OHCHR Accountability and Remedy Project III: Enhancing effectiveness of non-State-based grievance mechanisms in cases of business-related human rights abuse

• Overview
• Background
• Summary
• Documents
• Events, Meetings, Etc.
• Questionnaires
• Substantial contributions by external organizations
• Phases of the Accountability and Remedy Project

Overview

Background

The OHCHR Accountability and Remedy Project (ARP) began in 2014 with the aim of delivering credible and workable recommendations for enhancing accountability and access to remedy in cases of business-related human rights abuse (background on each phase of ARP).

The third phase of the project (ARP III) began in response to a mandate from the Human Rights Council in resolution 38/13 (July 2018) requesting OHCHR:

"to identify and analyse challenges, opportunities, best practices and lessons learned with regard to non-state-based grievance mechanisms that are relevant to the respect by business enterprises for human rights, . . . and to submit a report thereon to the Human Rights Council for consideration at its forty-fourth session."

Over the course of 2018-2020, OHCHR engaged in a robust set of information-gathering activities and, following ARP’s multi-stakeholder, consultative methodology, developed numerous papers regarding the role and effectiveness non-State-based grievance mechanisms, including a project scoping paper, discussion paper, and consultation draft.

At the Human Rights Council’s forty-fourth session in June 2020, OHCHR presented the ARP III final report and its explanatory addendum (see how to read an ARP report). These documents contain:

• general observations regarding non-State-based grievance mechanisms (in the report);
• a series of recommended actions for improving the effectiveness of these mechanisms, drawing upon good-practice lessons uncovered during the two-year project (in the annex of the report);
• detailed explanations and context for these recommendations (found in the addendum); and
• a model terms of reference States can use to review the contribution of non-State-based grievance mechanisms to remedy, and the role of the State in facilitating access to remedy through such mechanisms (found in the addendum).

Follow-up work on ARP III is currently being conducted through the fourth phase of the project (ARP IV).

For any questions or comments regarding the ARP III work, please contact OHCHR-business-access2remedy@un.org.

Summary

Although the Guiding Principles recognize that non-State-based grievance mechanisms can offer potential benefits to those affected by business-related human rights abuse, few mechanisms are fulfilling their envisaged role.

While there have been welcome attempts to design and operate various kinds of mechanisms, and while there have been valuable contributions by such mechanisms to accountability and remedy, rights holders continue to report significant problems with identifying, accessing and using such mechanisms in practice. The remedies that may be obtained from non-State-based grievance mechanisms are usually partial at best, in many cases due to limitations placed on the mechanism’s mandate, available resources, or both.

The potential contribution of non-State-based grievance mechanisms is often undermined by a lack of policy coherence on the part of States in their approaches to such mechanisms.  There is a need for greater recognition by States of the legitimacy and utility of these mechanisms in complementing and supplementing domestic legal and regulatory regimes.

Likewise, there is often a lack of sensitivity and responsiveness of many non-State-based grievance mechanisms to their legal, regulatory, economic, social and cultural contexts. Together with the lack of cooperation between developers and operators of mechanisms in specific contexts and cases, this results in unclear and incoherent processes, inefficiencies and other barriers for rights holders. For their part, developers and operators of such mechanisms need to give much greater emphasis to the needs, expectations and perspectives of the people for whose use these mechanisms are intended.

The recommendation actions found in the annex of the ARP III report address

• how States can work towards developing a legal and policy space that enables non-State-based grievance mechanisms to make a positive contribution to accountability and remedy; and
• how developers and operators of non-State-based grievance mechanisms can enhance the effectiveness of their mechanisms, as well as take advantage of opportunities for greater cooperation with other entities and mechanisms.

Documents

• ARP III Main Report: A/HRC/44/32, 19 May 2020
• ARP III Addendum: Explanatory Notes to Final Report: A/HRC/44/32/Add.1, 3 June 2020
• Meeting the UNGPs’ Effectiveness Criteria: Summary of ARP III Guidance, 10 December 2021
• How to read an ARP report, 22 February 2021
• ARP III Programme of Work, 5 October 2020
• Blog post on States and non-State-based grievance mechanisms, 28 March 2020
• ARP III Consultation Draft of ARP III Recommendations, 17 February 2020
• ARP III Discussion Paper, 19 November 2019
• Update on OHCHR's project on non-State-based grievance mechanisms (ARP III), 17 April 2019
• ARP III Information Note, 11 January 2019
• ARP III Paper on Scope and Programme of Work, 1 November 2018
• A/HRC/RES/38/13 - Business and human rights: improving accountability and access to remedy, 6 July 2018

Events, Meetings, Etc.

This section includes certain events and other types of meetings in which OHCHR took part, and which can be made public. This list is not exhaustive, nor is it representative of the geographic reach of the project, which was global in nature.

OHCHR is actively seeking to participate in events related to accountability and access to remedy for business-related human rights abuse. If you would like to notify the ARP team of, or invite us to, relevant events, or propose organizing an event with us, please contact OHCHR-business-access2remedy@un.org.

Questionnaires

The following open process and targeted questionnaires were available for response until 30 April 2019.

• ARP III Open Process Questionnaire (online form)
• Word version: English | Français | Español
• Questionnaire for States (online form)
• Word version: English | Français | Español
• Questionnaire for users and their representatives (online form)
• Word version: English | Français | Español
• Questionnaire for companies (online form)
• Word version: English | Français | Español
• Questionnaire for industry, multi-stakeholder, or other collaborative initiatives that have grievance mechanisms (online form)
• Word version: English | Français | Español
• Questionnaire for independent accountability mechanisms (online form)
• Word version: English | Français | Español

Substantial contributions by external organizations

This section contains certain substantial contributions that were submitted to the ARP III team, and which can be made public. The views expressed in these contributions are solely those of the authors and not OHCHR, and OHCHR has not independently verified all claims made in these documents.

• Bridging the Data Gap: Exploring Pillar III and Victims’ Access to Remedy (Independent expert study of the Corporations and Human Rights Database at University of Denver, Daniels College of Business and Korbel School of International Studies), 6 January 2020
• Global Partners Digital Submission: Online Platforms, 12 December 2019
• Non-state based non-judicial grievance mechanisms (NSBGM): An exploratory analysis (Independent expert study by the Business and Human Rights Catalyst at University of Manchester, Alliance Manchester Business School), 13 July 2018

Phases of the Accountability and Remedy Project

For background on the greater Accountability and Remedy Project, consult the ARP background page. For information on specific phases: