Where Is Ireland's National Action Plan On Business and Human Rights? Updated

Where is Irelands national action plan
on business and human rights? Updated

September 22, 2016 by Shane Darcy
For several years now, the Irish government has been promising to produce a national action plan on
business and human rights. It seems that such a plan is imminent for 2016, given that a Working
Outline of the national plan was published late last year on international human rights day, 10
December 2015, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade Charlie Flanagan quietly announced the
publication of the Working Outline, describing it as the next step in Irelands efforts at placing
human rights firmly on the business agenda. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade held a
consultation on this document in January of this year and received a number of written submissions in
response. The final national action plan, however, has yet to be produced.
Ireland has reluctantly engaged with the business and human rights agenda since the development of
the United Nations Guiding Principles on business and human rights. Despite the occasionally
grandiose rhetoric, the engagement to date reveals that ensuring business respect for human rights has
not been a priority of much significance for the Irish Government. The following timeline traces the
path to Irelands yet-to-be published national action plan on business and human rights:
April 2005 The UN Commission on Human Rights requests the Secretary-General to appoint a Special
Representative to the Secretary-General on business and human rights.
July 2005 Professor John Ruggie is

appointed to the role and begins a multi-year mandate of research, engagement and consultation aimed
at addressing the human rights concerns arising from business activities.
June 2008 Special-Representative Ruggie puts forward the Respect, Protect and Remedy
Framework on business
and human rights, which is unanimously welcomed by the members of the UN Human Rights Council
June 2011 The United Nations Human Rights Council endorse the UN Framework and Guiding
Principles on business and human rights prepared by Special-Representative Ruggie
October 2011 The European Commissions calls on member states of the European Union to develop
national action plans for the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on business and human
rights
March 2013 In response to a Dil question, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade Eamon Gilmore
acknowledges the endorsement by the Human Rights Council of the UN Guiding Principles and
explains that consideration was being given on how to address these.
May 2013 Irish Aids Aid policy document One World, One Future states without elaboration that
Irelands actions in this context are to be guided by the United Nations guiding principles on
business and human rights
October 2013 Minister Gilmore is asked if Ireland are preparing a national action plan and replies that
Consideration is being given as to how to address the Guiding Principles and how best to go about
formulating our national action plan for their implementation.
November 2013 On foot of a submission from the Irish Centre for Human Rights, the UN Human
Rights Committee asks the Irish Government to provide it with information on how the Government
addresses concerns regarding the activities of private businesses based in the State party that may lead
to violations of the Covenant outside the territory of the State party.
March 2014 The Irish Government responds to the Human Rights Committee by stating that Ireland
was still considering how best to address the implementation of a national action plan on business and
human rights and that it planned on learning from other countries that have undertaken similar
processes.
June 2014 At a session of the UN Human Rights Council, Ireland states that it is strongly committed
to the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and is currently
developing its approach on how best to formulate a National Plan to implement them. The Irish
delegation also votes against a resolution seeking to advance discussion on a binding business and
human rights treaty.
July 2014 In response to questioning by the Human Rights Committee in Geneva on the activities of
Irish businesses overseas, the Irish government responds that a national plan was being developed in
an attempt to prevent human rights abuses by Irish companies operating abroad.
November 2014 The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade dedicates

its annual NGO Human Rights Forum to the theme: Business and Human Rights: Implementing the
United Nations Guiding Principles. Minister Flanagan states that it is important for Irelands standing
internationally and the reputation of Irish companies that we signal our commitment to placing human
rights firmly on the business agenda.
December 2014 The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade calls for submissions for its
consultation on the national action plan on business and human rights. Minister Flanagan puts its in the
Dil that the development of a national plan is a valuable opportunity to situate Ireland as a
progressive leader on the issue of business and human rights.
March 2015 Numerous submissions on the national action plan are made to the Department from a
variety of interested parties, including from IBEC, Dchas, the Irish Congress of Trade
Unions, Business in the Community, Christian Aid, Trcaire, the Irish Human Rights and Equality
Commission, the Irish Small and Medium Enterprises Association, the Irish Centre for Human Rights,
Amnesty International and the International Service for Human Rights.
October 2015 In a debate on corporation tax, poverty and human rights, Irish parliamentarians
criticise the delay in the development of Irelands national action plan on business and human rights.
December 2015 Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Charlie Flanagan, announces the publication
of the Working Outline of a national action plan on business and human rights
January 2016 The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade holds a consultation on the Working
Outline of a national plan and solicits written submissions. Various NGOs and interested parties
submit their observations on the Working Outline, with human rights civil society expressing some
disappointment. In the submission from the Irish Centre for Human Rights, for example, concern is
raised at the overemphasis on promotional activities, rather than the pursuit of a robust legislative
framework on business and human rights.
February 2016 The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child takes Ireland to task for the failure of
its Working Outline to contain any firm commitment to childrens rights.
June 2016 The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade responds to a parliamentary question put
by Deputy Sen Crowe on the status of the national action plan, by stating that the input received
through consultations and submissions is being reviewed in consultation with Government
Departments and with a view to producing a first draft of the National Plan.
July 2016 In response to another parliamentary question, this time from Deputy Maureen OSullivan,
the Minister provides a similar answer, but also adds that Ireland has engaged with the issue of
business and human rights at both the EU and UN level.
October 2016 The Minister for Foreign Affairs Trade, Charlie Flanagan, tells the Dil that his
department is reviewing submissions received with a view to producing a National Plan within the
first quarter of 2017.
***
It is now over five years since the UN Guiding Principles were endorsed by the UN Human Rights
Council and since EU member States were asked by the European Commission to develop national
action plans. Ireland has spent several years considering how to implement the Guiding Principles,
and at least two years developing its own national action plan. In the meantime, a number of other
states have published national plans and the United Kingdom has produced a second version of its
national action plan. Since 2011, there has not been any shortage of serious human rights issues in
which Irish business has been implicated, including human trafficking and exploitation in Irelands
fishing industry, the Rana Plaza factory collapse, the selling of software by Irish companies to Syria
and, most recently, large-scale tax avoidance by multinational companies operating in Ireland.
National action plans to implement the UN Guiding Principles are certainly not a silver bullet that will
prevent companies from negatively impacting on human rights, but at the very least they offer a means
of gauging a States commitment to this issue. Advocates of a global business and human rights treaty
have been warned that efforts to develop a binding instrument could derail existing initiatives aimed at
implementing the UN Guiding Principles. Irelands slow performance to date with regard to its national
action plan provides a underwhelming example of the potential of such undertakings for ensuring
business respect for human rights.
https://businesshumanrightsireland.wordpress.com/2016/09/22/where-is-irelands-
national-action-plan-on-business-and-human-rights/
Irelands position on a binding business
and human rights treaty
October 3, 2016 by Shane Darcy
Irelands Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade,

Charlie Flanagan, recently gave a statement outlining the Governments official position on the efforts
underway at the United Nations to develop a binding business and human rights treaty. As noted
previously here, Ireland voted against the resolution of the UN Human Rights Council establishing the
inter-governmental working group with a mandate to advance discussions on a binding instrument,
although the Government continues to advocate support for the UN Guiding Principles on business and
human rights (but has yet to produce its national implementation plan).
https://www.dfa.ie/media/dfa/alldfawebsitemedia/ourrolesandpolicies/int-
priorities/humanrights/nationalplanonbizandhr/National-Standards-Authority-of-Ireland.pdf
Preliminary submissions on the development of Irelands National Plan on Business and Human Rights
priorities/humanrights/nationalplanonbizandhr/Shell-Ireland.pdf
In the Dil last week, Minister Flanagan was asked by Deputy Thomas Pringle if Ireland supports the
process to develop an international legally binding instrument on transnational corporation and other
business enterprises with respect to human rights in the UN Human Rights Council as part of the UN
Treaty on Business and Human Rights; and if he will make a statement on the matter. The Minister
responded by reiterating the Governments support for the UN Guiding Principles and its concerns with
the approach of the inter-governmental working group to date (emphasis added):
Ireland is strongly committed to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs)
which are recognised as the global standard in this area. The Government is committed to the
development of a National Plan on Business and Human Rights to give effect to this
commitment and in this regard I was pleased to announce publication of the Working Outline of the
Plan in December 2015. This was the result of extensive consultation with civil society, business and
Government Departments. Following further consultation earlier this year, officials in my Department
are currently working to finalise the National Plan. The text of the Working Outline, as well as the
contributions received in the consultation process, are available on my Departments website.
Ireland is not a member of the Inter-Governmental Working Group on Transnational
Corporation and other Business Enterprises with respect to human rights, established in the framework
of the Human Rights Council, but we are following closely its deliberations. We share the common EU
position that the approach of this Working Group, which has a narrow focus on the elaboration of a
legal instrument applicable to transnational corporations only, is flawed in that it fails to take into
account that many human rights abuses are committed by domestic enterprises. This undermines a
fundamental tenet of the UN Guiding Principles, which cover all businesses, regardless of whether they
operate in one or more countries.
A further omission is the absence from the Working Groups work plan of any reference to
small and medium enterprises. In many countries these make up the vast number of business
enterprises.
These concerns have been shared by the EU with the Chair of the Working Group and we hope that
they will be addressed sufficiently to enable our fuller participation in the process.
These is some validity to these criticisms. Nonetheless, they might be more effectively addressed from
within the Working Group if Ireland were to join the process than by staying on the outside.
https://businesshumanrightsireland.wor
dpress.com/2016/10/03/irelands-
position-on-a-binding-business-and-
human-rights-treaty/
Ireland reiterates commitment to
business and human rights, votes
against Resolution on binding standards
June 27, 2014 by Shane Darcy Bookmark the permalink.
In a statement made to the current session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, Ireland
confirmed that addressing business and human rights issues is now firmly on the Governments
agenda. It states:
priorities/humanrights/nationalplanonbizandhr/Irish-Human-Rights-and-Equality-Commission.pdf
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Inclusion in Business Submission to Department of

Foreign Affairs and Trade National Plan on Business and Human Rights
priorities/humanrights/nationalplanonbizandhr/GLEN.pdf
Ireland is strongly committed to the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and
Human Rights and is currently developing its approach on how best to formulate a National Plan to
implement them. We welcome the report of the Secretary-General on the challenges, strategies and
developments with regard to the implementation of the Guiding Principles by the UN system. This is a
vital measure, complementary to the implementation activities of States, to ensure that the actions of
the UN in fields such as investment and procurement are consistent with the business and human rights
standards we have agreed, as well as more generally in our overall efforts to mainstream and embed
human rights throughout the UN system.
The Human Rights Council, of which Ireland is a member, has adopted two resolutions addressing the
subject of business and human rights. More specifically, these resolutions have addressed to varying
degrees the question of elaborating binding legal obligations for companies. Ecuador and South Africa
put forward a resolution, in which it is stated that the Council:
Decides to establish an open-ended intergovernmental working group on a legally binding instrument

on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights;
whose mandate shall be to elaborate an international legally binding instrument to regulate, in
international human rights law, the activities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business
Enterprises.
priorities/humanrights/nationalplanonbizandhr/International-Service-for-Human-Rights.pdf
Ireland voted against the Ecuador and South Africa resolution, as did various other European countries,
as well the United States, South Korea and Japan. 20 votes in favor were sufficient for the resolution to
be adopted, but the divide between so-called developing countries and Western countries (home to
many of the worlds largest corporations) on this issue is obvious. Norway also proposed a resolution
on business and human rights, which contains a softer approach to the question of binding standards, in
which the existing Working Group on business and human rights will examine this question further. In
the resolution, the Human Rights Council:
Requests the Working Group to launch an inclusive and transparent consultative process with States in
2015, open to other relevant stakeholders, to explore and facilitate the sharing of legal and practical
measures to improve access to remedy, judicial and non-judicial, for victims of business-related abuses,
including the benefits and limitations of a legally binding instrument.
This resolution was adopted by consensus.
The move towards binding standards is a contentious issue, and it would seem that battle lines between
States are now being drawn. The call from a number of developing world states, and backed by many
NGOs, is a reflection of the dissatisfaction with the status quo concerning corporate accountability for
human rights.
https://businesshumanrightsireland.wor
dpress.com/2014/06/27/ireland-
reiterates-commitment-to-business-and-
human-rights-votes-against-resolution-
on-binding-standards/
The Irish Abroad how does Ireland
ensure that Irish companies respect
human rights when operating overseas?
February 1, 2017 by Shane Darcy Bookmark the permalink.
One of the recurring issues that has come up on the blog has been the extent to which Ireland acts to
ensure that Irish companies are not complicit in human rights violations when operating abroad (see
here, here and here). How companies that are connected with such violations might be liable to
litigation in Ireland will be considered at a forthcoming conference at NUI Galway organised by the
Irish Centre for Human Rights. In advance of the conference, I intend to run a series of posts
highlighting some current examples of where it is claimed that Irish companies are involved in rights
violations overseas.
The situation in Western Sahara and the activities of an Irish oil company have previously been
mentioned here, and last week in the Dil, Maureen Sullivan raised the issue again with the Minister of
Foreign Affairs and Trade, Charlie Flanagan. He was asked to explain the measures his Department
has taken in advising Irish companies of the consequences of their activities in Western Sahara while
under Moroccan occupation, in view of his commitment to the self determination of the Sahrawi people
in Western Sahara. Minister Flanagan responded as follows:
Ireland has consistently supported the right to self-determination of the people of Western Sahara.
Ireland has not taken a position on the future status of the territory, so long as that status is decided in a
genuine exercise of self-determination.
At present, Western Sahara is a non-self-governing territory. Under international law, the economic
resources of a non-self-governing territory may only be exploited for the benefit of the people of the
territory, on their behalf or in consultation with their representatives. Any exploration and exploitation
activities that proceed in disregard of the interests and wishes of the people of Western Sahara would
be in violation of the principles of international law applicable to natural resource activities in non-self-
governing territories.
I would expect that any Irish company operating abroad would have due regard to the principles
of international law and the rights of the inhabitants of the territory in which it is operating. My
Department has committed to develop a National Plan on Business and Human Rights, which
will assist companies in advancing the United Nations Guiding Principles on
Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) adopted by the Human Rights Council in 2011.
The National Plan is designed to help Government departments, State agencies, Irish companies,
Multinational Enterprises (MNEs) operating in Ireland and Irish enterprises operating abroad adhere
to and promote the UNGPs. Following the publication of the Working Outline of the National Plan on
Business and Human Rights in late 2015, my Department engaged in an extensive consultation process
with the aim of ensuring the broadest possible participation in the development of the Plan. Work on
the Plan is nearing conclusion and I expect that it will be published within the next three months.
Ireland continues to engage in EU and UN discussions aimed at promoting the UN Guiding Principles
on Businessand Human Rights. Most recently, Ireland, together with other EU Member States,
reiterated our collective commitment to the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles at the fifth
UN Annual Forum on Business and Human rights in Geneva in November 2016.
No specific advice seems to have been offered to such Irish companies in this case, therefore, let alone
any caution or threat of sanction for any potential complicity in breaches of international law. Aside
from the specific example of doing business in illegal Israeli settlements in Palestine, when
such questions have been put to the Department in recent years, the stock response has been that the
national action plan on business and human rights will provide the necessary answers. The
considerable delay in its preparation and publication suggests that ensuring business respect for human
rights, including how the Irish abroad conduct themselves, is not a priority for the Irish government.
We will have to wait and see.
https://businesshumanrightsireland.wordpress.com/2017/02/01/the-irish-
abroad-how-does-ireland-ensure-that-irish-companies-respect-human-rights-
when-operating-overseas/
reland reiterates commitment to

agenda. It states:
priorities/humanrights/national-statement-general-debate-items-2-3.pdf

