This year marks the 10-year anniversary of the adoption of the Human Rights Council Resolution 26/9 that created the Intergovernmental Working Group (IGWG) on a legally binding instrument (LBI) on business and human rights.

Engagement by States has been on the rise since the start of the binding treaty process and despite the dates of the negotiating session being moved to December 2024, causing concerns among CSOs, we are hope that this year will continue to see strong commitment by African and Latin American states that were very involved last year. The EU, despite not having an official mandate to be able to participate in the negotiations (it is being negotiated), has been called to play an active role in the process given its experience with the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (EU CSDDD). Eyes will also be on US participation in light of recent election results, and after the country’s increased engagement in the past few years.

Last year, states negotiated only the first three Articles of the treaty – with a significant amount of time devoted to the preamble and Article 3 on the scope of the treaty (i.e. what type of businesses and human rights the treaty should cover).

This year, the revised draft programme of work plans negotiations on Articles 4 to 24. The first article to be discussed, Article 4 on the rights of victims, promises strong engagement from states. In 2023, at various points in the negotiations, states and CSOs alike made it clear that the treaty should be a victim-centred instrument.   

Between July and October 2024, the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, together with partners, organised a series of three webinars under the banner of “10 years on: A call to concrete action for a powerful legally binding instrument”, exploring the opportunity of the treaty and remaining challenges in the text through reflection by legal experts.  

This year’s treaty roundtable series highlighted the need for regional collaboration to address regulatory gaps and promote responsible business practices, alongside integrating gender perspectives into these frameworks, including an LBI, through inter-regional learning between Africa and Latin America.  With growing momentum behind mandatory due diligence initiatives globally, experts also reflected on the complementarity between due diligence legislation and the treaty and delved into issues that have been under-explored in the treaty discussions to date and that are likely to be on the table for discussion this year, such as workers’ rights, and the need for robust environmental provisions that can both adequately protect human rights and environmental defenders and hold companies accountable. One of the most contentious and foundational provisions of a binding treaty: The  the scope and its legal implications was also discussed.

Watch all instalments below and catch up on the 2024 treaty blog series here.

Subscribe here to our LinkedIn newsletter on the binding treaty for daily updates during the week of the IGWG negotiations.

Webinar 1: Fostering inter-regional learning: Establishing national frameworks to regulate transnational corporations and safeguard human rights in Africa and Latin America

31 July 2024 - Organised by ActionAid in partnership with Cameroon Diplomatic Mission in Geneva (Africa Friends of the Chair), PODER, ESCR-NET, FIDA-Uganda, MACUA/WAMUA, and Pan-African Lawyers Union.

Key takeaways:

• Challenges and impact: Significant challenges posed by TNCs were highlighted, underscoring the need for stronger regulatory frameworks.  
• Effective practices: Best practices from the Escazú Agreement and Brazil’s legislative developments offer insights into promoting responsible business practices. 
• Collaborative advocacy: Participants emphasised the importance of collaboration to advocate for corporate accountability and human rights.
• Increased awareness: Participants recognised the disproportionate impact of TNC activities on women's rights, highlighting issues such as labour exploitation. 
• Experience exchange: Participants shared challenges faced in regulating TNCs, advocating for stronger legal frameworks and enforcement mechanisms. The need for regional collaboration to address regulatory gaps and promote responsible business practices was emphasised, alongside integrating gender perspectives into these frameworks.  
• Next steps: Future discussions will focus on actionable recommendations for policymakers and civil society organisations. 

Webinar 2: A shifting corporate accountability landscape: perspectives from regulators, labour, and the climate justice movement and what they mean for a binding treaty

26 September 2024

Key takeaways:

• The EU is uniquely positioned and has a responsibility to seek a new impetus for the UN treaty and to ‘re-energise’ negotiations, to build off the momentum of global human rights due diligence initiatives, including the EU CSDDD. (Lara Wolters) 
• It is imperative to consider provisions in other due diligence laws and initiatives that could be useful in drafting the binding treaty. (Juliette Renaud)
• A LBI should have a broad scope covering all internationally recognised human rights and all business enterprises regardless of their size; provide access to justice in the home state of companies; and international monitoring and enforcement mechanisms. (Todd Broggan)
• A LBI must have robust environmental provisions that can both adequately protect human rights and environmental defenders and hold corporations accountable. (Jaybee Garganera)
• There is an opportunity for African states to push for stronger sustainability and human rights standards in supply chains to avoid mistakes of the past. (Sikho Luthango)

Webinar 3: The most debated provisions in the negotiations? Treaty scope and its legal implications

3 October 2024

Key takeaways:

• Excluding certain businesses from the treaty's scope could create loopholes that allow larger companies to evade accountability for human rights violations. (Fernanda Hopenhaym)
• Power imbalances between transnational corporations (TNCs) and Global South countries underscore the need for international mechanisms to ensure TNCs’ accountability and provide remedies for victims. (Anesu Dera)
• Focusing on how operational sections work together, rather than just on TNCs definitions, would facilitate discussions and balance the treaty’s requirements. (Kinda Mohamadieh)
• A broader scope covering all business enterprises, aligned with the UN Guiding Principles, would simplify negotiations and enhance treaty implementation. (Rae Lindsay)
• Precise definitions of "transnational business activities" are essential to avoid ambiguity and ensure effective regulation. (Carlos Lopez)