Even though France has adopted a pioneer legal framework to protect human rights from violations resulting from business activities, HRDs are put at risk in the context of two major French companies’ large scale projects. This is not acceptable.
Transnational companies can play a major role in directly perpetrating, contributing to or tolerating different actions of violence against HRDs defending their human rights, environment or land against corporate large-scale projects. Companies are often found deliberately influencing communities’ decision-making on their corporate projects, for instance by promising benefits to selected community members or interfering with participating mechanisms. These divisions and lobbying tactics generate polarization and fuel violent social conflicts. Furthermore, businesses often move forward with their projects despite evident failure of public authorities to guarantee the protection of HRDs and of human rights for the communities affected by such projects.
The cases of rural and indigenous communities in Uganda and Tanzania, and of the Unión Hidalgo indigenous community in Mexico illustrate these trends. Until today, these communities face increasing criminalization, threats and escalating violence, while they are simply trying to defend their land, livelihoods, and human rights.
Both cases are linked to the development of mega-projects by French companies, Total and EDF (Électricité de France). Affected communities and civil society organizations from Mexico and Uganda are seeking justice in France under the French Duty of Vigilance Law (loi sur le devoir de vigilance, 2017). This Law creates a legally binding duty for parent and outsourcing companies to effectively prevent and mitigate the risks of serious violations to human rights, fundamental freedoms, the safety or physical integrity of individuals and the environment caused along their operations worldwide.
In both cases - and in many others - repeated intimidation and an increasing climate of violence prevent affected communities and other stakeholders from freely expressing their concerns about corporate projects. Shrinking of HRD’s civic space undermines their ability to claim and defend their rights, in particular the right to free, prior and informed consent.
As a result, the complainants in both the Total and EDF case argue that the companies did not adequately prevent serious human rights violations caused by their subsidiaries’ and subcontractors’ activities, thus breaching their Duty of Vigilance.
On 27 January 2021, in an expert online meeting on the situation of human rights defenders and the implementation of the French Duty of Vigilance Law, these demands were reinforced by Mary Lawlor, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders: “In 2019, 357 HRDs were killed. Half of them were land, environmental or indigenous rights defenders, facing land-intensive industry projects. There are not only many obstacles for those seeking the defence of their rights, but also little protection available to them.
This is a point to keep at the forefront of our minds when thinking about the implementation of the loi de vigilance.”
For the French Duty of Vigilance Law to develop itsfull potential as a preventative mechanism, a human-rights based approach with a gender and intersectional perspective is required. All stakeholders implementing the Duty of Vigilance Law must take into account the reality and concrete needs of the affected people.
Therefore, we, the undersigned organizations, call:
– on the French courts to fully apply the Duty of Vigilance Law and pay special attention to risks for human rights defenders during the proceedings; in particular by enjoining companies to take precautionary measures to preserve the safety of HRDs until they comply with their Vigilance obligations and effectively prevent further risks for their safety or physical integrity. French Courts should also consider the objective of the Duty of Vigilance Law, driven by the protection of fundamental freedoms;
– on the French government to take measures to ensure the law is better respected, and, in particular, to ensure that companies receiving public funding respect their obligations under the duty of vigilance law, which should include identification of risks for HRDs and effective implementation of prevention and mitigation measures. In cases where these issues are not adequately tackled by companies, the French government should consider ceasing funding to those companies;
– on French and multinational companies to respect and fulfill their new legal duties under the Duty of Vigilance Law. Voluntary commitments to respect human rights often declared by companies are meaningless if not translated into concrete actions.
Concretely, companies must identify in their Vigilance Plan the specific risks for HRDs affected by their projects. They must then list and take appropriate mitigating measures.