A/HRC/45/9/Add.1 company may contribute to adverse impacts through the use of private security at different levels of the supply chain. 35. In 2015, a coalition of Swiss civil society organizations launched a public initiative to hold Swiss companies to account for human rights abuses committed abroad. The Swiss Responsible Business Initiative 20 obtained well over the required 120,000 signatures to trigger a citizen initiative. It seeks to introduce a partial amendment to the Constitution to include mandatory human rights due diligence. At the time of the visit, the Swiss Parliament was deliberating a counter-proposal containing elements from the Initiative with a more limited scope. While private military and security companies did not feature in the debate, any law concerning Swiss companies operating abroad could affect them, in addition to the Federal Act on Private Security Services Provided Abroad. The Working Group strongly supports any initiative that would strengthen human rights due diligence and supply chain liability in Switzerland, including for operations of Swiss-based private military and security companies abroad. 5. An international legally binding instrument 36. In parallel to the development of the above-mentioned non-binding initiatives on private military and security companies, there has been, since 2010, a process within the Human Rights Council to consider the possibility of elaborating an international regulatory framework on the regulation, monitoring and oversight of the activities of private military and security companies, including potentially an international legally binding instrument. During the visit, officials told the delegation that Switzerland considered the abovementioned non-binding initiatives as complementary to an international regulatory framework, and noted that, for some stakeholders, it appeared important to reach an agreement on the content of an international regulatory framework before focusing on the nature thereof. Officials also elaborated on the positive aspects of these initiatives, such as inclusiveness, speed, and their apolitical and humanitarian nature. Nevertheless, it is important to note that, while extremely worthwhile, these initiatives are subject to critical limitations, particularly in relation to their narrow scope, the small number of States and companies that have committed to them, and their limited effectiveness in securing accountability and effective remedies for victims of abuses. B. Regulation of Swiss-based private military and security companies operating abroad 1. Aims and scope of application of the regulation 37. Switzerland’s reflections on better regulation for private military and security companies operating abroad were initiated in 2005. Three reports were adopted between 2005 and 2010 to scope the issue, which gained traction in 2010 when it was reported in the media that a holding company of a large private military and security company had moved to Switzerland. The activities of the private military and security company abroad were deemed not to be in conformity with Swiss foreign policy principles and objectives. This generated a sense of urgency to legally restrict the kinds of services that could be provided by Swiss companies abroad. As a result, the Federal Act on Private Security Services Provided Abroad, of 27 September 2013, was adopted, and the Act and its accompanying ordinance entered into force on 1 September 2015.21 The company in question subsequently left Switzerland. 38. Positively, compliance with international law, and in particular human rights law and international humanitarian law, is one of the Act’s four objectives (art. 1), against which activities are assessed on a case-by-case basis. The other three objectives are to contribute to: safeguarding the internal and external security of Switzerland; realizing the 20 21 8 See https://corporatejustice.ch. See www.eda.admin.ch/eda/en/home/foreign-policy/security-policy/bundesgesetz-ueber-die-imausland-erbrachten-privaten-sicherheit.html.