View previous stories
	Rights groups express alarm over changes to transparency rules for oil and mining industries by Global Witness, Publish What You Pay Coalition   Feb. 2017   Proposed U.S. executive order would allow US firms to sell ''conflict minerals''. (Guardian News)   The Trump administration has prepared a new executive order that would extinguish regulatory controls designed to prevent US companies profiting from and encouraging the spread of “conflict minerals” that are inflaming violence in Congo.   A draft executive order, composed last week and obtained by the Guardian, proposes a two-year suspension of a portion of the Dodd-Frank financial reforms that requires US firms to carry out due diligence to ensure that the products they sell include no minerals mined in the Democratic Republic of the Congo or neighbouring countries. The regulation was widely applauded as a mainstay of attempts to cut the umbilical chord between big business and violent warlords who have spread unrest throughout the Congo and caused the deaths of more than five million people since the 1990s.   The draft order claims that it is temporarily scrapping the rule, contained in section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act that was introduced in 2010, "out of concern for human rights" in the war-torn African country. It alleges that there is “mounting evidence” that the obligation on US firms to prove to regulators that they are not involved in blood minerals has “caused harm to some parties in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and have thereby contributed to instability in the region and threatened the national security interest of the United States”.   The draft continues in similar vein that “this Executive Order recognizes that humanitarian missions play an important role in the President’s responsibility to defend the national security interests of the United States”.   But international aid groups working with the Congolese victims of conflict minerals – such as blood diamonds and the mining of coltan that is widely used in mobile phones and other tech gadgetry – have lashed out at the proposal, saying that far from being a humanitarian measure it would embolden armed groups and the unscrupulous businesses in cahoots with them.   Global Witness, which for years has investigated the role of mining in fuelling violence in eastern Congo, said that were the draft executive order put into effect it would be a “gift to companies wanting to do business with the criminal and the corrupt”.   The group added: “This law helps stop US companies funding conflict and human rights abuses in the Democratic Republic of Congo and surrounding countries. Suspending it will benefit secretive and corrupt business practices.”   In Global Witness’s analysis, contrary to the draft’s allegation that the Dodd-Frank regulation had increased instability in the region, responsible business practice was now beginning to spread in eastern Congo.   “This action could reverse that progress. It is an abuse of power that the Trump Administration is claiming that the law should be suspended through a national security exemption intended for emergency purposes. Suspending this provision could actually undermine US national security.”   Perhaps anticipating an outcry from human rights groups, the draft order says that it will replace the regulatory efforts of Dodd-Frank with a new plan to tackle human rights violations and the funding of armed groups in the Congo. It gives the state department and the treasury 180 days to come up with a new proposal that would more effectively target specific companies known to be engaging in illegal activities.   The conflict minerals law, first reported by Reuters, seeks to help stop mineral trading that inflames violence in central Africa. It requires companies to check whether they are funding conflict or human rights abuses through their purchases of minerals, including tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold.   Several products sold in the US contain these minerals, from jewelry and planes to laptops and mobile phones.   http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/08/trump-administration-order-conflict-mineral-regulations http://www.globalwitness.org/en-gb/press-releases/executive-order-suspending-us-conflict-minerals-law-would-be-gift-warlords-and-corrupt-businesses-says-global-witness/   3 Feb. 2017   U.S. Congress votes for overturning historic transparency law in gift to big oil. (Global Witness)   Today’s decision by the Republican-led U.S. Senate to overturn a rule designed to stop oil companies striking corrupt deals with foreign governments is a grave threat to U.S. national security and an astonishing gift to big oil, said Global Witness. The news comes just two days after Rex Tillerson, a longstanding opponent of the law while CEO of ExxonMobil, was confirmed as Secretary of State.   The oil industry has been plagued by corruption. Alongside a broader anti-regulatory push and Mr. Trump’s failure to address his own conflicts of interest, this vote to roll back efforts to bring oil deals into the open is another sign of the rapid erosion of U.S. democratic safeguards in favor of big business.   The law, known as the Cardin-Lugar transparency provision, requires U.S.-listed extractive companies like Exxon, Chevron and several Chinese oil majors to publish details of the hundreds of billions of dollars they pay to governments across the world in return for rights to natural resources.   Bringing shady oil deals to light should help ensure these vast public revenues benefit all instead of lining the pockets of corrupt elites. However, this week, Congress voted to rescind the implementing regulation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, with the House of Representatives voting on Wednesday and the Senate voting earlier today.   “As Exxon CEO, Rex Tillerson did everything in his power to gut this law, because it doesn’t suit big oil’s dodgey business model. Now he’s Secretary of State, Congress has immediately sanctioned corruption by green lighting secret deals between oil companies and despots. These deals deprive some of the world’s poorest people of oil wealth that is rightfully theirs.   Given the President’s many conflicts of interest and his administration’s broad attacks on regulation, it appears our institutions are increasingly being abused to further the business interests of a powerful few,” said Corinna Gilfillan, Head of U.S. Office of Global Witness.   This move sets the U.S. in opposition to a broader global trend toward greater transparency and accountability in how oil, gas and mining revenues are managed.   Thirty other major economies around the world, including the UK, Canada, Norway and all 27 members of the European Union – have laws requiring their oil, gas and mining companies to disclose their payments to governments.   Dozens of major European and Russian oil companies have already published their payments to governments. Claims made by the oil lobby that greater transparency will harm U.S. oil companies’ competitiveness has proven untrue.   