Enterprises.
human rights.
https://businesshumanrightsireland.wordpress.com/2014/06/27/ireland-
reiterates-commitment-to-business-and-human-rights-votes-against-resolution-
on-binding-standards/
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL BEGINS

GENERAL DEBATE ON THE PROTECTION
OF CIVIL, POLITICAL, ECONOMIC,
SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS
Concludes Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression
13 June 2017
The Human Rights Council in its midday meeting concluded its interactive dialogue with the Special
Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression, David Kaye, before hearing the presentation of
thematic reports by the Secretary General and the High Commissioner for Human Rights and
beginning its general debate on the promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political,
economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development.
Kate Gilmore, Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, presented reports by the Secretary
General and the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the impact of arms transfers on the
enjoyment of human rights; conscientious objection to military service; the impact of multiple and
intersecting forms of discrimination and violence in the context of racism, racial discrimination,
xenophobia and related intolerance on the full enjoyment of all human rights by women and girls; the
realization of the equal enjoyment of the right to education by every girl; ways to bridge the gender
digital divide from a human rights perspective; the relationship between climate change and the rights
of the child; the operations of the Voluntary Trust Fund for Participation in the Universal Periodic
Review; the operations of the Voluntary Fund for Financial and Technical Assistance in the
implementation of the Universal Periodic Review; the inter-sessional Seminar on the Protection of the
Family and Disability; the activities of the United Nations Trust Fund in Support of Actions to
Eliminate Violence against Women; and the report on the engagement of Parliamentarians with the
human rights system.
In the general debate, delegations raised a number of issues, including conscientious objection to
military service, which some asserted was one of the key elements of freedom of thought, conscience
and religion. Others claimed it was unfair to those who did serve in the military. Some delegations
spoke about issues such as the reduction of poverty, which paved the way to the better promotion of
human rights. They said poverty reduction should be addressed in a holistic manner and a multi-
pronged way, based on national contexts. Speakers also lamented discrimination against persons with
autism, who were often victims of stigmatization and discrimination and could be subject to unfair
limitations in access to public healthcare, education and labour opportunities.
Speaking in the general debate were Venezuela on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, Brazil on
behalf of the Group of Friends of the Right to Health, Croatia on behalf of a group of countries, China
on behalf of a group of countries, Paraguay on behalf of a group of countries, Pakistan on behalf of the
Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Malta on behalf of the European Union, Ireland on behalf of a
group of countries, Sweden on behalf of a group of countries, Brazil on behalf of a group of countries,
Belgium, Latvia, Iraq, Netherlands, Republic of Korea, Indonesia, Holy See, Greece,
Pakistan, Russian Federation, Montenegro, Maldives, Estonia, Jordan, Singapore, Iran, Belarus,
Azerbaijan, Cooperation Council of the Gulf and Armenia.
The following non-governmental organizations also took the floor: Khiam Rehabilitation Centre for
Victims of Torture, African Regional Agricultural Credit Association, The Palestinian Return Centre
Ltd, International Movement against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism, British Humanist
Association, World Evangelical Alliance, International Commission of Jurists, in a joint statement,
Presse Embleme Campagne and VIVAT International.
During the interactive dialogue with David Kaye, the Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and
expression, delegations examined areas of State and private sector involvement, querying the Special
Rapporteur on how companies could engage in dialogue in a relevant way, as well as asking for
examples of good practices when it came to balancing the thin line between security and
freedom. Several delegations drew attention to the situation of freedom of opinion and expression in
specific countries or territories, where they said that that right was under pressure or being
violated. Noting that the Special Rapporteur had said the publics commitment to freedom of
expression was diminishing, he was also asked how it could be shored up.
In concluding remarks, Mr. Kaye said Governments should search for ways other than criminalization
to deal with expression which they saw as blasphemy since those were often views and expressions of
minorities. There was also a critical need to deal with terrorist content and recruitment online. The
Special Rapporteur noted that often counter-terrorism laws were vague in this regard and were also
often used to suppress the opposition and dissent.
Mr. Kaye presented his reports on Monday, 12 June and a summary of his remarks, as well as the first
part of the interactive dialogue, can be found here.
Speaking in the interactive dialogue were Republic of Korea, Myanmar, Bolivia, Nigeria, Ireland,
Lithuania, Netherlands, Botswana, Paraguay, Ukraine, Cte dIvoire, Organization for Security and
Co-operation in Europe, Armenia, Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Brazil, Slovakia, Mexico,
Azerbaijan and United Kingdom.
The following non-governmental organizations also took the floor: International Movement against All
Forms of Discrimination and Racism, Iraqi Development Organization, Franciscans International,
International Federation for Human Rights Leagues in a joint statement, East and Horn of Africa
Human Rights Defenders Project, Jssor Youth Organization, International Human Rights Association
of American Minorities and Human Rights Now.
Speaking in exercise of the right of reply to statements made during the interactive dialogue with the
Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression were Turkey, Russian
Federation, Japan, India, Republic of Korea and Pakistan.
At 3 p.m., the Council will hold a panel discussion on womens rights and the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development: health and gender equality. The general debate will resume at a future date.
Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right
to Freedom of Opinion and Expression
Republic of Korea expressed concern about the upsurge of hateful expression in Japan directed at
minorities, especially ethnic Koreans residing in Japan, and urged Japan to continue with its efforts to
address this matter. With regard to schoolbooks in Japan, the education of children on correct history,
including on the so-called comfort women, was paramount to enable all to learn lessons from
history. Myanmar said that it had enacted the media protection law, which guaranteed the freedom of
journalists and the media, adding that its citizens had the right to express their views and opinions
freely online and offline. Myanmar stressed the difficulties in striking a balance in ensuring freedom
of expression while respecting the rule of law. Bolivia said that the fundamental right to freely express
and disseminate thoughts and opinions through any media without prior censorship was guaranteed by
the Constitution. The human rights obligations of digital access providers must be discussed.
Nigeria said it had always endeavoured to ensure and guarantee the right to freedom of opinion and
expression and had enacted the law on the protection of whistle-blowers. The exercise of this right
must not negate the rights of others nor the obligation of States to provide peace and security, public
order and good governance. Ireland shared the concern regarding the increasing trend by States to
restrict digital access in order to control, monitor and limit freedom of expression online and supress
expression by human rights defenders and journalists. What were the best practices for strengthening
cross-sector collaboration, including with civil society, to ensure freedom of expression online and
offline? Lithuania was concerned about ongoing information wars and State-led misinformation
campaigns that were very dangerous for democracy. Efforts to eradicate gender discrimination and
increase gender equality in freedom of expression must be increased. Lithuania asked how to ensure
that regional organizations were on the same page with the Council with regard to the freedom of
expression and the safety of journalists?
Netherlands said a free, open and secure internet could only be reached through the cooperation of all
stakeholders, asking the Special Rapporteur how companies could engage in dialogue in a relevant
way. The Netherlands shared the Special Rapporteurs concerns about the situation in
Turkey. Botswana said the Special Rapporteur had illustrated the importance of a fair justice system,
and concurred with the importance of creating an enabling environment. The Special Rapporteur was
asked if he had come across good practices to balance the thin line between security and
freedom. Paraguay said todays technical advances were a tool for human development, but they could
make rights vulnerable, noting that the constitution in Paraguay protected on-line media. Paraguay
promoted net neutrality and transparency was a vital characteristic.
Ukraine drew the attention of the Special Rapporteur to the situation in territories occupied by the
Russian Federation. In Crimea, there was physical violence and damage to equipment and closure of
media outlets; none of those crimes had been investigated. Cte dIvoire welcomed the Special
Rapporteurs commitment to defending freedom of expression, noting violations of freedom of
expression in the digital sphere. Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe said the Special
Rapporteurs report highlighted examples of States interfering with digital access, and asked the
Special Rapporteur how important the cooperation of States was for the effective functioning of his
mandate, and how the publics commitment to freedom of expression, which he had said was
diminishing, could be shored up.
Armenia shared the concerns about arbitrary and unlawful restrictions of freedom of expression, which
were often aimed at silencing journalists, bloggers and human rights defenders. Armenia urged the
Special Rapporteur to continue to pay close attention to those acts of intimidation and
reprisals. Organization of Islamic Cooperation asked Mr. Kaye to reflect on how to marry private
commercial interests with their human rights obligations and on the accountability mechanisms that
checked violations and compensated the victims. What measures could States and media implement to
curb the expression and promotion of views leading to hatred, discrimination and violence? Brazil
welcomed the efforts to identify ways in which freedom of expression could be better protected and
promoted in the digital space with the participation of all stakeholders, but continued to be concerned
about the potential of digital technologies to violate human rights. What would the activities of the
mandate focus on in the next three years?
Slovakia said that the massive expansion of digital media in the modern world shaped the political
discussion and debate and attempts to shut down service providers might amount to a breach of human
rights. Was there a way to confront the spread of terrorist ideas and fake news in the digital space
while ensuring freedom of expression? Mexico had reformed its Constitution and legislation to
harmonize the national legal framework with international treaties and ensure that freedom of opinion
and expression was not restricted by any means. Access to information and communication technology
was a constitutional right in Mexico and no law or authority could censor or restrict it except under
very specific circumstances established by the law. Azerbaijan stressed the importance of putting in
place a mechanism to protect journalists and said that the need to protect freedom of expression must
be considered in the broader context of the wide-ranging obligations of States, including to combat
terrorism, discrimination and hatred. United Kingdom said the Special Rapporteur had rightly focused
on digital access. State interference with internet privacy had to follow the rule of law; the private
sector should not become complicit in human rights abuses. The Special Rapporteur was asked for
best practices ensuring internet access.
International Movement against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism expressed concern about the
Government of Japans response to the Special Rapporteurs report on his country visit to Japan,
calling on the Government to adopt measures to implement the Special Rapporteurs recommendation
on public demonstrations in Okinawa. Iraqi Development Organization drew attention to the
suppression of online media, noting that in Bahrain, human rights defenders faced up to 18 years in
prison for criticizing the Governments use of torture. The Special Rapporteur was asked what
methods of protection existed for targeted groups.
Franciscans International urged the Japanese Government to respect and guarantee the right to freedom
of expression and opinion of the Rukyu indigenous people of Okinawa, and to further take concrete
measures to implement the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur.
International Federation for Human Rights Leagues, in a joint statement with, Reporters Sans Frontiers
International - Reporters Without Borders International, and World Organisation Against Torture, said
Nabeel Rajab was a leading human rights defender in the Arab world, asking the Human Rights
Council to act regarding the situation for freedom of expression in Bahrain. East and Horn of Africa
Human Rights Defenders Project expressed concern at the situation in Tanzania, where Government
acts regulated on-line media, as well as concern at the situation in Uganda, where a Government act
had been used to prosecute activists who used social media.
Jssor Youth Organization said that there were gaps in the report by Mr. Kaye which id not address the
issue of the limitations and restrictions on Palestinian journalists and lawyers imposed by
Israel. International Human Rights Association of American Minorities said that Jammu and Kashmir
under the control of India was suffering and media access was blocked. In Yemen, the freedom of
expression had collapsed, a number of media outlets had been closed down, and 148 journalists had
been detained, kidnapped or arrested. Human Rights Now was concerned about Japans suggestion to
use the Broadcast Act to revoke broadcast licenses based on the content of reporting, and the serious
threats and intimidation against a journalist covering the issue of comfort women. Japan should
listen to the voice of the Special Rapporteur and take concrete steps to implement his
recommendations.
Concluding Remarks
DAVID KAYE, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion
and expression, in his concluding remarks urged the Governments of Turkey, Tajikistan and Bahrain to
release individuals detained for expressing their opinion, including a novelist, a linguist, a leading
economist, and a judge who had served on the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia. Governments should search for ways other than criminalization to deal with expression
which they saw as blasphemy since those were often views and expressions of minorities. There was a
critical need to deal with terrorist content and recruitment online. The Special Rapporteur noted that
often counter-terrorism laws were vague in this regard and were also often used to suppress the
opposition and dissent.
The Special Rapporteur expressed his interest to visit Cuba and assess the extent of digital access in the
island. Encryption was absolutely important and a critical tool to provide the privacy necessary for the
exercise of freedom of expression and the Special Rapporteur encouraged all States not only to protect
encryption but to promote it. Surveillance was used increasingly to strike against freedom of
expression and States should refrain from such use. Finally, Mr. Kaye urged all stakeholders to follow
those issues and adhere closely to the right to freedom of expression as laid down in both the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Documentation
The Council has before it the Report of the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the
Empowerment of Women on the activities of the United Nations Trust Fund in Support of
Actions to Eliminate Violence against Women - Note by the Secretary-General (A/HRC/35/3).
The Council has before it the Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for
Human Rights on conscientious objection to military service (A/HRC/35/4).
The Council has before it the Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the expert
workshop on the impact of existing strategies and initiatives to address child, early and forced
marriage (A/HRC/35/5).
The Council has before it the Summary report of the Office of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights on the panel discussion on the theme "The implementation of
the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training: good practices and
challenges" (A/HRC/35/6).
The Council has before it the Summary report of the United Nations High Commissioner for
Human Rights on the panel discussion on youth and human rights (A/HRC/35/7).
Human Rights on the impact of arms transfers on the enjoyment of human rights (A/HRC/35/8).
The Council has before it the Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
on ways to bridge the gender digital divide from a human rights perspective (A/HRC/35/9).
on the impact of multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination and violence in the context of
racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance on the full enjoyment of all
human rights by women and girls (A/HRC/35/10).
on the realization of the equal enjoyment of the right to education by every girl (A/HRC/35/11).
on the inter-sessional Seminar on the Protection of the Family and Disability (A/HRC/35/12).
Human Rights - Analytical study on the relationship between climate change and the full
enjoyment of the rights of the child (A/HRC/35/13).
The Council has before it the Summary report of the Office of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights on the panel discussion on the adverse impact of climate
change on States efforts to realize the rights of the child and related policies, lessons learned and
good practices (A/HRC/35/14).
Presentation of Reports by the Secretary General and by the High Commissioner for Human
Rights
KATE GILMORE, Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, presented 12 reports that had been
submitted to the Council. The report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for
Human Rights on the impact of arms transfers on the enjoyment of human rights (A/HRC/35/8)
outlined that the proliferation of arms continued to threaten human rights worldwide. Regulating arms
trade and transfers through the application of the principles enshrined in international conventions on
arms was key to end abuse and control arm proliferation. Ms Gilmore outlined that there was an urgent
need to systematically collect data on arms trade in order to adopt adequate public policies.
The report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on conscientious
objection to military service (A/HRC/35/4) underscored that legal improvements had been made in
several countries, strengthening the protection of the right to conscientious objection to military
service. Some States had even adopted regulations allowing the release of individuals that had been
detained under charges of treason. Unfortunately, some States still did not recognize the conscientious
objection to military service. Ms. Gilmore recalled that the right to refuse to kill must be recognized
completely.
Turning to the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the impact of
multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination and violence in the context of racism, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance on the full enjoyment of all human rights by women
and girls (A/HRC/35/10), Ms. Gilmore highlighted that it provided recommendations addressing the
matter of the lack of adequate school materials promoting gender equality and preventing any form of
discrimination in the domain of education. The report recommended practical measures in matters of
gender equality, and violence against women. The report of the United Nations High Commissioner for
Human Rights on the realization of the equal enjoyment of the right to education by every girl
(A/HRC/35/11) promoted gender autonomy in several domains, making it a key aspect of the
prevention of child marriage. Successful initiatives involving men and boys were highlighted in the
report. The report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on ways to bridge the
gender digital divide from a human rights perspective (A/HRC/35/9) reminded that there were still
considerable gaps and barriers in equal access to the internet. Gender equality should be included in
every policy decision regulating internet access. It was of utmost importance to enable an empowering
ICT environment which could remedy the current unequal situation in the digital space and provide
technologies to stop further widening inequalities.
Ms. Gilmore said the report on the relationship between climate change and the rights of the child
(A/HRC/35/13) addressed the many threats that climate change posed to the enjoyment of the rights of
the child. It stressed that the human rights commitments contained in the Convention on the Rights of
the Child and those from the Paris Climate Agreements were clear on the obligations of States to
protect the rights of the child and address climate change while taking into account the principle of the
best interest of the child, as expressed by children themselves. The States also must guarantee access
to remedies for children affected by climate change.
Turning to the report of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the operations of
the Voluntary Trust Fund for Participation in the Universal Periodic Review (A/HRC/35/17), the
Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights said that the Voluntary Fund had supported exclusively
