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

• Overview
• Background
• Summary
• Documents
• Events, Meetings, Etc.
• Questionnaires
• 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 (2-page background on ARP).

The second phase of the project (ARP II) began in response to a mandate from the Human Rights Council in resolution 32/10 (June 2016) requesting OHCHR:

“to identify and analyse lessons learned, best practices, challenges and possibilities to improve the effectiveness of State-based non-judicial mechanisms that are relevant for the respect by business enterprises for human rights, including in a cross-border context, and to submit a report thereon to be considered by the Council at its thirty-eighth session.”

Over the course of 2016-2018, and following ARP’s multi-stakeholder, consultative methodology, OHCHR developed numerous papers regarding the role and effectiveness State-based non-judicial mechanisms, including a project scoping paper, sector study, discussion paper, and consultation draft.

At the Human Rights Council’s thirty-eighth session in June 2018, OHCHR presented the ARP II final report and its explanatory addendum (see how to read an ARP report). These documents contain:

• general observations regarding State-based non-judicial 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 scope, functions and effectiveness of relevant non-judicial mechanisms (found in the addendum).

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

For any questions or comments regarding the ARP II work, please contact [email protected].

Summary

The Guiding Principles recognize that while effective judicial mechanisms are “at the core of ensuring access to remedy,” administrative, legislative, and other non-judicial mechanisms play an essential role in complementing and supplementing judicial mechanisms.  However, in many cases these mechanisms are not yet fulfilling the role envisaged for them in the UNGPs.

State-based non-judicial mechanisms may take many different forms and can be found at all levels of government (local, regional, and national). There is great diversity in their mandates, originating regimes, sources of authority, functions, and powers.

Haphazard legal and institutional development in some jurisdictions has led to unevenness and gaps in the extent to which different human rights are protected through these mechanisms. Particularly in a serious or complex case, it can be difficult to identify a mechanism (or combination of mechanisms) with a sufficiently broad mandate to address the case in its entirety; responses can therefore be fragmented, and remedial outcomes may not meet international standards.

There is a need for a greater understanding of (1) the importance of State-based non-judicial mechanisms in meeting States’ duty to protect, and (2) the contribution of such mechanisms as part of a comprehensive State-based accountability and remedy system.

The recommendation actions found in the annex of the ARP II report focus on the steps that States can take to improve the effectiveness of State-based non-judicial mechanisms, at both the systemic and individual levels.

Documents

• ARP II Main Report: A/HRC/38/20, 14 May 2018
• ARP II Addendum: Explanatory Notes to Final Report: A/HRC/38/20/Add.1, 1 June 2018
• How to read an ARP report, 22 February 2021
• ARP II Consultation Draft of Recommendations, 15 January 2018
• ARP II Discussion Paper, 2 November 2017
• ARP II Sector Study: How State-based NJMs respond to sectors with high risks of adverse human rights impacts, May 2017
• ARP II Scoping Paper, 17 February 2017
• A/HRC/RES/32/10 - Business and human rights: improving accountability and access to remedy, 15 July 2016

ARP II Follow-up Work

• ARP papers on mandatory human rights due diligence
• ARP Consultation exploring the links between human rights due diligence, accountability, and access to remedy, 3-4 March 2022
  • Event recording
• Enforcement of Mandatory Due Diligence: Key Design Considerations for Administrative Supervision, October 2021 (joint policy paper of Shift/OHCHR)

Events, Meetings, Etc.

This section includes select 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 (see ARP II Discussion Paper, pp. 7-8, 27-30 for details on the ARP II methodology).

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 [email protected].

Questionnaires

The following questionnaires were made available to solicit input into the ARP II report.

• ARP II Open Process Questionnaire (online form)
  • PDF version: English | Français | Español
  • Note Verbale to States: English | Français | Español
• ARP II NHRI Questionnaire (online form)
• ARP II OECD NCP Questionnaire (online form)

Phases of the Accountability and Remedy Project

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