By Marya Farah, Ayushi & Marjolein Quist, Feminists for a Binding Treaty coalition.

With thanks to the wider coalition for its contributions.

It’s been 10 years. Ten years since the process began to develop and enact a UN binding treaty to stop the harms corporations commit across the globe and hold them accountable. And as each year passes, the urgency of the situation becomes even more stark.

The Feminists for a Binding Treaty coalition has followed the negotiations closely over the past decade; provided inputs from a feminist perspective in the lead-up to and during the formal sessions; and advocated on key issues throughout the year. At this crucial point, we take stock of the process and highlight some steps needed in moving forward.

Lack of transparent and inclusive decision-making 

It’s an unbalanced system. Those committing harms almost always hold most of the power, influence and capital. Multinational companies, and the groups that represent them and their interests, do not face the same barriers to attending negotiations - particularly around funding and difficulties in getting a visa to travel to Geneva - as the communities they impact. Civil society has been forced to confront this reality in an even more stark and alarming way ahead of the 10th session, as the Chair unexpectedly moved the session to December less than a month before negotiations were set to begin. Feminists for a Binding Treaty joined other coalitions to issue an open letter to the Chair and call for a reversal in the decision. Over a month later, the Chair issued a response confirming that the session would be postponed until December. With the announcement, our coalitions continued to grapple with the monetary costs and broader impacts of a session moved from its well-established, annual time slot at the end of October.

It is concerning what the change in dates – and likely reduction in civil society and community representatives attending - will mean for further corporate capture of the session, where business associations regularly sit alongside states with plaques for their names while CSOs and communities look on - a step removed. This imbalance must be continually acknowledged and addressed so that the process is accessible to affected groups and their representatives.

This also means ensuring hybrid access – i.e. in person and online - to the Intergovernmental Working Group (IGWG) and associated sessions, and an end to last-minute notification of UN consultations which make attendance near-impossible for groups outside of Europe and with limited resources. Regional, in-person consultations should also be accessible and open to these groups.

Recognising the true impact of corporate power

We welcomed the spirit of the IGWG Chair’s efforts to quicken the process of negotiating this vital treaty. However, we remain concerned that key human rights language, emphasised by communities affected by corporate abuses and violations, and agreed in previous versions of the text, have now been removed. This includes, for example text in Articles 6-9, which cover areas like human rights due diligence, access to remedy for victims of harms, and establishing jurisdiction to bring perpetrators of corporate violations to justice. We need to ensure the process is meaningful, marginalised voices are heard, and hard-fought human rights language remains in place to build an impactful and feminist treaty.

We know these issues disproportionately affect women. In Uganda, for example, as in other contexts, women are more likely to farm – but not hold title to – the land that is grabbed by corporations, and so face the loss of their livelihoods and homes. In conflict-affected areas, women and girls are often disproportionately impacted by businesses who cause and contribute to violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, amongst other frameworks. As weapons manufacturers profit from Israel’s genocide on Palestinians, it is women and children that are the “most exposed to danger”.

In the Democratic Republic of Congo, businesses exploiting the rich mineral wealth of the country are fuelling further conflict. In Western Sahara, Moroccan businesses illegally operate in agriculture and fisheries in the occupied territory exporting millions of euros worth of fish, tomatoes and melons to Europe, mislabelling them as originating from Morocco. Examples of businesses exacerbating or fuelling instability and conflict are present throughout the world, as is the impunity in which they operate.

Reinstating the right to a healthy environment 

The triple planetary crisis of climate change, pollution and biodiversity loss continues to worsen, with women and girls bearing the brunt of its impacts. At the same time, transnational enterprises continue to operate with impunity, as they degrade the environment, including by polluting water and land, and fail to curb carbon emissions. After nine years of the Treaty process, and following the universal recognition of the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, we were dismayed when last year’s updated text removed important language on the environment throughout the text, including explicitly on the right to a healthy environment.

What needs to happen next? 

We saw in the 9th session last year that more states spoke in favour of a gender-sensitive treaty and strengthened provisions to this effect. This must continue and be duplicated by more States, while also ensuring these statements are made in a substantial manner, and followed-up in practice.

We see the “add women/gender and stir” approach play out quite commonly where the inclusion of women’s rights is only done as empty rhetoric and lacks nuance and meaningful change. In this process, this has been exemplified by Global North States that emphasise “feminist foreign policies” and equality, but in practice support regimes or businesses (including those domiciled in their territory) to commit human rights violations abroad.

Beyond an emphasis on the experiences of women specifically, feminist analysis of corporate abuse seeks to highlight and promote the multiplicity of lived experiences, particularly the perspectives of those individuals and communities facing the most significant and widespread business-related human rights abuses. Taking a feminist approach means putting the experience and expertise of affected individuals and groups at the centre of all stages of developing, implementing and monitoring the effective regulation of business activities, and analysing and tackling structural barriers to holding businesses accountable. After 10 years of negotiations and countless years of corporate abuse, we must all come together for change and justice.