the representatives from developing countries, and in particular small island developing States and least
developed countries. In 2016, 26 Member States out of 35 eligible ones had received support. The
Fund was examining other options to best support Member States not only in the participation in the
Universal Periodic Review but also in the implementation of recommendations they received in this
process.
The report on the operations of the Voluntary Fund for Financial and Technical Assistance in the
implementation of the Universal Periodic Review (A/HRC/35/18) outlined, among other, the support
provided to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Niger, Afghanistan, Samoa, Tajikistan, The former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iraq, Mauritania, Argentina, Barbados, Bolivia, Chile, Costa Rica,
Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Paraguay and Uruguay.
Ms. Gilmore presented three other reports, the report on the inter-sessional Seminar on the Protection
of the Family and Disability (A/HRC/35/12); the report of the United Nations Entity for Gender
Equality and the Empowerment of Women on the activities of the United Nations Trust Fund in
Support of Actions to Eliminate Violence against Women; and the report on the engagement of
Parliamentarians with the human rights system.
General Debate on the Promotion and Protection of All Human Rights, Civil, Political,
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, including the Right to Development
Venezuela, speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, said that multiple and complex
challenges faced by the world today called for global solutions, including the setting up of different and
inclusive mechanisms. The implementation of the right to development must be accelerated to make it
a reality for everyone, and in this regard, it was essential to complete the elaboration of a legal
instrument on the right to development. Cultural diversity must be respected, said the Non-Aligned
Movement, also condemning unilateral coercive measures.
Brazil, speaking on behalf of the Group of Friends of the Right to Health, reiterated that the right of
everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health was a
human right. As agreed in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Group of Friends was
firmly committed to a world of universal rights and human dignity, with equitable and universal access
to healthcare and social protection, where physical, mental and social wellbeing were assured. The
Group of Friends invited all States to join it in its endeavours.
Croatia, speaking on behalf of a group of countries, welcomed the report of the Office of the High
Commissioner for Human Rights on the conscientious objection to military service, which was one of
the key elements of the freedom of thought, conscience and religion. The group of countries
commended the attention given to the best practices as they served as a guidance to all countries at the
international, regional and national levels. Despite significant progress, challenges still remained,
which justified keeping the issue of the Councils agenda.
China, speaking on behalf of a group of countries, noted that the reduction of poverty would pave the
way to the better promotion and protection of human rights. Poverty reduction should be addressed in
a holistic manner and a multi-pronged way, based on national contexts. Jobs should be created for the
poor and States should ensure social equity and justice, access to education, effective protection for
vulnerable groups, and strengthening international cooperation and solidarity, including the promotion
of South-South and North-South cooperation.
Paraguay, speaking on behalf of a group of countries, reminded that autism affected one in every 106
children worldwide, impairing their individual development and their participation in society. Persons
with autism were often victims of stigmatization and discrimination and could be subjected to unfair
limitations in access to public healthcare, education and labour opportunities. The group of countries
called upon States to work together towards developing public initiatives to empower persons with
autism.
Malta, speaking on behalf of the European Union, reiterated the European Unions strong commitment
to the promotion and protection of the human rights of all people, including lesbian, gay, bisexual and
transgender persons, without any discrimination. There must be a paradigm shift in mental health
away from the medical approach and towards a human rights-based approach. The European Union
remained committed to promoting gender equality and eliminating violence against women and girls
and was pleased to note that the issue remained firmly anchored on the agenda of the Council.
Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, said that the realization of the
right to development was crucial and indispensable for the enjoyment of all other human rights and
stressed the need for a common effort to address poverty, unemployment and public budget deficits. It
was essential to have a two-way dialogue, taking into account the needs and positions of States, with
due respect for national laws. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation was firmly committed to the
implementation of all 17 Sustainable Development Goals and stressed their indivisible nature.
Ireland, speaking on behalf of a core group on civil society space, condemned reprisals and
intimidation of civil society and urged greater participation of civil society voices in the Council, where
substantive participation of civil society including in the Universal Periodic Review made the
debates and work richer and more meaningful. More needed to be done to recognize civil society as
having an equal stake in discussions in other multilateral fora too. Future resolutions would address
issues such as civil society and the private sector, civil societys role in the achievement of the 2030
Agenda, civil society and children, and the funding to civil society.
Sweden, speaking on behalf of a group of countries, highlighted that the internet could be harnessed as
a powerful enabler of human rights, but only for those who had access to it. Nearly 60 per cent of the
worlds population had no access to the internet, including the majority of women and girls.
Brazil, speaking on behalf of a group of countries, stressed that the Agenda 2030 had reached a
momentum for the provision of equal access to education and training. The Sustainable Development
Goals constituted an opportunity to set education for all as a key priority to prevent discrimination
against vulnerable groups at school and promote life-long learning.
Belgium stressed that the full realization of womens human rights was still far from a reality. On the
contrary, they were currently witnessing a backlash. Urgent and sustained action was needed to
promote womens rights.
Latvia voiced strong commitment to full gender equality and empowerment of women, and welcomed
numerous reports on those issues. It highlighted the need to increase literacy and school attendance by
women. The High Commissioners report on child, early and forced marriages presented a good
analysis on how boys and men could be powerful agents of change to eradicate those harmful
practices. Bridging the gender digital divide was important in increasing womens participation in
social, political and cultural life.
Iraq attached high importance to foster the promotion of fundamental economic, social and cultural
rights, including the right to development, by enacting a number of laws in line with international
human rights standards. It underlined the importance of the principle of universality, impartiality and
non-selectivity in the promotion of human rights. Iraq had adopted legislation awarding pensions to
the most vulnerable groups.
Netherlands welcomed the report of the Expert Workshop on the impact of existing strategies and
initiatives to address child, early and forced marriage. It was of the view that good practices in cultural
and family life required a guarantee of womens rights to equality in autonomy and self-
determination. It voiced concern over the shrinking space for civil society. Maintaining a healthy and
participatory democracy could only be realized when free assembly and freedom of speech were
guaranteed.
Republic of Korea noted that Universal Periodic Review process was an essential step in realizing
human rights protection and promotion, which began by listening to the rights bearers. In that respect,
it welcomed the panel discussion on youth and human rights. Along with good governance, young
people were positive agents of change. The Republic of Korea also welcomed the report on the right to
education by every girl, noting that it was committed to redoubling efforts to raise awareness about
gender equality in school curricula.
Indonesia said it was committed to uphold the principles of the Council. Civil, political, economic,
social and cultural rights, including the right to development, were indivisible and interdependent, with
the right to development being at the heart of Indonesias human rights policies. In line with the
Sustainable Development Goals principle of leaving no one behind, Indonesia had launched the
developing Indonesia from the periphery agenda, focused on advancing the rights of those who lived
in remote areas.
Holy See stressed that mental health problems had long been ignored or shrouded in fear, stigma,
discrimination and outright rejection. It was important to avoid imposing new forms of isolation by
fostering over dependency on huge doses of psychotropic medications and depriving patients of
informed consent.
Greece reiterated its commitment to the importance and indivisibility of both economic, social and
cultural rights as well as civil and political rights. This was even more crucial in times of financial
crisis where economic and social rights were seriously challenged ad cultural rights were marginalized.
Pakistan raised the issue of the situation of citizens in Indian-occupied Kashmir who could not enjoy
their right to self-determination. The question went beyond a conflict matter between Pakistan and
India but had grave humanitarian consequences. Kashmiri citizens were used as human shields and
their human dignity was threatened daily.
Russian Federation regretted that the thematic imbalance of the presented reports did not contribute to
increase the credibility and authority of the Council in fostering cooperation among States. The
majority of Council resolutions focused on political and civil rights, neglecting economic, social and
cultural rights. Social protection should enjoy proper attention. The Russian Federation, therefore,
called for equal attention to be given to all categories of human rights.
Montenegro shared views on the importance of a balanced participation of women and men in the
implementation and use of information and communication technologies. Additional efforts were
needed to raise womens awareness of the importance of digital skills. Montenegro also welcomed the
report on the equal enjoyment of the right to education by every girl, noting that it still had to work
towards ensuring that Roma and Egyptian girls in the country did not leave school early.
Maldives asked that the strong shelter the weak and the privileged to mind the disenfranchised. It
aimed to improve the human condition for every individual because history had taught Maldives that
everyone was connected. It was the Councils collective aim to create an atmosphere that facilitated
growth, including both economic and social progress. The Councils mandate could only be realized
through unity and greater attempts towards consensus.
Estonia noted that of the 7.5 billion people in the world, men made up about 18 per cent and women 16
per cent of all the persons online. In keeping with the 2030 Agenda that meant that in this sense, 200
million women had been left behind. The gender digital divide had negative social and economic
consequences, and was a consequence and cause of violations of womens human rights. The internet
had to be open, global, accessible and human rights-based.
Jordan said its commitment to keep to all parts of an action plan showed Jordans determination, and
given that Jordan had committed to implementing a gradual plan, national priorities had been set which
were in keeping with all sectors of society. The plan encouraged all stakeholders to act to implement
the plan in an innovative fashion.
Singapore spoke about conscientious objection to military service, saying national defence was based
on citizen armed forces in the country, and the system was only viable under the system of
universality. Singapore respected the constitutional respect to the freedom of religion but allowing
some not to serve was unfair to those who did serve.
Iran said the High Commissioner for Human Rights had cited that the brutality of Daesh knew no
bounds, and only days later, Tehran had been attacked. Terrorism and violent extremism constituted
the most serious threat, and while all human rights were mutually reinforcing, human rights were not
treated in a fair and equal manner. Most Council resolutions were implemented in favour of civil and
political rights. Economic, social and cultural rights should be given their due.
Belarus stressed that the issue of family constituted a priority. Families were responsible for ensuring
the protection of children and their wellbeing. Substantial financial support must be included in family
State policies in order to allow them to access quality childcare. Belarus highlighted the untouchable
nature of the family and called on the Council to promote its values.
Azerbaijan said that the right to development addressed the hindrances that impeded poor populations
from benefiting from the resources of the State. It was important to invest more in development
efforts. Unfortunately, some States were not willing to participate to these global efforts and preferred
to focus on territorial enhancement.
Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf stated that helping families to face challenges of
childcare was key. The right to education was an important base to ensure the full enjoyment of other
human rights. A number of obstacles still undermined the fulfilment of this key right and it was crucial
to reinforce cooperation between States in order to achieve its completion.
Armenia voiced concern over the increased number of attacks on schools, noting that children should
enjoy free access to education. It also voiced concern over the ongoing crackdown on the media,
namely attacks and reprisals against journalists, bloggers and human rights defenders in the Caucasus
region.
Khiam Rehabilitation Centre for Victims of Torture drew attention to the suppressive attitude of the
Government of Bahrain towards human rights. There should be preparatory steps taken, including the
lifting of the travel ban for opposition leaders. The recommendations of Bahrains Universal Periodic
Review remained a dead letter. Bahrain had to implement those recommendations and stop
procrastinating.
African Regional Agricultural Credit Association spoke of Pakistans human rights violations in
Balochistan, including the violation of the right to development. The China-Pakistan project
threatened to turn the Baloch people into a minority in their own land, due to the influx of hundreds of
thousands of workers, mainly from Punjab and China.
Palestinian Return Centre Ltd condemned the detention of thousands of Palestinian children by the
Israeli authorities. They were deprived of the right to have access to lawyers and contact with the
outside world. The occupation authorities dealt with detained children as with adults and they
presented them to military tribunals. The Centre called on Israel to release all children and to stop
terrorising them.
International Movement against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism noted with concern that there
had been too little time to contribute to the High Commissioners report. A number of States had made
comments related to different groups of women, but there was no specific comment on Dalit
women. A study should be carried out to help the Council mitigate discrimination faced by those
groups.
British Humanist Association, in a joint statement, said there were ongoing abuses against people on
the basis of their sexual identity, including in Chechnya, and the Trump Administration had rescinded
access to transgender persons to bathrooms. It was concerning that a nation was taking backward
steps, and Member States which had discriminatory policies should avoid retrograde steps.
World Evangelical Alliance expressed gratitude for a mapping report on the Central African
Republic. In the context of the crisis there that had started in 2012, the recent acts of violence were a
major setback, and it was regrettable that Muslims had been identified as the main targets. The
struggle was not a religious conflict.
International Commission of Jurists, on behalf of severals NGOs1, said the number of seats for non-
governmental organizations had shrunk from 24 to two in four years in the meeting room of the Human
Rights Council. All delegations were called on to reflect on what that meant in the context of the
shrinking of civil society space lamented by many speakers.
Presse Embleme Campagne stressed that many individuals still faced major hindrances to access the
internet be it because of shutdowns or State-led surveillance practices. These practices were
particularly visible during elections periods and protests. Presse Embleme Campagne called on States
to fulfil their obligations to protect digital privacy and ensure the full integrity of digital infrastructure.
VIVAT International voiced concerns about information coming out of Bosnia and Herzegovina
showing an increasing disrespect to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights. Reports of State employees not having been paid for their work had been released. The
disregard for human rights should not go further without any reaction from the Council.
Right of Reply
Turkey, speaking in a right of reply in response to statements made during the interactive dialogue with
the Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression, said it was Turkeys right
and responsibility to take necessary measures to protect its democracy, and principles of necessity and
proportionality had been observed. Turkey rejected allegations regarding so-called restrictions on
freedom of expression as this right was safeguarded by the constitution. There were ongoing
prosecutions against persons exploiting the profession of journalism.
Russian Federation, speaking in a right of reply in response to a statement by Ukraine made during the
interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression,
said that Ukraine should focus on internal issues, including the recommendations of international
monitoring mechanisms, and when the situation in Ukraine had been sorted out, then there could be
criticism of third parties. All Russias commitments under international instruments applied to all
Russian territory.
Japan, speaking in a right of reply in response to statements made by the Republic of Korea and some
non-governmental organizations during the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the
right to freedom of opinion and expression, said textbook authorization did not allow intervention by
the Government, and some text books included descriptions of the comfort women issue. In
response to statements made by Franciscans International, freedom of expression was the political basis
of democratic States, and could not be restricted. Based on the specific conditions of a protest,
appropriate and minimum measures were taken. In response to Human Rights Now, the Special
Rapporteur on the right to privacy had based his information on fragmentary information, and Japan
was ready to communicate with the Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy.
India, speaking in a right of reply, said India was firmly opposed to the allegations of Pakistan that
India had repeatedly violated the basic human rights of its own citizens, including in Kashmir. The
instability in Kashmir was the result of regular protests and terrorist activities that benefitted from the
support of Pakistan. The internal judicial framework of India provided for a strict independence of the
judiciary system, free press and generalized access to rights, whereas Pakistan had witnessed a major
fall in most of its socio-economic indicators. Pakistan had become a base for terrorist activities and
national security forces had even been using artillery on Pakistani people. India called on Pakistan to
engage in a serious introspection that would to contribute to peace worldwide.
Republic of Korea, speaking in a right of reply, stressed the necessity to engage in a joint effort to
strengthen the progress that had already been made in the domain of access to quality
education. Recent recommendations emitted by United Nations bodies and mechanisms were key to
achieve basic human rights goals. The Republic of Korea stressed that education of correct history was
of paramount importance to allow societies to learn lessons from the past.
Pakistan, speaking in a right of reply in response to India, outlined that India had repeatedly applied
methods of naming and shaming against rivals in every international forum. Therefore, Pakistan had
been the target of harsh defamation and had unacceptably been accused of terrorism. Accusations of
threats against India at the border with Kashmir were not accurate considering that this border was one
of the most strongly fenced frontiers in the world. Indian armed forces on the contrary had used
barbaric methods against the people of Kashmir and refused to observe their right to self-
determination. Finally, Pakistan said that it benefitted from a vibrant middle class. Many of its socio-
economic indicators were better than Indias.
_______________
1
Joint statement: International Commission of Jurists, Baha'i International Community, CIVICUS -
World Alliance for Citizen Participation, East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project,
Franciscans International, International Federation for Human Rights Leagues, International Lesbian
and Gay Association, International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism
(IMADR), International Service for Human Rights, and Peace Brigades International Switzerland.
For use of the information media; not an official record
http://www.unog.ch/unog/website/news_media.nsf/%28httpNewsByYear_en
%29/5679CE7322C9DA6EC125813E004CB39F?OpenDocument
Key issues in the debate on a binding

