A/HRC/44/32 I. Introduction 1. In 2013, as part of its mandate to advance the promotion and protection of human rights globally, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) initiated a process aimed at strengthening the implementation of the access to remedy pillar of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. 1 2. In its resolution 26/22, the Human Rights Council requested the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to continue work on improving access to remedy and to report back to the Council. In November 2014, and pursuant to that mandate, OHCHR launched the Accountability and Remedy Project.2 The first phase of the project explored the role and use of judicial mechanisms with a view to enhancing the effectiveness of such mechanisms in cases of business-related human rights abuse. The High Commissioner submitted a report thereon to the Council at its thirty-second session.3 3. In its resolution 32/10, the Human Rights Council welcomed the above-mentioned report and requested the High Commissioner to continue work on improving accountability and access to remedy, and in particular to identify ways to improve the effectiveness of Statebased non-judicial mechanisms that are relevant to respect by business enterprises for human rights. In June 2018, the High Commissioner submitted a report on that second phase of the project to the Council at its thirty-eighth session.4 4. In its resolution 38/13, the Council welcomed that report and further requested the High Commissioner “to identify and analyse challenges, opportunities, best practices and lessons learned with regard to non-State-based grievance mechanisms that are relevant to the respect by business enterprises for human rights”. The work carried out by OHCHR pursuant to that request comprises the third phase of the Accountability and Remedy Project, which is the subject of the present report. II. Accountability and access to remedy: the contribution of non-State-based grievance mechanisms 5. When business-related human rights abuses occur, those affected must have access to effective remedy. Ensuring accountability of business enterprises and access to effective remedy for those affected is a vital part of a State’s duty to protect against business-related human rights abuse, as required under international human rights law and as reflected in the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.5 6. While effective judicial mechanisms should be “at the core of ensuring access to remedy”,6 administrative, legislative and other non-judicial mechanisms play an essential role in complementing and supplementing judicial mechanisms. Effective non-State-based grievance mechanisms offer potential benefits “such as speed of access and remediation, reduced costs and/or transnational reach”,7 and, moreover, have a particular role to play in cases where a grievance may not readily provide the basis for legal enforcement or a legal claim. The Guiding Principles call on business enterprises to establish or participate in effective operational-level grievance mechanisms, noting their potential contributions to human rights due diligence processes. 8 Furthermore, the Guiding Principles highlight how important it is that collaborative initiatives ensure the availability of effective mechanisms to help enable remedy.9 7. At present, however, few non-State-based grievance mechanisms are fulfilling their envisaged role. While there have been welcome attempts to design and operate various kinds 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A/HRC/17/31, annex. See www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/OHCHRaccountabilityandremedyproject.aspx. A/HRC/32/19 and A/HRC/32/19/Add.1. A/HRC/38/20 and A/HRC/38/20/Add.1. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, principle 25 and commentary. Ibid., principle 26 and commentary. Ibid., principle 28 and commentary. Ibid., principle 29 and commentary. Ibid., principle 30 and commentary. 3