56
silent about or benefi ts from such wrongful acts . ” Furthermore, note that three
forms of complicity can be described (ISO 2010 ):
• Direct complicity, when organizations (incl. enterprises) knowingly assist in the
commission of wrongful acts
• Benefi cial complicity, when organizations (incl. enterprises) benefi t directly
from these wrongful acts committed by someone else
• Silent complicity, when this involves the failure by an organization to raise with
the appropriate authorities the question of systematic or continuous wrongful
acts
It is not surprising that in the ISO 26000 these three forms are related and exemplifi ed with the avoidance of human rights violation.
From these considerations, it is clear that “due diligence” is indeed “a comprehensive, proactive process” for an organizations’ governance in addressing the
issues of social responsibility.
In the Implementation Manual of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Guidelines,
the notion of “due diligence” is used the fi rst time as part of the “governance”
requirements: “Report the highest governance body’s role in the identifi cation and
management of economic, environmental and social impacts, risks, and opportunities. Include the highest governance body’s role in the implementation of due diligence processes.”
For the purposes of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, “due
diligence is understood as the process through which enterprises can identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address their actual and potential adverse
impacts as an integral part of business decision-making and risk management systems . ” In the paragraphs related to the General Policies, it is stressed that “enterprises should” “avoid causing or contributing to adverse impacts on matters covered
by the Guidelines, through their own activities, and address such impacts when they
occur”. The Commentary on the General Policies is explicit on stressing that “own
activities includes their activities in the supply chain”. Furthermore, a Deming
wheel approach is strongly recommended: “In the context of its supply chain, if the
enterprise identifi es a risk of causing an adverse impact, then it should take the necessary steps to cease or prevent that impact.” However “The Guidelines recognise
that there are practical limitations on the ability of enterprises to effect change in the
behaviour of their suppliers.” Note that this is very much related to the sphere of
infl uence mentioned above.
For UN Global Compact “due diligence” is in the fi rst place related to the human
rights principles where “identifying and managing human rights risk will help
business respect human rights and avoid complicity in human rights abuse”.
4 The
concept of “sphere of infl uence” has been introduced as well and is seen to “help
map the scope of a company’s opportunities to support human rights and make the
greatest positive impact”. But it is recognized: “While these opportunities may be
4 See
http://www.unglobalcompact.org/Issues/human_rights/The_UN_SRSG_and_the_UN_
Global_Compact.html (last accessed February 2015).
B. Mazijn and J.-P. Revéret
silent about or benefi ts from such wrongful acts . ” Furthermore, note that three
forms of complicity can be described (ISO 2010 ):
• Direct complicity, when organizations (incl. enterprises) knowingly assist in the
commission of wrongful acts
• Benefi cial complicity, when organizations (incl. enterprises) benefi t directly
from these wrongful acts committed by someone else
• Silent complicity, when this involves the failure by an organization to raise with
the appropriate authorities the question of systematic or continuous wrongful
acts
It is not surprising that in the ISO 26000 these three forms are related and exemplifi ed with the avoidance of human rights violation.
From these considerations, it is clear that “due diligence” is indeed “a comprehensive, proactive process” for an organizations’ governance in addressing the
issues of social responsibility.
In the Implementation Manual of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Guidelines,
the notion of “due diligence” is used the fi rst time as part of the “governance”
requirements: “Report the highest governance body’s role in the identifi cation and
management of economic, environmental and social impacts, risks, and opportunities. Include the highest governance body’s role in the implementation of due diligence processes.”
For the purposes of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, “due
diligence is understood as the process through which enterprises can identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address their actual and potential adverse
impacts as an integral part of business decision-making and risk management systems . ” In the paragraphs related to the General Policies, it is stressed that “enterprises should” “avoid causing or contributing to adverse impacts on matters covered
by the Guidelines, through their own activities, and address such impacts when they
occur”. The Commentary on the General Policies is explicit on stressing that “own
activities includes their activities in the supply chain”. Furthermore, a Deming
wheel approach is strongly recommended: “In the context of its supply chain, if the
enterprise identifi es a risk of causing an adverse impact, then it should take the necessary steps to cease or prevent that impact.” However “The Guidelines recognise
that there are practical limitations on the ability of enterprises to effect change in the
behaviour of their suppliers.” Note that this is very much related to the sphere of
infl uence mentioned above.
For UN Global Compact “due diligence” is in the fi rst place related to the human
rights principles where “identifying and managing human rights risk will help
business respect human rights and avoid complicity in human rights abuse”.
4 The
concept of “sphere of infl uence” has been introduced as well and is seen to “help
map the scope of a company’s opportunities to support human rights and make the
greatest positive impact”. But it is recognized: “While these opportunities may be
4 See
http://www.unglobalcompact.org/Issues/human_rights/The_UN_SRSG_and_the_UN_
Global_Compact.html (last accessed February 2015).
B. Mazijn and J.-P. Revéret