by Calvin Queant - Geneva Representative for Human Rights Now

The push for stronger due diligence laws

As the global influence of multinational corporations grows, so does the urgency for mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence (mHREDD) laws. With Japan, South Korea and Taiwan being home to some of the world's largest and most influential corporations, these businesses and their extensive supply chains impact numerous communities of workers and their environment beyond the borders of their headquarter countries. Unfortunately, the lack of robust mHREDD legislation has allowed some companies to operate without adequate oversight, leading to human rights abuses and environmental degradation across their supply chains.

A coalition of civil society organisations (CSOs) from Japan, South Korea and Taiwan call for state action on mHREDD laws, urging governments to hold companies like Samsung, Mitsubishi and Formosa Plastics accountable for their actions. This call for change is part of a broader movement to ensure businesses operate responsibly and sustainably, not only for their long-term financial gain, but more importantly for the well-being of the communities and ecosystems they impact.

Supply chain abuses by companies from Japan, South Korea and Taiwan

The tuna industry in Japan, involving major players like Mitsubishi Corporation, has been plagued by supply chain abuses, most prominently forced labour reports. By failing to identify, mitigate and remedy such claims of forced labour, the largest actors of the Japanese tuna industry remain complicit in gross human rights violations, a clear dismissal of the UNGPs. These issues underscore the systemic problems within the industry, from unfair labour practices to environmental degradation, highlighted by a overall lack of transparency and reporting mechanisms.

One other notable example is Samsung’s environmental violations in Vietnam, where weak national regulation on pollutants allowed the South Korean company to cover up violations. These included water pollution and chemical leaks that severely harmed labour forces, all without legal consequences; indeed, neither in the countries where they operate nor in their home states, do adequate mechanisms exist to hold these corporations accountable. This accountability gap allows companies with extensive records of abuses to continue their operations without facing significant consequences, despite their extensive global footprint.

Formosa Plastics Group, from Taiwan, is another multinational with a troubling history in Vietnam. In addition to a lawsuit accusing the company of nearly destroying the aquaculture industry and coastal fisheries in four provinces — notwithstanding health impacts on the local community — citizens, journalists, and bloggers advocating for the company to change its practices have faced prison sentences of up to 20 years. With a total lack of effective legal tools for victims in both Taiwan and Vietnam, companies linked to alleged abuses continue to operate without encountering substantial repercussions, underscoring the importance of implementing laws that can effectively hold corporations accountable for their actions globally, putting an end to this well-known cycle of impunity.

Other Taiwanese companies – including Walsin Lihwa Corporation and Yieh Phui Enterprise –  involved in Indonesian nickel mining have faced criticisms for a high number of work-related accidents and negative environmental impacts. Despite their global presence in sectors such as electronics and semiconductors, there are no effective legal tools for victims overseas to seek justice.

Fearing bureaucratic hurdles in judicial implementation, delocalisation of multinationals due to  loss of competitiveness and the possible abundance of litigations stemming from workforce complaints, governments remain resilient to consider regulatory change. Nonetheless, by implementing stringent regulations within supply chains and learning from potentially successful models like the European Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), Japan, South Korea and Taiwan can better promote corporate responsibility and contribute to the overall goal of sustainable development and human rights protection, allowing for a growing labour force retention and long-term profits.

A call for action

In September 2022, the Japanese Government introduced its Guidelines for Respect for Human Rights in Responsible Supply Chains. While this marks a positive step, it falls significantly short of offering adequate prevention and relief to victims of severe human rights abuses occurring globally. Indeed, these Guidelines are merely advisory. Although some companies might voluntarily adopt these guidelines and engage in human rights due diligence sincerely, their non-binding nature means others may disregard them.

In South Korea, drafted in collaboration with leading Korean NGOs, the Bill on Human Rights and Environmental Protection for Sustainable Business Management was introduced to the National Assembly of Korea on 1 September 2023 (Korean version of the Bill). While this bill could have marked a significant milestone as Asia's first HRDD legislation, it was ultimately discarded. Along with the country's recent political turmoil, the prospect of such legislation seems uncertain, yet the demand and support from civil society, academia, public institutions, and international organisations continue to grow stronger.

Civil society organisations work tirelessly to raise awareness about corporate misconduct, support affected communities and push for legislative change. These efforts are instrumental in holding corporations accountable and ensuring the voices of those impacted by corporate actions are heard. The call for robust, binding mHREDD legislation in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan is now loud and clear. However, much work remains to be done, as it is essential for governments, businesses and civil society to collaborate to ensure effective implementation.

Amid the political instability of the new Omnibus proposal, presently affecting the effectiveness and timely implementation of the European CSDDD, it should be reiterated that implementing this Directive will not only contribute to corporate accountability for the EU market, but also serve as the essential basis for transitioning the global market as a whole towards the principles envisioned by the UNGPs.

Advocating for stronger mHREDD laws in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan is crucial to ensure responsible corporate practices as a moral imperative. Naturally, creating a level playing field for multinationals has the potential to further the interests of stakeholders and rightsholders alike. Yet, only a strong alignment between businesses and CSOs will permit the advocacy necessary for the realisation of such measures. By working together, we can ensure that corporations are held accountable for their actions, promoting a future where business practices align with sustainable and responsible principles for all.