business and human rights instrument
April 13, 2015 by Shane Darcy Bookmark the permalink.
In February of this year, I was asked to provide the opening remarks at a brainstorming session
organised by Geneva for Human Rights and Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung on a binding business and human
rights instrument. The session brought together State representatives from countries such as Ecuador
and South Africa who have been pushing this initiative at the Human Rights Council, as well as
representatives from EU countries, who are less enthusiastic. Civil society was also well-represented
at the meeting, which focused on access to remedies and the question of extraterritorial jurisdiction.
My remarks are available here, and I have also reproduced them below.
* * *
Thanks to Geneva for Human Rights and Friedrich Ebert Stiftung for the invitation to provide some
remarks at the opening of this session. It is an honour and a challenge for an academic who is at a
remove from the business of human rights here in Geneva. There are others in the room who surely
have greater expertise and practical experience regarding business and human rights, but hopefully I
can make a valuable contribution. What I would like to do is reflect a little on developments and the
debate to date and to pose some questions regarding a potential future business and human rights
instrument.
In approaching this talk, I have decided to use a number of old Irish proverbs or seanfhocail, as they
are called. They help, I think, to highlight some of the key issues regarding the development of a
business and human rights instrument and provide food for thought in the context of this brainstorming
session.
#1 Bonn dh insint ar scal agus dh leagan dag ar amhrn
There are two sides to every story & twelve versions of every song
At first glance, it may seem that we have a re-emergence of the divisive debate between binding and
voluntary means of addressing business and human rights. Perhaps it has never fully gone away. In any
event, we can roughly see two sides on this debate. Those in favour of a binding instrument argue that:
The United Nations Guiding Principles are merely guidance, and along
with the subsequent initiatives the Annual Forum and Working Group
have not provided accountability for corporate harms or ensured a right
to a remedy
Domestic efforts are more likely to succeed when linked to a binding
obligation
Transnational actions of multinational corporations can only be
addressed by action at the international level
A binding instrument can build on the Guiding Principles and provide
better measures for implementation.
On the other side, those against a binding instrument argue that:
More time and effort needs to be given to the UN Guiding Principles

Pursuing a treaty might detract from this, and be used by States as an
excuse not to implement the Guiding Principles
Such efforts could undermine implementation programmes and processes
already in train (such as those designed by NGOs and CSR professionals)
There may be ulterior motives on the part of proposers, who have not
done much to implement UN Guiding Principles.
Treaty making is a slow process and which poses monumental
challenges, according to John Ruggie, given the breadth of business and
human rights issues. A treaty could be so abstract as to be meaningless
Who would ratify such an instrument? A low uptake could prove fatal.
A binding instrument is divisive and confrontational and would, as one
observer put it, lead states and businesses will go back to their trenches
(the International Organisation of Employers suggests a treaty would
conflict with the current approaches).
There is of course greater nuance to these positions than my shopping list approach presents. It is
arguable that many engaged in this debate are singing from the same hymn sheet, with an acceptance of
an eventual move towards binding regulation, but that at the moment the versions of the song being
sung are different. If we take the debate between John Ruggie and Amnesty in 2011, this could easily
be misinterpreted, when in fact Amnesty have pushed for a binding instrument, but not in isolation,
while Ruggie has accepted that treaties are the bedrock of the human rights system and has never fully
dismissed their role it depends on what a proposed treaty addresses.
What many in this debate have said is that pursuing further implementation of the Guiding Principles is
compatible with developing a binding instrument, and can if fact be complementary. As Amol Mehra
has put it, significant gains can be made by pursuing both. But some States are treating this otherwise,
emphasising the need to focus on the UN Guiding Principles, given the threat of a treaty.
#2 Is fearr leath builn n bheith gan arn
Half a loaf is better than to be without bread
The Guiding Principles, as unanimously endorsed by the Human Rights Council, have served to draw
greater attention to business and human rights and have placed it firmly on the on the agenda of the
Council. They provide a coherent and broadly accepted framework to address human rights in the
context of business activities. Their reception has been generally positive civil society has been able
drawn upon them; the Council and the European Commission have called on States to develop national
implementation plans and they have been adopted by some major companies and international
organisations (IFC, OECD). The Guiding Principles are beginning to seep into the work of the UN
human rights bodies. They represent a promising start John Ruggie described their endorsement as
the end of the beginning.
That being said, although endorsed three and a half years ago, only a handful of States have developed
national action plans, and the commitments therein fall short of what is needed. The OECD Guidelines,
incorporating the Guiding Principles, remain a voluntary, non-binding initiative, with at times weak
national contact points. There remains a very real ignorance of the Guiding Principles amongst
business Aaronson and Higham note that less than half a per cent of MNCs have a human rights
policy, because of a lack of education by governments. Amnesty International has said that the
Guiding Principles enjoy broad support from business, because they require little meaningful action.
The Guiding Principles can be considered as half a loaf: they do not themselves provide for
accountability or remedy, and the iteration of extraterritorial obligations does not match that which is
put forward by the UN human rights treaty bodies. The Guiding Principles are arguably not capable of
meeting the challenges posed by the unprecedented power and reach of corporations today; redressing
the negative impact that they may have on human rights is blocked by significant legal and political
obstacles.
#3 Is fearr ral inniu n scilling amrach
It is better to have sixpence today than a shilling tomorrow

