A/HRC/8/16 page 20 forms of child labour and other child exploitation; serious violations of individuals’ rights in situations of war or conflict; severe environmental damages; gross corruption; other particularly serious violations of fundamental ethical norms”.56 66. Thus the concern is not only about investing in companies which may be complicit in abuses but that the Fund may also be considered to have contributed to abuse through its association with such companies.57 67. In recent years it has become increasingly common to see divestment campaigns based on an investor’s stake in a company seen to be directly or indirectly abusing rights.58 Investors will likely base their decisions about such campaigns on their own investment policies and the views of their members. For instance, the Norwegian Government Pension Fund has relied on the Ethical Guidelines to publicly divest from companies based on their alleged complicity in human rights abuses.59 3. Human rights advocacy 68. Over the last decade major international human rights groups have drawn attention to the issue of companies’ indirect involvement in human rights abuses, often employing the term complicity to describe such involvement. In 1998, Amnesty International published its 56 Ibid. 57 For another example of an investment policy dealing with human rights issues, see the Corporate Governance Policy of the Second Swedish National Pension Fund, chapter 10, available at: http://www.ap2.se/template/Page.aspx?id=468. The Special Representative has also learned that in May 2008, ABP, the pension fund for employers and employees in the Dutch Government and educational sector, will publish a responsible investment policy, with the United Nations Global Compact amongst its guiding principles. The policy provides that ABP expects companies in which it invests to follow the Global Compact’s principles, thus effectively requiring that companies must not be complicit in human rights abuses, with divestment a possible consequences of persistent failure to improve practices in this regard. 58 For background information on recent divestment campaigns, see http:// www.business-humanrights.org/Categories/Issues/Investmenttradeglobalisation/Divestment. 59 In 2006, following consideration of allegations that Wal-Mart was “implicit in violations of human rights and labour rights in its business operations”, the Norwegian Ministry of Finance announced the Government Pension Fund’s divestment from the company based on recommendations from the Council of Ethics, which were made pursuant to the Ethical Guidelines. The Ministry said the Fund would “incur an unacceptable risk of contributing to serious or systematic violations of human rights by maintaining its investments in the company”. The 6 June 2006 press release is available at: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/fin/ Press-Center/Press-releases/2006/Two-companies-Wal-Mart-and-Freeport-.html?id=104396.