Kapitelvorschau

Kapitelvorschau

Abstract

Supply chains laws are not only legal and legitimate from the perspective of international law; they are even required by both international law and EU law. Otherwise a “democratic and equitable international order” will remain elusive. The European Commission has recognised this in its recent proposal for a Directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence.

Abstract

The article presents four categories of EU approaches on regulating supply chain responsibility. Sometimes, like in the case of the Kimberley process for conflict diamonds or with respect to illegally fished fishery products, the EU enacts restrictions or prohibitions that are specifically targeted at the import of foreign products. These import regimes are distinguished from marketing prohibitions for unethically produced goods. The prime examples are the European bans on cat and dog fur and seals products, as well as a possible future ban on goods made from forced labour. While these categories impose negative duties for EU importers and producers, the author also looks at EU regulations imposing positive obligations of EU companies. They may either be required to report about supply chain responsibility or need to entertain due diligence with respect to their import activities. For the latter category, the author discusses the EU regulations on tropical timber, conflict minerals, deforestation and general due diligence. Hoffmeister shows how these regimes fit into the normative framework of the European Union’s foreign policy objectives and argues that they are WTO compatible. He also provides a short comparative assessment about their effectiveness.

Abstract

Foreign direct investment is one of the modes of organisation of global supply chains. At the international level, foreign direct investment is mostly regulated through international investment agreements (IIAs). While most of these agreements are still silent on corporate responsibilities, there are some notable exceptions that mark the way forward toward a more balanced investment protection regime. This contribution argues that even though the main purpose of IIAs remains the promotion and protection of foreign investment, IIAs could equally be used to enhance corporate responsibilities. To that purpose, the contribution outlines possible legal sources and means of enforcement to establish corporate responsibilities through IIAs.

Abstract

Regulations that aim at the observance of certain human rights and environmental standards by companies along the value chain have gained momentum. A recent example is the German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act that obliges German companies to adhere to due diligence obligations vis-à-vis human rights and, to a lesser extent, the environment when making use of global supply chains. Germany, as other WTO members, must at the same time ensure compliance with WTO law when adopting such measures. This article will argue that due diligence laws may have a bearing on WTO obligations, but can be justified according to the general exceptions clause of Art. XX GATT. Ultimately, the article argues that such measures may be necessary if international economic law is to accommodate the common goal of sustainable development.

Zusammenfassung

Im innerstaatlichen Recht werden in jüngerer Zeit in wachsendem Umfang menschenrechtliche Sorgfaltspflichten für Unternehmen auch in Bezug auf ihre globalen Lieferketten normiert. Aus völkerrechtlicher Perspektive betrachtet sind diese und weitere Aspekte der internationalen Unternehmensverantwortung für den Schutz der Menschenrechte jedoch bislang ganz überwiegend soft law geblieben. Vor diesem Hintergrund wird im Rahmen des Beitrags die Thematik der menschenrechtlichen Unternehmensverantwortung aus einer bestimmten Perspektive etwas näher beleuchtet und dabei ein Aspekt in den Vordergrund gerückt, der bislang etwas weniger im Blickpunkt der Diskussion steht: Die potentielle Relevanz von Prozessen der Versicherheitlichung im Kontext der menschenrechtlichen Unternehmensverantwortung in der Lieferkette im internationalen Rohstoffrecht. Im Zentrum steht die These, dass Prozesse der Versicherheitlichung einen Impulsfaktor für Rechtsentwicklungen im Bereich der Unternehmensverantwortung gerade auch in Gestalt von Sorgfaltspflichten in der Lieferkette bilden und überdies einen aussichtsreichen Ausgangspunkt für die Erzielung eines breiteren Konsenses in der internationalen Gemeinschaft für eine völkerrechtliche Rechtsetzung darstellen. Der Beitrag versucht dabei zu verdeutlichen, dass die Effekte einer Versicherheitlichung sich gerade auch im Kontext der aktuellen Akzentverschiebungen im internationalen Rohstoffrecht nachweisen lassen. Dies gilt insbesondere auch für die Einbindung privater Wirtschaftsakteure in die Verwirklichung globaler Gemeinwohlbelange auf der Basis von Verantwortungsstrukturen in der Lieferkette. Das internationale Rohstoffrecht bildet daher aufgrund seines diesbezüglichen Pioniercharakters ein anschauliches Referenzgebiet.

Abstract

Due diligence obligations of companies to respect human rights in their global supply chains have been more recently enshrined in domestic laws of an increasing number of countries. However, respective binding international regulations addressing corporate actors in the field of human rights are still largely absent. Against this background, it is argued in this contribution that in order to facilitate the international law-making processes on this issue, closer attention should be devoted to processes of so-called securitization. Outlining the importance of securitization moves for the emergence of due diligence expectations on and obligations of private commercial actors in the field of international commodity law, in particular as far as normatively addressing the issue of so-called conflict diamonds and minerals is concerned, the contribution attempts to identify notable spill-over effects resulting from these legal developments for the realm of international human rights law.