The Guiding Principles are here today and it is argued that we should work towards improving these
existing tools. This can be done in various ways: developing national action plans, which requires
political will, resources, and concerted civil society pressure. Business respect for human rights can be
embedded in procurement, investment or other forms of State support, especially the requirement of
due diligence. There should also be a push to mainstream business and human rights in the existing
human rights treaty monitoring processes and the Universal Periodic Review.
Like any guidance, however, those to whom it is directed might choose to ignore it. Few would
disagree, however, than a binding instrument would be a better option to addressing business and
human rights, even if it is tomorrow. An instrument could help fill the gaps and failings of the
international legal framework concerning access to justice. Existing international accountability
mechanism, such as the International Criminal Court, do not address corporate harms adequately and
domestic processes have proven incapable of dealing with transnational corporate complicity the
Alien Torts Claims has provided very limited success, and barriers such as forum non conveniens and
non-interference in foreign affairs often deny accountability. While the UN Guiding Principles, if
implemented, could improve matters, we cannot afford to wait for state practice to fully develop, as
Mehra has put it.
David Bilchitz argues persuasively that the fundamental nature of human rights requires a binding
instrument human rights need to be recognised on the same level as other obligations in the context
of trade and investment. A treaty could recognise and clarify the legal obligations of business and
contribute to their development, such as providing for mandatory due diligence. And as the
International Commission of Jurists has noted, codification could level the playing field for business
and avoid a race to the bottom. The process towards a treaty is already underway.
#4 Ts Maith Leath na hOibre
A good start is half the battle
While previous efforts have failed, the latest endeavour was spurred by 80 States, led by Ecuador,
calling for a legally binding instrument in Sept 2013, with over 600 civil society organisations of the
treaty alliance supporting such an initiative. Efforts towards a binding business and human rights
instrument centre around Human Rights Council Resolution 26/9, adopted in June 2014. This
resolution established a new UN Intergovernmental Working Group with an open-ended mandate to
work on the elaboration of an internationally legally binding instrument on transnational corporations
and other business enterprises with respect to human rights.
Did it have a good start? Well 20 States voted in favour, 14 against and 13 abstained. Those that voted
against included Ireland, the United Kingdom, the United States, France and Germany, while those in
favour included China, India, Russia and South Africa. John Ruggie notes that no home State of the
major multinationals voted in favour and suggested that the voting does not reflect a neat north/south
divide. It may not be neat, but there is a distinct developed versus developing world feel about the
voting pattern. Ruggie sees the Intergovernmental Working Group as having a weak mandate. It may
not be the most auspicious beginnings, but should this prove fatal? There is a long road ahead, with
planned annual meetings, and this time could be used to build greater support for the initiative.
#5 Is deas an rud an beagn ach a dhanamh go maith
Little is best if well done
John Ruggie sees the treaty promoters as pushing for a single, overarching legal instrument that, like a
silver bullet, promises the resolve business and human rights challenges once and for all. This
approach is fundamentally flawed, as there is too much to squeeze into a single instrument.
It has been suggested instead that a binding instrument should focus on gross human rights violations.
Ruggie has advocated for carefully constructed precision tools with the most likely candidate
dealing with the worst of the worst given that there is already a firm basis on which to proceed. This
would mean excluding broader human rights issues, some of which might not be understood as gross
violations, but which for victims are no less real.
An amendment of the Rome Statute, perhaps, might accommodate such an approach, bearing in mind
that attempts to include corporate criminal liability in 1998 failed, although the situation has arguably
changed since then given the increased attention on business and human rights. That said, the
International Criminal Court deals with a very narrow set of crimes, while trials have proven slow and
expensive. If gross violations is interpreted more broadly than international crimes, then the ICC might
not make sense.
David Bilchitz sees some merit in this approach, but considers that it would apply only to a limited
number of cases, and it would not fully address the accountability gap, or other reasons for creating a
treaty. It could address some of the deficiencies in the international legal regime concerning standards
applicable to companies for gross violations, but, as the International Commission of Jurists has asked,
what would be achieved by focusing solely on gross violations?
While it may improve accountability and remediation for the most serious violations in terms of, it
seem most NGOs and experts suggest that an instrument should address the broad universe of human
rights standards. Focusing on crimes would place more emphasis on civil and political rights and
undermine efforts over recent years to advance socio-economic rights.
Those undertaking this task will need to make choices to be made about issues to cover. There is no
shortage of good candidates tax abuse, for example, in which companies play a major role, and which
deprives many countries of the necessary resources to ensure they meet their human rights obligations,
is a pressing issue which requires attention. But how much can one treaty address?
#6 Is maith an scala an aimsir
Time is a good storyteller
In undertaking negotiations on a new instrument, some lessons might be gleaned from other
endeavours, including past efforts to develop binding instruments addressing business and human
rights. Key issues have been the subject matter, enforcement, monitoring and implementation, and
whether to address the responsibilities of State, companies or both.
Notable past efforts, in the 1970s and late 1990s at creating binding standards, were overtaken by other
initiatives, including the adoption of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the
appointment of John Ruggie as the Special Representative of the Secretary General. Was this to take
the momentum out of those efforts? Ruggie has written had he tried to create new international law, his
efforts would never have got off the ground.
The Draft Norms, adopted by the UN Sub-commission on the Protection and Promotion of Human
rights in 2003, addressed all human rights, with some more relevant examples highlighted, as well as
corruption, consumer protection, and environmental harm. They sought to apply the full range of
obligations to companies and transpose the existing system of human rights monitoring and reporting
on to business. Would a UN Committee feasibly be able to monitor the activities of 1000s of
companies? It has been said that their broad scope is why they were not acted upon, although it should
be reiterated that they were draft norms.
As to which companies, Resolution 26/9 seems to mean transnational companies only, as was
seemingly the case with the Draft Norms and the UN Centre on Transnational Corporations Code of
Conduct. John Ruggie considers that major States would insist that it also applies to national
companies a sentiment echoed also by Human Rights Watch. Is there an argument to be made that
transnational corporations present particular problems as compared to those that are purely national?
If a treaty is too broad for some major States, how would it fare without their support? The Apartheid
Convention can be considered a poorly drafted instrument, partly because it did not go through the
UNs Sixth Committee it did not have the support of several major powers, for political reasons, and
no prosecutions for apartheid ever ensued. But the crime is incorporated in the Rome Statute and has
become part of the legal landscape. And there are a number of other human rights treaties which have
proceeded fairly successfully without the support and at times opposition of certain major states,
including the Convention on the Rights of the Child, Additional Protocol II of the Geneva Conventions
and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
If the decision is to proceed on a narrowly focused treaty, it is suggested that the Anti-Bribery
Convention could provides a comparable example and some valuable lessons. It has a narrow focus on
a discrete issue, and importantly, had significant backing from the United States. Anita Ramasastray
has suggested that a set of narrower treaties might emerge, rather than a single overarching human
rights framework. In this regard, it its worth noting that the international community has for decades
been unable to adopt a comprehensive Convention on terrorism, so has instead opted for a series of
specific treaties addressing issues such as financing, hostage-taking, hijacking etc. Might this work in a
business and human rights context?
#7 N sheasaonn sac folamh
An empty sack does not stand
It is said that a broad overarching treaty runs the risk of being too abstract. To cover everything, John
Ruggie has said, it would have to be pitched at so high a level of abstraction that it would be of little if
any use to real people in real places. But many human rights treaties set general protections and
enunciate broad principles, which are then subject to jurisprudential developments the European
Court of Human Rights treats the European Convention as a living instrument and has developed its
content over several decades.
The issues on todays agenda of access to justice and extraterritorial obligations are both linked in this
context of business and human rights and are seen as essential pieces of the puzzle. A binding
instrument that does not satisfactorily address these might not be supported by civil society, who have
played such a prominent role in pushing the business and human rights agenda.
Access to Justice: according to the International Commission of Jurists, the most acute challenges and
needs in the area of business and human rights relate to the deficits both in ensuring the accountability
of companies and in access to effective remedies for victims of abuse. The UN Guiding Principles
paint a fairly comprehensive picture of what remedies should look like, but as Ruggie himself has
accepted, they are better at decrying inadequate access to judicial remedy than fixing it. The UN
Guiding Principles have not spurred governments to act sufficiently on providing remedies.
The right to a remedy is an unquestioned component of human rights law but its realisation faces
considerable obstacles in the business and human rights context, especially as regards transnational
corporate activities. The International Commission of Jurists has highlighted problems with
jurisdictional rules, corporate structures, legal standing, the potential for individual or group claims, the
enforcement of judgments, and the lack of knowledge or understanding on the part of affected peoples.
A binding instrument could usefully provide more specific standards, and could be an effective tool
to enable States enact the legislation necessary to define companies responsibilities and establish
liabilities. Domestic action tends to follow international obligation, provided, of course, that ratification
has occurred. International law is arguable at its most effective when domesticated.
Which avenues for remedy would a binding instrument focus on? Ensuring access to civil claims
processes or strengthening criminal prosecution in domestic systems? Administrative measures?
Enhancing the jurisdiction of the human rights bodies? Some type of international court for
corporations? There are limitations and advantages for each of these. For domestic remedies, the High
Commissioner for Human Rights paper by Jennifer Zerk warns of the significant challenges presented
by differing national approaches, as well as resource implications.
Extraterritorial obligations: the UN Guiding Principles have taken a more restricted reading than the
UN human rights bodies, stating that international law permits States to exercise jurisdiction
extraterritorially but does not require this. Ruggie has explained that State practice generally does not
support this for the entire array of rights. For the treaty advocates, he puts it that they are on tricky
terrain when they seek comprehensive forms of extraterritorial jurisdiction under international
human rights law.
But if everything else is globalised, why not human rights obligations and access to a remedy? As the
introduction to the Maastricht Principles on Extraterritorial Obligations put it, such obligations are a
missing link in the universal human rights protection system. Given the nature of transnational
activates and where human rights violations tend to occur, international human rights law thus fails
where it is most needed, as Daniel Augenstein has put it. Extraterritoriality exists already, but not
sufficiently in the business and human rights context, advocates argue.
How would a binding instrument address this? Do the findings of international human rights bodies
provide a sufficient basis are they consistent and do they cover all rights? How to address the view of
the United States Supreme Court that there is a presumption against extraterritoriality, or that some
States may be this as an external imposition? Perhaps an approach similar to the complementarity
regime under the International Criminal Court, where a home State would only be under an obligation
to take proceedings if the host State was either unwilling or unable, with some external oversight or
remedy in case neither acts.
#8 Chonn beirt rud nach bhfeiceann duine amhin
Two people see a thing that an individual does not
It seems clear that the treaty-making process that is underway must be a consultative and open
approach, involving States, civil society and business. As the International Commission of Jurists
noted, dialogue could help avoid misunderstandings on this contentious topic. Unity is unlikely on this
subject, as even the preliminary debates reveals, but it is important to build as broad a support as
possible. Ruggie has emphasised the importance of choosing the right chair of the Intergovernmental
Working Group. He has suggested a respected third party to help focus on consensus-building rather
than the pursuit of strong national positions. Although politics is the art of the possible, political
opposition should not be an excuse for not proceeding at this stage, and for seeking to generate greater
support as the process moves along.
Sources
International Commission of Jurists, Needs and Options for a New

International Instrument in the Field of Business and Human Rights, 2014.
John Ruggie, Life in the Global Public Domain: Response to Commentaries
on the UN Guiding Principles and the Proposed Treaty on Business and
Human Rights, Harvard Kennedy School, 23 January 2015, available at:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2554726.
John Ruggie, The Past as Prologue? A Moment of Truth for UN Business and
Human Rights Treaty, Institute of Human Rights and Business, 8 July
2014.
John Ruggie, A UN Business and Human Rights Treaty?, Harvard Kennedy
School, 28 January 2014, available at: http://www.hks.harvard.edu/m-
rcbg/CSRI/UNBusinessandHumanRightsTreaty.pdf.
Susan Ariel Aaronson and Ian Higham, Putting the Blame on Governments;
Why Firms and Governments have failed to advance the Guiding Principles
on Business and Human Rights, Institute for International Economic Policy,
2014.
Amol Mehra, The Caravan Towards Business Respect for Human Rights,
Institute for Human Rights and Business, 11 February 2015.
David Bilchitz, The Necessity for a Business and Human Rights Treaty,
2014, available at:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2562760.
ummary of South Africa Business

Leaders Dialogue on Human Rights 26
May 2016
http://www.global-business-initiative.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/06/Business-Leaders-Dialogue-Summary-
Report-26-May-2016-Johannesburg-GBI.pdf
BUSINESS LEADERS DIALOGUE ON CORPORATE

RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
ADDRESSING COMPLEX CHALLENGES, BUSINESS RISK
AND THE TRUST DEFICIT
content/uploads/2016/06/3695_GBI-South-African-
Agenda_May_2016_Web_NEW_FIN.pdf
Business Leaders Dialogue

on Corporate Respect for
Human Rights
Addressing Complex Challenges, Business Risk
and the Trust Deficit
CONFERENCE MATERIALS
26th May 2016, Turbine Hall, Johannesburg, South Africa
content/uploads/2016/06/3721_GBI_SouthAfrica_MaterialsPack_Ma
y16_Web_NEW_FIN.pdf
John Ruggie, A UN Business and Human Rights Treaty?, Harvard Kennedy School,
28 January 2014
https://www.hks.harvard.edu/m-
rcbg/CSRI/UNBusinessandHumanRightsTreaty.pdf
The Past as Prologue? A Moment of
Truth for UN Business and Human
Rights Treaty
08 July 2014
https://www.ihrb.org/pdf/2014-06-UN-HRC.pdf
International Commission of Jurists,
http://icj.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/06/NeedsandOptionsinternationalinst_ICJRe
portFinalelecvers.compressed.pdf
Ireland reiterates commitment to

agenda. It states:

