[...] Following the political events in Belarus and Myanmar, DWS has been engaging with selected issuers operating in both countries. The alleged continuation of Myanmar military junta’s severe human rights violations ranging from abuses against ethnic minorities, restrictions on freedom of expression and peaceful assembly and limitations on the flow of information and other violations is of great concern to DWS. The significant deterioration of human rights in Belarus is also very concerning where publicly available information from non-governmental organisations indicate allegations of torture, discrimination against various groups in society, restrictions on freedom of expression and peaceful assembly and limitations on the flow of information. We will continue to monitor the situation very closely and engage in critical but constructive dialogue with issuers operating in Belarus. We also report on other engagements on social issues as part of our annual Active Ownership report.

[...] Please understand that we cannot comment publicly on dialogs with individual companies. In general, the exchange with invested companies is an integral part of the DWS investment process on the active investment platform. We evaluate companies individually. In our fiduciary function, constructive dialog with companies is important to us in order to urge and implement improvements in sustainability factors. If we are not invested, we cannot exert influence. Most companies are open to critical-constructive exchange. As part of this approach, engagement can be initiated in critical situations involving ESG factors or reputational risks of individual companies and, if necessary, escalated further, up to and including divestment of the relevant companies. In addition to regular engagement with boards of invested companies, we conducted 581 engagements with 471 companies on environmental, social or governance issues in 2021, an increase of almost 28 percent year-on-year.

In cases where we cannot identify any progress, we use our voting rights accordingly or also publicly comment critically on the lack of change at the respective Annual General Meeting. This involves combining the voting rights of all active and passive DWS funds. In individual cases, we came to the conclusion that little potential was discernible for improving important sustainability factors in the corporate dialog. If the sustainability risks of these investments outweighed the benefits, a divestment of the holdings in relevant mutual funds was implemented. Further information and results can also be found in our publicly available Active Ownership Report.

[full response attached]