_(27843153986).jpg)
The Russian war in Ukraine has, in addition to the COVID-19 global pandemic, once again highlighted the need for corporate human rights and environmental due diligence (HREDD) regulation, such as the proposed EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD).
After the start of the Russian invasion, many European companies struggled with the challenges of conducting business in the region responsibly. Issues arose in relation to the provision of essential services to affected people; engagment with employees on safety, protective measures, salaries and relocations; alongside highly-publicised questions over whether, when and how to responsibly exit the Russian and Belarussian markets. (As of early June 2022, almost 1000 companies have announced their withdrawal from Russia).
The type of business relationships European companies maintained in Russia prior to the war (the provision of technology services to the Russian military, for example); how companies reacted immediately after the invasion; and how they continue to react is significant and, in many cases, has been costly to affected persons as well as companies themselves.
The scale and divergent nature of these reactions show the urgent need for crosssectoral HREDD obligations in order to ensure common standards of responsible business conduct and private sector preparedness in the face of future crises.
A new study by the Frank Bold expert group analyses the legal regulation of community energy in EU member states down to the practical implementation. In response, it presents seven specific recommendations to improve the legislation of energy laws, as well as the planned implementing regulations.
Last Friday, we submitted our recommendations to the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB)’s agenda priorities.
Today, the European Parliament has adopted its negotiating position on the proposal for a Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). A majority of 366 Members of the Parliament voted in favour of almost all the amendments endorsed by the Committee on Legal Affairs in April, with 225 votes against and 38 abstentions.