Enterprises.
human rights.
Feature article on human rights

concerns with Irish businesses in Qatar
TheJournal.ie has a large feature today regarding the risk that Irish companies working on construction
projects for Qatar 2022 might become implicated in forced labour. Considerable coverage has been
given in the Irish and international press to human rights violations occurring in the run-up to the
World Cup, particularly under the kafala labour system. This article, however, is one of the few times
where Irish media have highlighted the risk of complicity by for Irish businesses in this this context
(something which I have looked at before here). The lengthy piece written by Orla Ryan, is well worth
a read and I have reproduced it below in full.
Concerns raised about some Irish businesses involved with Qatar World Cup
As fresh bribery allegations throw the spotlight back on Qatar, an Irish human rights lawyer has
warned that the countrys kafala labour system is leading to the exploitation of migrant workers.
IRISH COMPANIES OPERATING in Qatar have been warned that the labour system there could be
seen to facilitate a form of slave labour.
Several Irish businesses are currently involved in various aspects of the 2022 World Cup build.
Human rights lawyer Orna Joyce said that while it is difficult to directly connect individual
organisations to slavery, companies operating in Qatar could be linked to its corrupt employment
system.
Joyce said that the driving factor of slavery in Qatar is the kafala labour law.
She stated that once an employee comes to Qatar they are essentially owned by their employer due to
the kafala system.
The word kafala in Arabic means adoption Once a person arrives they have to be attached to an
employer, but that employer has to actually be a Qatari person and so, for that reason, a lot of foreign
countries will basically hire what they call a sleeping agent thats someone who becomes a passive
employer.
Joyce explained that the company itself remains legally responsible for the worker.
Say, for example, if that person was to get drunk or commit a crime, then their owner is actually
responsible for them.
In a report released in April, the UN called on Qatar to abolish the kafala system as its
renders migrants vulnerable to abuse and exploitation.
The report states:
Another problematic element of the kafala system is the exit permit

requirement under the Sponsorship Law: migrants can only leave the country
with an exit permit issued by their sponsor.
This requirement violates the freedom of movement guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms Racial
Discrimination.
The claim that it is meant to prevent the flight of migrants after committing
crimes can only apply to a few individuals and does not justify the pre-emptive
punishment of thousands. It is a source of abuse and there is no valid
justification for maintaining this system.
The document makes a series of recommendations for private sector companies operating in Qatar,
including adhering to international human rights and labour standards, refraining from confiscating
employees passports and ensuring that contracts signed by workers in their home countries are
respected.
Horrific living conditions
Joyce said that migrant employees often live in sub-standard accommodation.
The living conditions that most people are in are absolutely horrific you could
have anything up to 15-20 people living in a tiny room. Theyre expected to cook
in that room as well There have been reports of open sewers, right outside the
dormitory places that theyre living in.
She remarked that some migrants are so desperate to get work they are duped into paying exorbitant
fake costs to unscrupulous recruiters.
[Recruiters] have so much power over the migrant workers they can basically tell them what they
want.
Joyce said it can take workers up to three years to pay off the initial debt they owe to the company
and only then will they be able to start making money.
If youre a good employer, you can actually operate under kafala and give your
employees a good standard of living and let them have a nice life.
She said that Qatar has a law where employees are supposed to have one day off a week, known as
family day.
If youre single, you cant go into any shopping centres, you cant go into public spaces As a
result, on the day where they should be relaxing they arent actually allowed to leave where they live.
Most migrant workers are Filipino, Nepali and Indian so they look different from
local Qataris. A westerner would probably get away with it more easily because
they dont mind us as such were seen to be people with money. If you were a
lone guy walking around on a day off, youll be arrested.
Joyce noted that it is extremely difficult to directly link any company to such abuses because of
complicated legal structures. However, she pointed out that the Criminal Law (Human Trafficking)
Amendment Bill 2013 closed a loophole in the 2008 Act, meaning Irish companies can now be
prosecuted for forced labour.
She added that, albeit slowly, Qatar is improving in terms of local labour laws, noting that a helpline
was set up in 2011 to give employees the opportunity to air any grievances they may have about their
work environment.
Despite this, she warned: Companies are still paying people off within that line Its just not
working the way it should be at the moment.
1,200 workers have died to date
In March, the International Trade Union Confederation published a report, The Case Against Qatar,
that warned 4,000 workers could die before the tournament begins in 2022.
Some 1,200 people have died since 2010, when Qatar won the right to host the World Cup.
The report notes that there were 60 worker fatalities in the run-up to the Sochi Winter Olympics, 40
before the Athens Olympics, ten before the Beijing Games and no deaths of workers before the 2012
Olympics in London.
An average of 20 Indian migrant workers died per month in in Qatar 2013, peaking at 27 in the hottest
month August. There are an estimated 1.2 million migrant workers in the country.
Last September, David Begg, General Secretary of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, wrote to John
Delaney of the FAI urging him to ensure the right of workers in Qatar were respected in the run up to
the tournament.
TheJournal.ie contacted the FAI asking if the organisation was satisfied that FIFA was doing enough to
protect migrant workers. It did not respond.
Controversy has surrounded Qatars successful bid from the beginning.
Earlier this month, FIFA President Sepp Blatter admitted choosing the country as the location for the
2022 World Cup was a mistake.
Blatter said that the tournament would more than likely take place in the winter as average
temperatures in Qatar top 40C in June and July.
This week, the Sunday Times reported that Mohamed bin Hammam, the former president of the Asian
Football Confederation, paid 3.6 million to senior football officials to get support for Qatars
campaign to host the competition.
Organisers of the bid have denied the allegations but calls have been made for the competition to be
withdrawn from Qatar altogether.
FIFA vice president Jim Boyce said that a switch in host should be considered if the claims are proven
to be true.
Operating in Qatar
TheJournal.ie contacted a number of Irish companies that are involved in the Qatar build. KCC
Architectural is the only one that responded.
The company is providing door hardware and emergency exits in some of the stadiums where the
tournament will be held.
KCC began its operations in Doha in November 2011 and the groups managing director Chris
Kilpatrick said it is only beginning out there. KCC Middle East is co-owned by Petrobuild and KCC
International, with respective shares of 51 and 49 per cent.
Kilpatrick said he has never seen anybody mistreated or heard about any complaints on site and
noted that the contracts for their employees are all cleared and adhered to by Petrobuild.
He added that KCC has never had any issue with the kafala work system.
We have never seen anything that would jeopardise the employees.
Kilpatrick said he has visited some of the sites KCC are working on and said they were as good as
youd get in Ireland.
On any site I have visited I havent seen any issue with health and safety.
He noted that it was up to individual sites to ensure exploitation is not happening, adding that the
human resources department in Petrobuild was always available if employees needed to raise an issue
about their visa or work conditions.
KCCs employees in Qatar work from 8am to 6pm five days a week, with Fridays and Saturdays off.
Friday is equal to our Sunday, Kilpatrick explained.
Questionable human rights record
On the subject of doing business in a country with a questionable human rights record, Kilpatrick said
Qatar should not be singled out in this regard.
He offered the US as a country that has a lot to answer for in terms of human rights violations,
adding that you will find a plane full of Irish people travelling to Doha every week because they cant
get work here.
Kilpatrick said that most companies operating in Qatar offer their employees a months holiday but
make them take it all in one go, while KCC allows staff to take two weeks off in the summer and two
weeks off at Christmas.
The company employs six migrant workers in Qatar four men and two women from the
Philippines, Nepal and Sri Lanka. They work in engineering, administration and transport roles and
some have been to Ireland for training.
Kilpatrick is a member of the Irish Qatari Business Council an NGO set up in January 2012
to promote business and trade between the two countries.
Upon hearing of migrant worker exploitation in Qatar, he said he raised the issue with fellow members
of the council, noting that no one said they had come across problems personally.
Fostering business links

Conor Tubridy, chair of the IQBC, told TheJournal.ie: Its not the IQBCs role or position to make
commentary on political, religious or social issues in Qatar, or any other country.
Joyce disagreed, saying: By getting involved in business in Qatar, youre automatically involved in
politics.
Once youre working in that system, youre paying taxes over there and, as a
result, youre supporting that system. Regardless of whether or not youre
treating your employees badly or well, by supporting that system youre already
in the wrong.
The junior minister for trade and development, Labours Joe Costello, met with the council in Qatar at
the weekend.
In January, Taoiseach Enda Kenny and jobs minister Richard Bruton headed up a trade mission to Gulf
states that resulted in contracts worth 25 million for Irish companies in Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
At the time, the Tnaiste Eamon Gilmore defended Kenny for not raising human rights issues during
the visit, saying such topics are discussed through outlets such as the UN Human Rights Council, not
on trade missions.
Not perfect
Two weeks ago Fine Gael TD Pat Breen, chairman of the Oireachtas committee on foreign affairs,
made a return visit to Qatar and Bahrain.
Over the course of the three-day visit, Breen met with the Prime Minister of Qatar; the CEO
of Qatar Airways, Akbar Al-Bakar; and the US Assistant Secretary of State for Economics and
Business Affairs, Charles Rivkin.
The Clare TD said the purpose of the trip would serve to strengthen the economic and trade ties of
Ireland with Qatar and Bahrain.
At his meeting with the Qatari Prime Minister, Sheik Abdullah bin Nasser, Breen said he stressed the
need to strengthen and grow [ties between Ireland and Qatar] and discussed the possibilities of
further trade visits in both directions.
He noted that it would not have been suitable to raise the issue of human rights at the meeting, adding
that it was more appropriate to talk about trade and business.
When he asked the countrys deputy foreign minister about the issue, Breen said he was told that
migrant workers were treated well.
However, when he asked the same question to executives of Irish companies operating in Qatar, he said
they told him they were aware of some employees being exploited.
Breen noted that the living conditions for migrant workers in Qatar are not perfect, adding: Theres
no point in saying other wise.
The TD said most of the migrant workers in Qatar had a low level skills set and therefore a low
productivity level, earning about 200-300 a month.
China
Breen noted that trade with Qatar pumped 141 million into the Irish economy in 2012, a 33 per cent
jump from 2011.
He maintained that things work very differently there, but said the situation is much better than in
other Arab countries.
Breen said a bigger question surrounded the fact that we trade with China for 10 billion, another
country with a questionable human rights record.
He stated that he was very conscious of exploitation and it was something we have to monitor, but
added: We cant isolate ourselves either.
https://businesshumanrightsireland.wordpress.com/2014/06/03/f
eature-article-on-human-rights-concerns-with-irish-businesses-in-
qatar/
CRIMINAL LAW (HUMAN TRAFFICKING) (AMENDMENT)

ACT 2013
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2013/act/24/enacted/en/pdf
Concerns raised about some Irish

businesses involved with Qatar World
Cup
As fresh bribery allegations throw the spotlight back on to Qatar, an Irish
human rights lawyer has warned that the countrys kafala labour system is
leading to the exploitation of migrant workers.
Jun 3rd 2014
Migrant
worker in Qatar Source: AP/Press Association Images
IRISH COMPANIES OPERATING in Qatar have been warned that the labour system there could be
seen to facilitate a form of slave labour.
Several Irish businesses are currently involved in various aspects of the 2022 World Cup build.
Human rights lawyer Orna Joyce said that while it is difficult to directly connect individual
organisations to slavery, companies operating in Qatar could be linked to its corrupt employment
system.
Joyce said that the driving factor of slavery in Qatar is the kafala labour law.
She stated that once an employee comes to Qatar they are essentially owned by their employer due to
the kafala system.
The word kafala in Arabic means adoption Once a person arrives they have to be attached to an
employer, but that employer has to actually be a Qatari person and so, for that reason, a lot of foreign
countries will basically hire what they call a sleeping agent thats someone who becomes a passive
employer.
Joyce explained that the company itself remains legally responsible for the worker.
Say, for example, if that person was to get drunk or commit a crime, then their owner is actually
responsible for them.
In a report released in April, the UN called on Qatar to abolish the kafala system as its
renders migrants vulnerable to abuse and exploitation.
The report states:

