How socially responsible investors and digital rights groups can drive tech accountability

Human rights defenders and digital rights organisations have often seen investors as funders of rights-violating companies, but what if they could be powerful allies in holding tech companies accountable? A growing network of investors have been joining forces with civil society to highlight company impacts on human rights in private and public company engagements. In turn, human rights organisations can help investors fulfil their fiduciary duties, evolving legal obligations under evolving mandatory due diligence laws, and responsibilities under the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights by identifying, assessing, and mitigating human rights impacts and the associated legal, financial, and operational risks in their portfolios.

While there have been steps to align these different stakeholders, research from the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre (the Resource Centre) also highlights barriers that have hindered meaningful collaboration between these two powerful groups. In order to better understand and address these challenges, Heartland Initiative and the BHRRC collaborated with global majority digital rights groups to develop a reporting template, which aims to translate digital rights defenders’ expertise into actionable insights for investors.

This reporting tool is designed to guide digital rights defenders and organisations on how to document and spotlight surveillance-related harms in a way that resonates with investor audiences. Specifically, the template will help translate on the ground harms into decision useful information that investors can incorporate in sustainability and human rights due diligence frameworks.

Using this reporting template, digital rights defenders and organisations can more effectively:

• Outline the key aspects of an advocacy campaign targeting investors that fund problematic surveillance tech companies
• Prepare for meetings, events or conferences where investors will be present
• Highlight human right risks of portfolio companies to support investors conducting human rights due diligence or offer local insights for investors engaging companies on human rights risks
• Raise concerns with business and human rights consulting firms that have investor clients
• Support journalists to expose companies and investors linked to tech-facilitated human rights abuses.

How can the template help?

The template aims to help digital rights defenders and organisations document key aspects of tech-facilitated human right harm in a way that outlines its material risk to investors. "Material" information refers to any information that could significantly impact an investor's decision to buy, sell, or hold securities or that could affect a company's financial performance, operations, or risk profile. Given the evolving understanding of what constitutes “material” information, human rights risks may be a factor in investors’ decision-making process.

This template does not aim to provide a space for the complete documentation of a tech-facilitated harm taking place, but it ensures that key elements are registered for investors to try to build momentum for individual or coordinated action.

What type of case can the template be used for?

The template can be used to document a single incident, such as spyware being used against a journalist, a surveillance tech company threatening a human rights defender, or a biometric identification system mis-identifying a member of a minority community.

It can also be used to document broader or ongoing human rights situations that involve multiple incidents of abuse, for example the widespread tracking of a minority community followed by intimidation of protestors.

Do we have to answer all the questions?

No. In many cases, there will not be enough information available to answer all questions in the template. It is fine to indicate “not known” within some of the boxes. Ideally, organisations will be able to copy and paste content from pre-existing reports for most of the questions related to background information or the incident or incidents.

However, additional research may be required to establish the critical links connecting:

the harm -> the technology -> the company -> the investor.

Without clear evidence linking the harm to the technology, the company, and ultimately to the investor, it becomes challenging to justify investor engagement, divestment, or policy changes. Guiding questions and tips for conducting research to make links between these business relationships are included throughout the template.

What will happen once the checklist is completed?

This template is a guiding document that can be downloaded and used according to the digital rights organisation’s preferred advocacy strategies—whether that be preparing for meetings with tech companies, contributing to an investor’s due diligence processes, developing a framing for your next report and you’d like to name specific investors, ensuring that journalists have this information to mention financially linked actors to human rights harms in their articles, etc.

If you would like support to identify possible investor engagement opportunities, please send the completed template to [email protected].

We will then be in touch to clarify any details and discuss next steps. These might include:

• Connecting the community/organisation with relevant investor consultants or advocacy organizations, where possible
• Seeking a public response from the companies or investors identified in the template (if there are publicly documented allegations)
• Ensuring that any public documentation of the case is adequately recorded within the Resource Centre database

If I share this template with the Resource Centre, will it be made public?

No. The template is meant to be downloaded and used by digital rights organisations however they see fit. If sent to the Resource Centre, we will not share the templates without the prior consent of the reporting organisation.

What if some of the people involved in the situation are at risk?

Although the template will not be shared publicly by the Resource Centre, we recommend not putting any information in writing that would put someone at risk if leaked. If it is risky to name a local organisation, then we recommend completing the template with an international human rights organisation's support and including cases by mentioning statements such as 'a local human rights organisation has confirmed...' This is a precautionary measure to avoid unnecessary risk.