Abstract

In a globalised economy, transnational corporations from all sectors are directly or indirectly linked to global supply chains, in particular through transnational business activities and foreign investments. That this represents a potential threat to individuals and the environment has been revealed by persistent human rights abuses and damage to the environment. In practice, human rights abuses by transnational corporations often take place in countries of the Global South and affect the most vulnerable people, such as women workers, child labourers and residents of poor and rural areas. Nevertheless, the existing international human rights system does not impose direct human rights obligations on private actors, including transnational corporations. The responsibilities of transnational corporations for human rights in global supply chains are mainly based on a patchwork of soft regulations. In recent years, however, new initiatives have emerged at the national and international level, such as the the development of an internationally legally binding treaty to regulate business activities with respect to human rights or domestic legislation for corporate due diligence obligations. Most of these initiatives emphasise the role of the State in incorporating a “mediated” approach to the human rights responsibility of transnational corporations. This article explores recent developments connected to the human rights responsibilities of corporations and discusses their feasibility under international human rights law.

Abstract

The contribution analyses the different gender perspectives which occur across the global supply chain. It will explain the relationship of gender equality and its implications observing the different stages of the production cycle in global supply chains. Certain conditions and the employment of women in low-wage production at the lower tier of supply chains make them more vulnerable for different human rights violations, such as gender-based and sexual violence and harassment, discriminations based on sex, exploitation, unequal pay for work of equal value, among others. It will be examined how these are addressed with soft and hard law approaches on the international, European and national level, concluding with the benefits and pitfalls of national legally binding global supply chain acts.

Abstract

Sourcing gold is an example of one of the most problematic mineral supply chains. This is undoubtedly the case in artisanal mining (with serious environmental degradation through deforestation, the use of mercury, child labour and frequent violence). However, industrial mining is rarely better (local communities suffer from displacement and toxic emissions). The international community is struggling to regulate, however most of the rules remain soft law and self-regulation is unreliable. Furthermore, a large part of the supply chain evades the regulation altogether, since consumers in the Middle East, India and China rarely insist on clean sourcing.

Zusammenfassung

Am 23. Februar 2022 legte die Europäische Kommission ihren lang erwarteten Vorschlag für eine Richtlinie zur unternehmerischen Sorgfaltspflicht im Bereich der Nachhaltigkeit vor. Wie erwartet wurde dieser Vorschlag von viel Lob, aber auch von Kritik begleitet. Der Artikel stellt den Hintergrund und das Regelungssystem des Vorschlags dar und bietet eine Synopse zwischen der geplanten Richtlinie und dem deutschen Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichtengesetz. Am Ende des Artikels wird das Fazit gezogen, dass Gesetzgeber und Unternehmen bereits jetzt gefordert sind, diesen europäischen Prozess zu verfolgen und umzusetzen. Denn vieles deutet darauf hin, dass die anstehenden Regelungen zu strengeren Vorgaben führen werden.

Abstract

On February 23, 2022, the European Commission presented its long-awaited proposal for a directive on corporate sustainability due diligence. As expected, this proposal was accompanied by much laudation, but also by criticism. The article presents the background and the regulatory system of the proposal and provides a synopsis between the planned directive and the German “Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichtengesetz”. At the end of the article, it is concluded that legislators and companies are already required to follow and implement this European process. This is because there are many indications that the forthcoming rules will lead to stricter regulations.

Abstract

The contribution provides a rough introduction and evaluation of the implementation of supply chain responsibilities in Germany by administrative authorities using the example of the implementation of the EU Timber Regulation with a view to the introductory measures of the 3TG Regulation and the German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (Lieferkettengesetz).

Abstract

Globalisation allows corporate organisations to rise above the national and regional regulatory constraints through global value chains. This is especially due to the fact that national boundaries do not limit the flow of investment capital, labour, goods, or the environmental consequences of such activities. In parallel, the evolution of sustainable development has brought with it social, environmental, and economic activities for the benefit of future generations. The 2030 Agenda reflects the notion of sustainable development with 17 individual goals and 169 targets. While many welcomed such development, enforceability of sustainable development goals (SDGs) remains a challenge, primarily as voluntarism is central to the system of SDGs. In theory, consumers and end-user companies opt for sustainably produced goods to contribute towards sustainable development in their own countries and other countries in global value chains. In the absence of a national or international binding regulatory framework, contract emerged as the most effective solution for enforcing the SDGs in global value chains. This article explores the current challenges in the enforceability of sustainability clauses in global value chains through the lens of sustainable consumption and production patterns and SDG 12. It contributes to the ongoing academic debates and practical considerations through the lens of proactive law theory.