Another problematic element of the kafala system is the exit permit
requirement under the Sponsorship Law: migrants can only leave the country
with an exit permit issued by their sponsor.
This requirement violates the freedom of movement guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms Racial
Discrimination.
The claim that it is meant to prevent the flight of migrants after committing
crimes can only apply to a few individuals and does not justify the pre-emptive
punishment of thousands. It is a source of abuse and there is no valid
justification for maintaining this system.
The document makes a series of recommendations for private sector companies operating in Qatar,
including adhering to international human rights and labour standards, refraining from confiscating
employees passports and ensuring that contracts signed by workers in their home countries are
respected.
Horrific living conditions
Joyce said that migrant employees often live in sub-standard accommodation.
The living conditions that most people are in are absolutely horrific you could
have anything up to 15-20 people living in a tiny room. Theyre expected to cook
in that room as well There have been reports of open sewers, right outside the
dormitory places that theyre living in.
She remarked that some migrants are so desperate to get work they are duped into paying exorbitant
fake costs to unscrupulous recruiters.
[Recruiters] have so much power over the migrant workers they can basically tell them what they
want.
Joyce said it can take workers up to three years to pay off the initial debt they owe to the company
and only then will they be able to start making money.
If youre a good employer, you can actually operate under kafala and give your
employees a good standard of living and let them have a nice life.
She said that Qatar has a law where employees are supposed to have one day off a week, known as
family day.
If youre single, you cant go into any shopping centres, you cant go into public spaces As a
result, on the day where they should be relaxing they arent actually allowed to leave where they live.
Most migrant workers are Filipino, Nepali and Indian so they look different from
local Qataris. A westerner would probably get away with it more easily because
they dont mind us as such were seen to be people with money. If you were a
lone guy walking around on a day off, youll be arrested.
Joyce noted that it is extremely difficult to directly link any company to such abuses because of
complicated legal structures. However, she pointed out that the Criminal Law (Human Trafficking)
Amendment Bill 2013 closed a loophole in the 2008 Act, meaning Irish companies can now be
prosecuted for forced labour.
She added that, albeit slowly, Qatar is improving in terms of local labour laws, noting that a helpline
was set up in 2011 to give employees the opportunity to air any grievances they may have about their
work environment.
Despite this, she warned: Companies are still paying people off within that line Its just not
working the way it should be at the moment.
1,200 workers have died to date
In March, the International Trade Union Confederation published a report, The Case Against Qatar,
that warned 4,000 workers could die before the tournament begins in 2022.
Some 1,200 people have died since 2010, when Qatar won the right to host the World Cup.
The report notes that there were 60 worker fatalities in the run-up to the Sochi Winter Olympics, 40
before the Athens Olympics, ten before the Beijing Games and no deaths of workers before the 2012
Olympics in London.
An average of 20 Indian migrant workers died per month in in Qatar 2013, peaking at 27 in the hottest
month August. There are an estimated 1.2 million migrant workers in the country.
Last September, David Begg, General Secretary of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, wrote to John
Delaney of the FAI urging him to ensure the right of workers in Qatar were respected in the run up to
the tournament.
To view the letter in its entirety, click here.
TheJournal.ie contacted the FAI asking if the organisation was satisfied that FIFA was doing enough to
protect migrant workers. It did not respond.
Controversy has surrounded Qatars successful bid from the beginning.
Earlier this month, FIFA President Sepp Blatter admitted choosing the country as the location for the
2022 World Cup was a mistake.
FIFA President Sepp Blatter Source: Anja Niedringhaus
Blatter said that the tournament would more than likely take place in the winter as average
temperatures in Qatar top 40C in June and July.
This week, the Sunday Times reported that Mohamed bin Hammam, the former president of the Asian
Football Confederation, paid 3.6 million to senior football officials to get support for Qatars
campaign to host the competition.
Organisers of the bid have denied the allegations but calls have been made for the competition to be
withdrawn from Qatar altogether.
FIFA vice president Jim Boyce said that a switch in host should be considered if the claims are proven
to be true.
Operating in Qatar
TheJournal.ie contacted a number of Irish companies that are involved in the Qatar build. KCC
Architectural is the only one that responded.
The company is providing door hardware and emergency exits in some of the stadiums where the
tournament will be held.
KCC began its operations in Doha in November 2011 and the groups managing director Chris
Kilpatrick said it is only beginning out there. KCC Middle East is co-owned by Petrobuild and KCC
International, with respective shares of 51 and 49 per cent.
Kilpatrick said he has never seen anybody mistreated or heard about any complaints on site and
noted that the contracts for their employees are all cleared and adhered to by Petrobuild.
He added that KCC has never had any issue with the kafala work system.
We have never seen anything that would jeopardise the employees.
Kilpatrick said he has visited some of the sites KCC are working on and said they were as good as
youd get in Ireland.
On any site I have visited I havent seen any issue with health and safety.
He noted that it was up to individual sites to ensure exploitation is not happening, adding that the
human resources department in Petrobuild was always available if employees needed to raise an issue
about their visa or work conditions.
KCCs employees in Qatar work from 8am to 6pm five days a week, with Fridays and Saturdays off.
Friday is equal to our Sunday, Kilpatrick explained.
Questionable human rights record
On the subject of doing business in a country with a questionable human rights record, Kilpatrick said
Qatar should not be singled out in this regard.
He offered the US as a country that has a lot to answer for in terms of human rights violations,
adding that you will find a plane full of Irish people travelling to Doha every week because they cant
get work here.
Kilpatrick said that most companies operating in Qatar offer their employees a months holiday but
make them take it all in one go, while KCC allows staff to take two weeks off in the summer and two
weeks off at Christmas.
The company employs six migrant workers in Qatar four men and two women from the
Philippines, Nepal and Sri Lanka. They work in engineering, administration and transport roles and
some have been to Ireland for training.
Kilpatrick is a member of the Irish Qatari Business Council - an NGO set up in January 2012
to promote business and trade between the two countries.
Upon hearing of migrant worker exploitation in Qatar, he said he raised the issue with fellow members
of the council, noting that no one said they had come across problems personally.
Emir of Qatar Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani and Sheika Mozah bint Nasser al-Misned at the
2010 announcement that Qatar would host the World Cup in 2022. Source: Michael Probst
Fostering business links
Conor Tubridy, chair of the IQBC, told TheJournal.ie: Its not the IQBCs role or position to make
commentary on political, religious or social issues in Qatar, or any other country.
Joyce disagreed, saying: By getting involved in business in Qatar, youre automatically involved in
politics.
Once youre working in that system, youre paying taxes over there and, as a
result, youre supporting that system. Regardless of whether or not youre
treating your employees badly or well, by supporting that system youre already
in the wrong.
The junior minister for trade and development, Labours Joe Costello, met with the council in Qatar at
the weekend.
In January, Taoiseach Enda Kenny and jobs minister Richard Bruton headed up a trade mission to Gulf
states that resulted in contracts worth 25 million for Irish companies in Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
At the time, the Tnaiste Eamon Gilmore defended Kenny for not raising human rights issues during
the visit, saying such topics are discussed through outlets such as the UN Human Rights Council, not
on trade missions.
Not perfect
Two weeks ago Fine Gael TD Pat Breen, chairman of the Oireachtas committee on foreign affairs,
made a return visit to Qatar and Bahrain.
Over the course of the three-day visit, Breen met with the Prime Minister of Qatar; the CEO
of Qatar Airways, Akbar Al-Bakar; and the US Assistant Secretary of State for Economics and
Business Affairs, Charles Rivkin.
The Clare TD said the purpose of the trip would serve to strengthen the economic and trade ties of
Ireland with Qatar and Bahrain.
At his meeting with the Qatari Prime Minister, Sheik Abdullah bin Nasser, Breen said he stressed the
need to strengthen and grow [ties between Ireland and Qatar] and discussed the possibilities of
further trade visits in both directions.
He noted that it would not have been suitable to raise the issue of human rights at the meeting, adding
that it was more appropriate to talk about trade and business.
When he asked the countrys deputy foreign minister about the issue, Breen said he was told that
migrant workers were treated well.
However, when he asked the same question to executives of Irish companies operating in Qatar, he said
they told him they were aware of some employees being exploited.
Breen noted that the living conditions for migrant workers in Qatar are not perfect, adding: Theres
no point in saying other wise.
The TD said most of the migrant workers in Qatar had a low level skills set and therefore a low
productivity level, earning about 200-300 a month.
China
Breen noted that trade with Qatar pumped 141 million into the Irish economy in 2012, a 33 per cent
jump from 2011.
He maintained that things work very differently there, but said the situation is much better than in
other Arab countries.
Breen said a bigger question surrounded the fact that we trade with China for 10 billion, another
country with a questionable human rights record.
He stated that he was very conscious of exploitation and it was something we have to monitor, but
added: We cant isolate ourselves either.
http://www.thejournal.ie/irish-companies-qatar-world-cup-
1437685-Jun2014/
Meeting Of the Irish Qatari Business

Council
In recognition of the importance of the growth of Jones Engineering throughout the GCC, and in his
role as Group Director with particular responsibility for Qatar, James Curley recently attended and was
invited to speak a meeting of the Irish Qatari Business Council (IQBC) at the Intercontinental Hotel in
Doha.
The IQBC seeks to promote business and trade between Irish and Qatari entities utilising the networks
already established by the Irish expatriate population in Qatar. Jones Engineering recognises the work
and importance of such business networks, and as such is keen to play an active role in the IQBC.
http://joneseng.com/meeting-of-the-irish-qatari-business-council/
Field of Dreams, Cork
Volunteers from OSheas Electrical and ESB with Denis Cambridge, ESB Networks, Karen
OSullivan, Down Syndrome Ireland Cork and Brendan OFlaherty, OSheas Electrical
On Friday 26th & Saturday 27th May 2017, a team of 20 staff volunteers from our own OSheas
Electrical worked with staff volunteers from ESB to wire the porta-cabins and public lighting in Down
Syndrome Corks Field of Dreams. Several suppliers of electrical equipment in Cork also lent very
generous support.
The site is the first of its kind in Ireland and will see three acres of agricultural land transform into an
educational and work-based horticultural site. The land has been provided by the Munster Agriculture
Society who are partners with Down Syndrome Cork in this initiative.
About 95% of adults with Down Syndrome are unemployed, and the project will teach participants to
grow their own fruit and vegetables. It will provide a range of training, education, and work
opportunities for adults with Down Syndrome in a safe and inspirational environment. Award winning
garden designer Diarmuid Gavin is contributing to the development of this unique garden site.
To read more about the Field of Dreams check out their website.
We are proud to work with the ESB to support such a great cause. Well done to everyone involved!
http://joneseng.com/field-of-dreams/
Jones Engineering Group awarded oil

field commissioning works in Abu
Dhabi
Jones Engineering Group have been appointed as the specialist commissioning works contractor on the
UZ-750 Project, West Island facility of the Upper Zakum Offshore Oil Field Development, Abu Dhabi,
United Arab Emirates.
Upper Zakum is the second largest offshore oilfield and fourth largest oilfield in the world, it
comprises of four artificial islands with associated drilling and production facilities. The oil field is
owned by Zakum Development Company (ZADCO), a joint venture of ADNOC (Abu Dhabi National
Oil Company) acting as the operator, ExxonMobil and Japan Oil Development Company.
The works are being undertaken by our Contract Support Services division. This award complements
other recent awards by this division in both Saudi and Qatar, where support services are being provided
on several infrastructural and heavy industry/mining related projects.
https://www.ecouncil.ae/PublicationsEn/economic-vision-2030-full-versionEn.pdf
The Necessity for a Business and Human Rights Treaty
n June 2014, the Human Rights Council passed a resolution whereby countries
agreed to commence discussions on a legally binding instrument relating to
transnational corporations and other business enterprises. In this article, I
outline four arguments for why a treaty is necessary to cure important lacunae
in international law in this field. The arguments all are rooted in a common
normative understanding of fundamental rights and seek to ensure that they are
accorded the importance they deserve in this increasingly globalized world.
Whilst each argument on its own has strength, this paper aims to emphasize the
cumulative case that the four arguments create in favour of a treaty. The
emphasis throughout is upon why a binding legal instrument is particularly
important, as opposed to softer forms of regulation such as the United Nations
Guiding Principles. I then turn to several objections recently raised by Professor
John Ruggie, the former Special Representative of the Secretary General on
Business and Human Rights. I attempt to show why none of these objections
provides good reason to abandon the idea of a treaty as well as why it would be
unfortunate to proceed with Ruggies more restrictive proposal for a treaty that
only addresses gross human rights violations.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2562760
Irish Qatari Business Council ... Engineering and Construction in Qatar
https://www.enterprise-ireland.com/en/Export-Assistance/Market-Research-
Centre/Qatar_Engineering-and-Construction-in-Qatar-Ronan-Clifford-Atkins.pdf
Anita Ramsastray, Closing the Governance Gap in the Business and Human
Rights Arena: lessons from the anti-corruption movement, in Surya Deva and
David Bilchitz (eds), Human Rights Obligations of Business: Beyond the Corporate
Responsibility to Respect, Cambridge, 2013, 162.
Jennifer Zerk, Corporate liability for gross human rights abuses; towards a fairer
and more effective system of domestic law remedies, Report prepared for the
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2014.
Corporate liability for gross human rights abuses Towards a fairer and more
effective system of domestic law remedies A report prepared for the Office of
the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Dr. Jennifer Zerk DISCLAIMER:
This study was commissioned by OHCHR fr om Dr. Jennifer Zerk to enhance the
understanding of legal and practical issues related to domestic law remedies
for cases of corporate involvement in gross human rights abuses. The
contents of this paper do not necessari ly reflect the views of OHCHR.
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Business/DomesticLawRemedies/St
udyDomesticeLawRemedies.pdf
Daniel Augenstein, The Crisis of International Human Rights Law in the , 2014,
EUI Working Paper, RSCAS 2014/118.
http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/33781/RSCAS_2014_118.pdf?seq
uence=1
EUI Working Paper, RSCAS 2014/118.
https://businesshumanrightsireland.wordpress.com/2015/04/13/key-issues-
in-the-debate-on-a-binding-business-and-human-rights-instrument/
Gulf states trade trip not time or place

to bring up human rights concerns
Minister Richard Bruton said that concerns can be raised through other
forums including the UN and European Union.
Jan 8th 2014,
Image: Sam Boal/Photocall Ireland

