In recent years, the global regulatory landscape has undergone significant shifts, especially with regard to corporate responsibility for human rights and the prevention of modern slavery. These new regulations are forcing companies to examine their supply chains more closely, ensuring that their operations do not contribute to human rights abuses. Key regulatory frameworks, such as the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) in the European Union and the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act in the United States, have amplified the legal requirements for companies to disclose and address potential human rights violations, including forced labor and slavery.
1. Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD): A Landmark Legal Shift in Europe
In July 2024, the European Union passed the CSDDD, a landmark regulation that mandates companies to identify and prevent human rights abuses across their supply chains. The directive applies to European companies, as well as non-EU companies with significant turnover in the EU, requiring them to conduct human rights due diligence, particularly in the sourcing of raw materials and product manufacturing.
The CSDDD builds upon existing human rights due diligence laws already enforced in France, Germany, and the Netherlands, but expands its scope to cover a wider range of sectors and geographies. While the directive is not set to take full effect until 2027, it has already started to influence the business world. Many large global companies, including those in the US, UK, and beyond, have begun incorporating language into their regulatory filings warning investors about the looming regulatory changes.
For companies, failing to comply with CSDDD requirements could lead to significant legal consequences. As noted by the Minderoo Foundation, companies that ignore modern slavery concerns risk facing growing legal challenges. Investors are increasingly focusing on the risks posed by non-compliance, viewing corporate respect for human rights as an essential component of ethical business practices.
2. Global Implications of Modern Slavery Regulations: The US Example
Parallel to the EU’s efforts, the US government has enacted the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (2021), which targets forced labor allegations tied to the Xinjiang region in China. This law prohibits the importation of goods produced using forced labor from the region, unless companies can demonstrate that their goods were not produced using such labor. Since its implementation, the US Customs and Border Protection agency has stopped over 4,000 shipments of goods valued at over $3.6 billion for enforcement review, underscoring the intensity of the regulatory scrutiny.
These developments have raised significant concerns for businesses. In May 2024, a US Senate report found that BMW and Jaguar Land Rover were importing vehicles with components linked to Uyghur forced labor. The findings revealed that BMW had imported approximately 8,000 Mini Cooper cars containing parts made by a Chinese company that was blacklisted under US law. Jaguar Land Rover faced similar issues, continuing to import components even after being notified about the forced labor allegations. Both companies acknowledged the issue and began taking corrective actions to meet compliance standards.
3. Historical Context: A Legacy of Corporate Responsibility
The regulatory focus on human rights and slavery is not a new phenomenon. The 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act introduced a due diligence requirement for companies to disclose whether their products contained “conflict minerals” sourced from conflict zones, particularly in the Democratic Republic of Congo. This marked a shift toward more stringent corporate transparency in global supply chains.
Another early initiative aimed at addressing human rights abuses in the mineral supply chain was the Kimberley Process, established in 2003 to combat the trade in “blood diamonds” used to finance violent conflicts in Africa. While the Kimberley Process focused specifically on the diamond industry, its broader impact set the stage for modern laws regulating corporate responsibility in relation to human rights abuses.
4. Challenges of Compliance and Legal Risks for Multinationals
With the global shift towards greater transparency and accountability, multinational corporations face significant challenges in ensuring compliance with both local and international human rights laws. Companies operating in multiple jurisdictions must navigate a complex web of regulations. For instance, the CSDDD is set to affect companies operating not only in the EU but also those with significant turnover in the region, requiring compliance across different legal landscapes.
David Birchall, a senior lecturer at Macquarie University in Australia, highlights that many companies have yet to take meaningful action to comply with the CSDDD, even though the regulation will not be enforced until 2027. However, companies operating in jurisdictions with pre-existing human rights due diligence laws, such as Volkswagen in Germany, are already putting in place measures to comply with these regulations.
Birchall emphasizes the complexity of compliance, noting that it depends on factors such as the company’s sector, size, and geographical presence. While global companies are accustomed to navigating a patchwork of local laws, the CSDDD adds a new layer of complexity by imposing broader and often stricter requirements.
5. Political and Legal Uncertainties in the US and Europe
The future of human rights regulations in both the US and Europe is not entirely certain. In the US, it remains unclear whether the incoming administration will seek to exempt American companies from the CSDDD or other similar European regulations. There is, however, bipartisan support in Congress for tougher measures to combat forced labor, particularly concerning the treatment of Uyghurs in China.
While the Trump administration previously rolled back certain corporate transparency laws, such as the anti-corruption provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act, Republican support for the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act indicates continued bipartisan support for human rights legislation related to forced labor. However, there are concerns about how such laws will be enforced, particularly under political climates that may view these regulations as geopolitically motivated.
In Europe, the CSDDD still requires adoption into national laws by member countries, and its implementation may face delays depending on political shifts. The rise of right-wing political movements in some EU countries could impact how the CSDDD is transposed into domestic law and enforced. Legal experts, such as Rachel Chambers from the University of Connecticut, note that these political dynamics could influence the degree to which the directive is implemented effectively.
Conclusion
As the global regulatory environment evolves to combat modern slavery, companies and investors must pay close attention to their compliance obligations. The CSDDD in Europe and the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act in the US represent just two facets of an emerging legal landscape that demands greater corporate accountability for human rights. While these regulations are still in the early stages of implementation, they will have far-reaching consequences for global businesses and investors. The push for ethical business practices is gaining momentum, and companies that fail to adapt to these changes may face significant legal and reputational risks in the future.
Related articles:
New U.S. Consumer Privacy Laws: Key Updates And Regulatory Challenges For 2024-2026
The Evolution Of U.S. Climate Legislation: A Focus On New Laws And Regulations
What Is Assignment And Assumption Agreement?