do so without suffering or fearing retaliation."
Acciona Energía explicitly supports engagement with affected rights holders as a central part of the due diligence process, including during critical stages such as remediation. The document emphasizes the centrality of meaningful stakeholder engagement and their security, demonstrating full alignment with the indicator.
Enabling judicial enforcement with liability and compensation in case of harm caused by not fulfilling the due diligence obligations.
Based on the document "EU Business Statement – February 2022," in which the entity is listed as a signatory, it states: "To level and harmonise the playing field in practice, the requirement needs to be accompanied by legal consequences – encompassing administrative penalties and provisions for civil liability"
Support for civil liability as an essential component of the legislation shows direct alignment with the requirement for judicial enforcement. The entity explicitly endorses civil liability with provisions for compensation, justifying the maximum score.
Require companies to implement a due diligence process covering their value chain to identify, prevent, mitigate and remediate human rights impacts and improve that practice over time.
The Company states that it considers it as problematic in the omnibus proposal to limit the due diligence obligation to companies’ own operations, subsidiary operations, and direct business partners (so-called tier 1 level).
"A particularly problematic aspect of the Commission's omnibus proposal is the general limitation of the due diligence obligation to companies' own activities, the activities of subsidiaries and direct business partners (the so-called tier 1 level). This limitation may mechanically direct companies' responsibility work and the resources allocated to it to places where environmental and human rights risks are generally not the greatest. Limiting the obligation to the first stage of the production chain will not help to address the problems for which the CSR Directive was enacted. It makes it more difficult for companies carrying out responsibility work and increases the administrative burden. At the same time, it allows irresponsible business practices to continue"*Text translated, original language Finnish
Based on the document "EU Business Statement – February 2022," in which the entity is listed as a signatory, it states: “The legislation should oblige businesses to carry out ongoing due diligence proactively and across all their operations and the full value chain.” “The UNGPs set out that a company’s responsibility... extends throughout its business relationships across its full value chain...”
The entity fully supports the application of due diligence throughout the entire value chain, as reflected in UN and OECD principles. The statement proposes that the legislation require a continuous and proactive approach, covering direct operations and business relationships. There is clear and normative support for the application of due diligence across the entire chain (upstream and downstream), justifying the maximum score for this indicator.
Require that human rights risks and impacts should be assessed through dialogue with stakeholder or with their legitimate representatives.
Based on the document "EU Business Statement – February 2022," in which the entity is listed as a signatory, it states: “Listening to the voices of workers, community members and others is vital to a company’s understanding of risks to people and planet and strengthens its due diligence.”
The letter advocates that risk assessment should take place through active listening and dialogue with affected stakeholders, which aligns with the spirit of the indicator. The statement explicitly supports the use of dialogue as a risk assessment tool, justifying the maximum score.
| Legislation | Position |
|---|---|
| EU CSDDD | Supporting |
| Omnibus | Supporting |
| Trade Association | Performance band |
|---|