JOBS MINISTER RICHARD Bruton was questioned today on whether the subject of human rights
concerns would be raised during this weeks trade trip to the Gulf states.
He appeared to confirm that it was not the right time or place to raise these concerns but that the Irish
government had other forums in which to raise them.
As of yesterday, the Government had declined to say whether Taoiseach Enda Kenny had or would
raise specific concerns about human rights issues with leaders in the Gulf states of Saudi Arabia, Qatar
and United Arab Emirates (UAE), where he is on a trade mission with other Irish officials this week.
One of the members of the mission is Minister Bruton, who spoke to RT radio show Morning Ireland
from Abu Dhabi this morning.
So far, the trade mission has led to business contacts worth 25 million.
Bruton said we are very conscious of human rights issues, and for example the Taoiseach welcomed
Saudi Arabia joining the Human Rights Council of the UN.
He said of raising concerns that clearly we will work with other countries through UN agencies but
also through our membership of the European Union.
When it was put to him that the trade mission is there to do business, and that in terms of bringing up
anything negative or any concerns, this is not the time, this is not the place, Bruton said that would
be correct.
Bruton pointed out that there are requirements in the trade negotiations, and there are standards that
have to be met as Ireland develops trade agreements with these countries.
He said that this visit mainly involves business-to-business meetings where Irish businesses are
meeting their counterparts. Our focus here is exports and jobs, clearly that is the focus, concluded
Bruton.
http://www.thejournal.ie/trade-mission-
gulf-states-1253906-Jan2014/
ilmore insists: Ireland always raises
human rights issues
Michel Martin has said of course the Taoiseach should have raised
human rights issues with leaders in the Gulf this week.
Jan 9th 2014,
Enda Kenny and Richard Bruton at the Abu Dhabi Chamber of Commerce this
week.
Image: Photocall Ireland/GIS
TNAISTE EAMON GILMORE has insisted that Ireland always raises human rights issues amid
criticism of the Taoiseach Enda Kenny for not pressing the matter while on a trade mission to three
Gulf countries this week.
Kenny and Jobs Minister Richard Bruton have been on an Enterprise Ireland trade mission to Saudi
Arabia, Qatar and the UAE this week, but human rights issues have been largely off the agenda in
meetings with senior politicians there.
Ireland always raises human rights issues, Gilmore said at the RDS in Dublin today. There are a
number of ways in which we do that, one of the ways in which we do that is through the [UN] Human
Rights Council, which we are a member, and [it] has a procedure where it reviews the human rights
record of every country on a regular basis,
Gilmore said that the record of Saudi Arabia where women are not allowed to drive was reviewed
last October and that Ireland made specific recommendations to the country at the time in respect of
the rights of women in particular.
Asked if the Taoiseach should have raised these issues in meetings particularly with Saudis deputy
prime minister Crown Prince Salman, Gilmore responded: The Taoiseach was on a trade mission.
There are ways in which the human rights issues are raised by Ireland. We do
that consistently, we do that regularly and there are few countries that have a
strong a record as Ireland in pursuing human rights issues in different parts of
the world.
Criticism
Earlier, Fianna Fil leader Michel Martin said that he was surprised that Kenny had not raised the
issues.
Of course he should have and I mean its expected in encounters like that or in meetings like that you
would raise issues pertaining to human rights, he said.
Martin identified issues in relation to the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia and hit out the Taoiseach
congratulating Saudi for its election to the United Nations Human Rights Council.
You dont congratulate people on a situation that clearly is not compatible with
our own, he said.
The former Foreign Affairs minister said Ireland consistently raise[s] these issues with, not just Saudi
Arabia, but other countries where we believe human rights are being breached.
He added: I think he should have at least raised it in the meetings.
Socialist Party MEP Paul Murphy, who has already written to the Taoiseach over the issue, criticised
Jobs Minister Richard Bruton, who is also on the trade mission, for his comments in a Newstalk
interview this morning.
Minister Bruton cited the building of the World Cup stadiums as an example of progress and
growth. Workers building the World Cup stadiums in Qatar are facing shocking conditions, Murphy
said.
The Gulf trade mission concluded today with the Department of Jobs announced in a statement that it
had ensured an initial 95 jobs for Ireland and 21 contracts and business deals worth a record 65
million.
Around 100 executives from 87 Irish companies were also on the trade mission.
http://www.thejournal.ie/tanaiste-
human-rights-taoiseach-gulf-trade-
mission-1256119-Jan2014/
Gulf trade mission yields 25 million in
contracts
The trip has gained some concern over the issues of human rights in Gulf
states.
Jan 8th 2014,
Taoiseach Enda Kenny being received by Qatari Prime Minister, H.E. Abdullah
Bin Nasser bin Khalifa al Thani
Image: Photocall Ireland/GIS
THE IRISH TRADE mission to the Gulf States has yielded contracts worth 25 million so far.
The Department of Jobs announced this morning that nine Irish companies made the new contracts and
business developments worth more than 25 million during the first three days of this weeks trade
mission to the Gulf.
The mission was organised by Enterprise Ireland and is led by Taoiseach Enda Kenny TD and Minister
for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Richard Bruton TD.
Earlier today, Minister Bruton agreed when asked if the trip wasnt the time or place to bring up the
subject of human rights issues in Gulf states. Joyce noted that it is extremely difficult to directly link
any company to such abuses because of complicated legal structures. However, she pointed out that
the Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Amendment Bill 2013 closed a loophole in the 2008 Act,
meaning Irish companies can now be prosecuted for forced labour.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2013/act/24/enacted/en/pdf
Report of the Special Ra pporteur on the human rights of mig rants, Franois Crpeau
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/SRMigrants/A-HRC-26-35-Add1_en.pdf
One World, One Future Irelands Policy

for International Development
https://www.irishaid.ie/media/irishaid/allwebsitemedia/20newsandpublications/publicationpdfsenglish/
one-world-one-future-irelands-new-policy.pdf
The contracts were secured on the Saudi Arabia and Qatar legs of the five-day mission. The team are
now journeying on to meet business people in the United Arab Emirates for the final two days.
Escher Group signed a new contract with Saudi Post.

Instant Upright signed a $1m deal with the Saudi Electric Company.
Jones Engineering signed a deal worth in excess of 15m with a major
multinational consumer goods brand.
Ezetop inked a deal with the largest retail bank in the Middle East, Al
Rajhi Bank to provide software.
Rehab Group signed an agreement worth an expected 2.3million over
the first 12 months with the Human Resources Development Fund.
KCC Architectural announced multiple contract wins with customers in
Doha including the Kempinski Hotels, Qatar Airways and Aspeter
Hospital.
Kentz Corporation opened an office in Doha to offer specialised oil and
gas, infrastructure and transportation sectors.
Byrne Looby entered a joint venture partnership with ASCO Consulting
Engineers in Qatar.
Dona Technologies announced a partnership with MDS in Qatar.
Separately, Absal Paul, an Irish Saudi contract services provider announced that it had signed more
than 100m in contracts over the past twelve months, with partners including Haliburton, the Saudi
Stock Exchange, Boeing and General Electric.
The Taoiseach described it as a fantastic result so far and commended all of the companies who have
made todays announcements.
Minister Bruton said that more exports means more jobs in Ireland.
Julie Sinnamon, CEO Enterprise Ireland, said that EI will continue to work with these companies to
ensure they have all the supports they need to compete and win in these markets.
http://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-gulf-states-trade-mission-contracts-1254151-
Jan2014/?utm_source=businessetc
National plans on business and human

rights and the latest from Ireland
March 13, 2014 by Shane Darcy Bookmark the permalink.
The United Nations Working Group on business and human rights has just launched a repository of
national action plans aimed at implementing the United Nations Guiding Principles on business and
human rights. Although it is almost three years since the Human Rights Council endorsed the Guiding
Principles, and over two years since the European Commission invited member states of the EU to
develop national implementation plans, there have only been a couple of such plans adopted thus far.
The United Kingdom and the Netherlands came out with such plans late last year, and Spain, Denmark
and Switzerland are currently quite advanced in their efforts to develop these. The British and Dutch
efforts are not especially complex or comprehensive, but negotiating the tricky interdepartmental
nature of responsibility for business and human rights may be one explanation as to why these national
efforts have taken so long.
Photo by Jean-Marc Ferr
The Working Groups repository shows that Ireland is not alone in having yet to bring out a national
implementation plan on the United Nations Guiding Principles on business and human rights. Readers
of the blog will recall that the United Nations Human Rights Committee asked the Irish Government to
explain how it addresses concerns regarding the activities of Irish domiciled companies that may give
rise to human rights concerns overseas. In its official response to the Committee last week, Ireland
explained that a national implementation plan for the United Nations Guiding Principles remains a
work in progress:
Ireland is considering how best to implement the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights:
Implementing the United Nations Protect, Respect and Remedy Framework. The Guiding Principles
cover a range of issues which span the policy responsibilities of a number of Government Departments
and agencies. Consideration is being given as to how best to formulate Irelands national plan for their
implementation, including through learning from other countries that have undertaken similar
processes.
When Ireland comes before the Human Rights Committee this summer, it is to be expected that the
Committee will impress upon the Government the importance of ensuring that companies domiciled in
Ireland are made aware of their responsibility to respect human rights throughout their operations. A
national plan of action is not a panacea of course, but it affirms a States commitment to ensuring
business respect for human rights and the adoption of such might also be recommended by the
Committee.
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Business/NationalPlans/NAPconsultation.pdf
ITALIAN NATIONAL ACTION

PLAN ON BUSINESS AND
HUMAN RIGHTS
2016, 2021
http://www.cidu.esteri.it/resource/2016/12/49117_f_NAPBHRENGFINALEDEC152017.pdf
There is a wealth of guidance available to States developing national implementation plans for the
Guiding Principles on business and human rights. In addition to the existing British and Dutch plans
(and some critical commentary on those), the United Nations Working Group has held consultations
and various non-governmental organisations have produced useful reports and tools on the topic,
usefully collated by the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre. The International Corporate
Accountability Roundtable and the Danish Institute on Business and Human Rights have a national
actions plans project currently underway. Al Haq have developed specific language which they
recommend be included in national plans, with specific reference to international humanitarian law and
the role of national legal and regulatory frameworks.
The need for consultation in the development of national plans needs to be emphasised. Professor
Michael Addo, a member of the United Nations Working Group on business and human rights put it
that:
the Working Group expects that, within government, steps should be taken to ensure policy
coherence based on clear leadership. In addition, we all agree that consultation, especially
multistakeholder consultation, is an important part of the National Action Plans process.
The Irish government has not yet announced any formal consultation regarding its development of a
national implementation plan for the United Nations Guiding Principles, but such a process is to be
expected.
Irelands response to the Human Rights Committee also included a discussion of export control
measures and how human rights are considered in that context, to which I will return in a future post.
https://businesshumanrightsireland.wordpress.com/2014/03/13/national-
plans-on-business-and-human-rights-and-the-latest-from-ireland/
Putting your money where your mouth

is: Northern Irelands Human Rights
Commission on Procurement and
Human Rights
March 5, 2014 by Shane Darcy Bookmark the permalink.
The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission have just released a

very impressive report on public procurement and human rights. The report is an important addition to
the policy debate on business and human rights and is an affirmation of the long-standing recognition
that Governments and other bodies, both public and private, can influence respect for human rights by
carefully choosing where and how they spend their money. The United Nations Guiding Principles on
business and human rights, for example, call on States to promote respect for human rights by
business enterprises with which they conduct commercial transactions. The Guiding Principles note
that:
States conduct a variety of commercial transactions with business enterprises, not least through their
procurement activities. This provides States individually and collectively with unique opportunities
to promote awareness of and respect for human rights by those enterprises, including through the terms
of contracts, with due regard to States relevant obligations under national and international law.
The Commissions report, Public Procurement and Human Rights in Northern Ireland, does not focus
solely on States, but is rather aimed at Government departments, other public bodies and private
companies. It aims to generate discussion of procurement policy in Northern Ireland, and further
consideration of how it can impact on human rights, including improving the enjoyment of rights. Over
11.5 billion is spent each year in Northern Ireland on the acquisition of goods, services and works by
the public service.
A detailed description of existing international, European and national laws, policies and standards
relating to public procurement and human rights is provided in the report, as well as indications of
where Northern Ireland is falling short in this regard. Recommendations are also made regarding the
need for sufficient guidance from relevant bodies regarding a human rights compliant approach to
procurement. The Northern Ireland Commission notes that the United Kingdoms national
implementation plan for the UN Guiding Principles contains a commitment to review:
the degree to which the activities of UK State-owned, controlled or supported enterprises, and of
State contracting and purchasing of goods and services, are executed with respect for human rights.
Overall, the report notes that much work needs to be done in Northern Ireland on the issue of public
procurement and human rights, but it provides numerous valuable recommendations on the way
forward. Perhaps the soon-to-be-established Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission might
follow their lead, given the insufficient attention that has been paid to ethical procurement in this
jurisdiction.
https://businesshumanrightsireland.wordpress.com/2014/03/05/putting-your-money-where-your-
mouth-is-northern-irelands-human-rights-commission-on-procurement-and-human-rights/
Public Procurement and Human Rights
in Northern Ireland
http://www.nihrc.org/documents/NIHRC%20Public%20Procurement%20and
%20Human%20Rights.pdf

Where Is Ireland's National Action Plan On Business and Human Rights? Updated

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Where Is Ireland's National Action Plan On Business and Human Rights? Updated

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Where is Irelands national action plan

on business and human rights? Updated

July 2005 Professor John Ruggie is

November 2014 The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade dedicates

Irelands Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade,

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Inclusion in Business Submission to Department of

Decides to establish an open-ended intergovernmental working group on a legally binding instrument

This resolution was adopted by consensus.

reland reiterates commitment to

Decides to establish an open-ended intergovernmental working group on a legally binding instrument

This resolution was adopted by consensus.

HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL BEGINS

For use of the information media; not an official record

Key issues in the debate on a binding

#1 Bonn dh insint ar scal agus dh leagan dag ar amhrn

On the other side, those against a binding instrument argue that:

More time and effort needs to be given to the UN Guiding Principles

#2 Is fearr leath builn n bheith gan arn

Half a loaf is better than to be without bread

#3 Is fearr ral inniu n scilling amrach

It is better to have sixpence today than a shilling tomorrow

#4 Ts Maith Leath na hOibre

A good start is half the battle

#5 Is deas an rud an beagn ach a dhanamh go maith

Little is best if well done

#6 Is maith an scala an aimsir

Time is a good storyteller

#7 N sheasaonn sac folamh

An empty sack does not stand

#8 Chonn beirt rud nach bhfeiceann duine amhin

Two people see a thing that an individual does not

International Commission of Jurists, Needs and Options for a New

ummary of South Africa Business

BUSINESS LEADERS DIALOGUE ON CORPORATE

Business Leaders Dialogue

International Commission of Jurists,

Ireland reiterates commitment to

Decides to establish an open-ended intergovernmental working group on a legally binding instrument

This resolution was adopted by consensus.

Feature article on human rights

The report states:

Another problematic element of the kafala system is the exit permit

Horrific living conditions

Joyce said that migrant employees often live in sub-standard accommodation.

1,200 workers have died to date

Controversy has surrounded Qatars successful bid from the beginning.

We have never seen anything that would jeopardise the employees.

Questionable human rights record

Fostering business links

CRIMINAL LAW (HUMAN TRAFFICKING) (AMENDMENT)

Concerns raised about some Irish

The report states:

Horrific living conditions

Joyce said that migrant employees often live in sub-standard accommodation.

1,200 workers have died to date

Controversy has surrounded Qatars successful bid from the beginning.

Questionable human rights record

Fostering business links

Meeting Of the Irish Qatari Business

Field of Dreams, Cork

Jones Engineering Group awarded oil

The Necessity for a Business and Human Rights Treaty

Irish Qatari Business Council ... Engineering and Construction in Qatar