A/HRC/38/48 25. Having a senior minister advocate for a company is a substantial benefit. States should only advocate for companies that respect human rights and screen requests to make that determination. 26. The Working Group has not received any information about States requiring companies for whom they advocate to demonstrate respect for human rights or further adoption of the Guiding Principles. As noted above, what some States have done is to require companies to make commitments focused on integrity and combating corruption. 27. In Canada trade advocacy may include providing support to a company in interactions with foreign public officials and in certain circumstances in the public sphere generally. This may also include making representations on behalf of the company to foreign public officials, accompanying clients to meetings with foreign public officials, or supporting and/or participating in, events tailored to a particular company. The Government of Canada requires companies seeking such support from its Trade Commissioner Service to sign an integrity declaration. A company must attest that it understands the ethical expectations of Canada and has not been “charged, convicted or sanctioned for bribery or corruption, and will not engage in such illegal activities”. 18 If a company has been sanctioned for bribery, it must disclose past misconduct, which may affect the support it receives from the Government of Canada. 28. The United States International Trade Administration also has an advocacy centre. A company interested in receiving United States advocacy assistance must first file an advocacy questionnaire and anti-bribery agreement with the advocacy centre. The antibribery agreement requires a company to certify that neither the company nor its affiliates will engage in bribery of foreign officials.19 D. Training and guidance for trade and embassy personnel and for businesses 29. OECD has noted in relation to the promotion of responsible business conduct that “for some countries, the NAPs have provided an impetus to step up specific training and capacity building of diplomatic personnel”.20 30. There is still room for greater training and education of trade officers within national export promotion agencies and of those officials working within embassies or missions in host States.21 However, at present this need is not matched by relevant guidance. 31. Existing guidance (for example from the International Trade Centre) mentions the need to train trade representatives on issues relating to combating corruption and fleetingly mentions social compliance and corporate social responsibility as other issues of which trade representatives should be aware, but does not elaborate further on the subject. A trade promotion officer may not feel comfortable providing guidance to companies on human rights risks. The language of risk mitigation in the Guiding Principles and the framework of human rights due diligence therefore provide a useful framework for speaking about the processes companies need to undertake to respect human rights. 32. Germany intends to provide training on its National Action Plan and the Guiding Principles for trade officers in embassies and consulates. The training will enable trade officers to provide support to German companies that wish to exercise human rights due diligence in the respective host countries. Staff members of German export and investment 18 19 20 21 See http://tradecommissioner.gc.ca/how-tcs-can-help-comment-sdc-peut-aider.aspx?lang=eng. See https://2016.export.gov/advocacy/eg_main_092202.asp. See OECD, “Responsible business conduct and economic diplomacy tools. International Trade Centre, Entering New Markets. A Guide for Foreign Trade Representatives” (2013). 7