Reform And Response Of European And American Supply Chain Human Rights Due Diligence Legislation

The formation of global supply chain is the result of the division of labor among different enterprises under the background of globalization of economic development,when enterprises spread their production and operation networks all over the world.At the forefront of the supply chain are some large multinational enterprises,which control the supply chain operation either through capital control or commercial contract relations,and are the core enterprises of the international supply chain.At the end of the chain are the suppliers,mostly in developing countries.Based on economic benefits,core enterprises expand their business scale and reduce production costs through global supply chains,which may lead to serious human rights violations at the supplier end of the supply chain,and core enterprises should be responsible for the adverse human rights impacts of their transnational supply chains.The current international community,with the United Nations 2011 ‘Guiding Principles’ as the core,mainly regulates the core supply chains by stipulating the‘information disclosure’,‘tort liability’ and ‘due diligence’ obligations of enterprises.The ‘due diligence’ obligation regulates human rights abuses by core supply chain companies in their transnational supply chains.Among them,due diligence requires companies to establish due diligence procedures and to prevent and mitigate adverse impacts of company or supply chain activities.The regulatory model of corporate human rights due diligence obligations has evolved from a‘soft law’ mechanism to a mandatory norm,from voluntary compliance by companies to legislation that imposes legal liability on companies.This compulsion is expressed in the form of the legalization of due diligence obligations,and the comprehensive implementation mechanism as one of the content expressions.In recent years,the legislative practice of human rights due diligence in supply chain is mainly reflected in the process of transforming the Guiding Principles of Business and Human Rights into domestic laws in European and American countries.States have shown diverse legislative forms,with different focuses on implementation mechanisms.The UN Guiding Principles first introduced Human Rights Due Diligence as a proper noun and included the human rights impact of supply chains in the scope of regulation,which is a human rights due diligence guidance based on voluntarism.2017 French Corporate Vigilance Law Act,which imposes a duty of care on companies,is human rights due diligence legislation based on civil liability and adopts an enforcement mechanism with a private enforcement mechanism centered on civil damages claims.2021 German Supply Chain Corporate Due Diligence Act,which imposes a due diligence obligation on companies to establish risk management systems,relies on state oversight and enforcement mechanisms and is typical of sanctions-based The2022 EU Draft Directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Obligations provides for a comprehensive corporate due diligence obligation and liability for damages for breach of the obligation,which is a human rights due diligence legislation that balances state sanctions and civil liability.The above-mentioned legislative examples show the trend of making legislation on human rights due diligence obligations mandatory for supply chains in various countries,and its tendency to be protective.In theory,it is the inevitable requirement of the theory of corporate sustainability and the translation of the UN Guiding Principles into domestic law;in reality,it is driven by the governance gap in transnational supply chain jurisdictions,the social demands brought about by large-scale human rights infringement cases,the limited effect of "soft law" mechanisms,and the need to improve the autonomy of supply chains in the context of epidemics.In reality,it is caused by various factors,such as the governance gap between transnational supply chain jurisdictions,social demands brought by large human rights violation cases,the limited effect of "soft law" mechanism,and the game of national interests to improve supply chain autonomy in the context of epidemic.In particular,some European and American countries have used the improper application of domestic laws to impose economic sanctions on China.The legislation of supply chain human rights due diligence obligations in these major countries will objectively have significant impacts on China,including increased compliance costs and litigation risks for Chinese enterprises,conflicts with China’s Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law,and the politicization of supply chain liability issues threatening industrial chain security.The actual impact of the legislative process of each country on Chinese enterprises should be addressed by guiding the strengthening of their own corporate compliance systems and compliance levels.However,we should actively use the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Act to take countermeasures against economic sanctions brought about by the politicization of human rights issues in supply chains.