Global Witness notes with concern the complete fabrication of facts by the Republican leadership in their presentations about the Cardin-Lugar transparency provision. They have relied on the American Petroleum Institute’s “facts,” which have been discredited over the past six years in multiple fora, while being totally unwilling to hear an alternative view.   This is evidenced by their absence during the actual debate, not to mention the fact that many in the leadership who have pushed this resolution receive vast sums from the oil and gas industry.   “The U.S. has thrown away its global leadership on tackling corruption. Oil, gas and mining companies from other countries have already disclosed over $150 billion in payments under similar rules, meaning citizens can begin to hold their governments to account. If they can do it, you have to ask – what have the U.S. companies got to hide?” said Gilfillan.   The law was finally implemented in 2016 after being passed in 2010 as part of the Dodd Frank reform act. It was implemented following a broad campaign from civil society groups, investors and community leaders all over the world.   Prior to the vote, Bishop Cantu, Chairman of the Committee on International Justice and Peace at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops said, “Transparency in extractive industry payments to governments is important to us as leaders of the Catholic community of faith and institutions that are investors and consumers. We believe these principles, policies, and rules can help protect the lives, dignity and rights of some of the poorest and most vulnerable people on earth. The rules have moral and human consequences as well as economic and political impact.”   As a co-founder of the Publish What You Pay (PWYP) coalition, Global Witness led the global movement behind this law. For two decades our investigations have shown the need for the world’s most corrupt trade to open its books, and our advocacy has helped make that happen. This work led to the passage of the law we’ve today seen undone, as well as similar measures in the UK and EU.   http://www.publishwhatyoupay.org/pwyp-news/us-congress-votes-for-corruption/ http://business-humanrights.org/en/us-congress-introduces-bill-to-undo-dodd-frank-regulations-requiring-oil-gas-mining-firms-to-disclose-payments-to-govts Visit the related web page
	The business and human rights dimension of sustainable development by Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights   UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights: The business and human rights dimension of sustainable development: Embedding “Protect, Respect and Remedy” in SDGs implementation.   Key recommendations to Governments and businesses from the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights.   Human rights are essential to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Simply put, a development path in which human rights are not respected and protected cannot be sustainable, and would render the notion of sustainable development meaningless.   Rightly, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is explicitly grounded in the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, international human rights and labour rights treaties and other instruments, stating that the aim of the SDGs is to “realize the human rights of all”. The SDGs themselves and their targets also cover a wide range of issues that mirror international human rights and labour standards.   Many of the SDGs relate closely to economic, social and cultural rights, including rights focused on health, education, food, shelter, alongside the rights of specific groups such as women, children and indigenous peoples.   In addition, SDG 16 on the need for peaceful, just and inclusive societies emphasizes key civil and political rights, including personal security, access to justice, and fundamental freedoms.   The 2030 Agenda emphasizes that the business sector is a key partner for the United Nations and governments in achieving the SDGs. Notably goal 17 speaks of revitalizing global partnerships for sustainable development, including public-private partnerships.   Paragraph 67 of the 2030 Agenda calls on “all businesses to apply their creativity and innovation to solving sustainable development challenges” and commits States to “foster a dynamic and well-functioning business sector, while protecting labour rights and environmental and health standards in accordance with international standards and agreements and other ongoing related initiatives, such as the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights...”   Respect for human rights must be a cornerstone when envisioning the role that business will play in the pursuit of the SDGs. As a universally agreed global standard for States and companies to ensure that business and investment do not come at the cost of human rights, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights provide an important part of the solution to this challenge.   Based on the three pillars of “Protect, Respect and Remedy”, they clarify that: States have a duty to protect human rights, including against abuse by business; businesses have a responsibility to respect human rights throughout their activities and business relationships; and that victims of business-related human rights impacts must have access to remedy.   The corporate responsibility to respect human rights applies to all businesses regardless of their size, sector, operational context, ownership and structure.   Both the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda explicitly cite the Guiding Principles and the need to protect rights in the context of private sector contributions to solving sustainable development challenges. Much work remains to be done, however, to translate the SDGs into action by States and businesses in a manner that is consistent with international human rights standards. This includes ensuring that partnership activities involving the business sector are based on respect for human rights.   * Access the 10 key recommendations to Governments and businesses from the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights: http://bit.ly/2h5RYnX   Monitoring corruption and anti-corruption in the Sustainable Development Goals - Transparency International   As part of its follow-up and review mechanisms for the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), member states are encouraged to conduct regular national reviews of progress made towards the achievement of these goals through an inclusive, voluntary and country-led process.   This 100 page guide is intended to explain the role of civil society organisations in monitoring corruption in the SDGs, as well as how to identify potential indicators and data sources for this purpose. Throughout the guide, there are country examples of indicator selection, inclusive follow-up review processes and approaches to corruption monitoring: http://bit.ly/2xQGdvc Visit the related web page
	View more stories