Comments and suggestions from Amnesty International, ECCJ, FIDH, CORE and Sherpa on the Draft Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to member States on human rights and business of 22 August 2014.
This submission offers the perspectives of The International Corporate Accountability Roundtable (ICAR) and The Danish Institute for Human Rights (DIHR)— with the support of the Corporate Responsibility Coalition (CORE), the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (SOMO), and the European Coalition for Corporate Justice (ECCJ)— on the open public consultation document released by the UN...
The International Corporate Accountability Roundtable (ICAR), CORE, and the European Coalition for Corporate Justice (ECCJ) emphasise that, in the development of National Action Plans (NAPs), States must first conduct National Baseline Assessments (NBAs) and then commit in their NAP to close identified gaps through legislative or other regulatory means.
This submission offers the perspectives of The International Corporate Accountability Roundtable (ICAR) and The Danish Institute for Human Rights (DIHR)— with the support of the Corporate Responsibility Coalition (CORE), the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (SOMO), and the European Coalition for Corporate Justice (ECCJ)— on the open public consultation document released by the UN Working...
Submission to the Joint Committee on the draft Modern Slavery Bill, recommending that a transparency in supply chains provision is included in the Bill.
The Commission launched this public consultation in order to receive feedback on the implementation of its most recent policy on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), which is outlined in the Communication “A renewed EU strategy 2011-14 for Corporate Social Responsibility” (COM(2011) 681). CORE states its support for the Commission’s new definition of CSR, identifies the weaknesses in...
The response expresses support for a Council of Europe non-binding instrument focused on access to justice and closely related issues. Such an instrument should essentially deal with State–based judicial mechanisms given the Council of Europe’s long-standing expertise in this field and since other instruments have already provided important guidance on companybased grievance mechanisms.
The response expresses support for a Council of Europe non-binding instrument focused on access to justice and closely related issues. Such an instrument should essentially deal with State–based judicial mechanisms given the Council of Europe’s long-standing expertise in this field and since other instruments have already provided important guidance on company based grievance mechanisms.
