...14. AI [Amnesty International] expressed concern that Chinese laws and regulations did not reference the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights nor place related human rights due diligence requirements on Chinese companies operating either domestically or overseas. JS28 noted that the scope of the Chinese law was limited to domestic jurisdiction and could not be used to regulate Chinese companies’ operations beyond China’s borders. JS28 urged China to incorporate protections for international human rights standards into new legislation addressing outbound investment and overseas development assistance...Myanmar Alliance for Transparency and Accountability urged China to respect human rights in countries where it maintains business activities, such as through conducting due diligence involving human rights impact assessments, and provide access to effective remedy for those who are negatively impacted by its businesses’ activities.

15. JS3 also emphasized that Chinese mining companies, particularly those involved in the Mirador and San Carlos Panantza projects in Ecuador had engaged in irregular land-acquisition practices, such as irregular purchase without consultation, arbitrary claims of mining rights and filing civil actions against families without property titles. Through such practices and with the support of the security forces, these companies had brought about forced eviction and involuntary displacement of a total of 42 indigenous families.

16. JS14 also highlighted the violations committed by state-owned China National Petroleum Company through their partner BGP Bolivia, which shows their non-compliance to the international human rights standards for the protection of the human rights of indigenous peoples and to agreements emanating from the process of consultation and free, prior and informed consent, including harassment and criminalization of indigenous social and environmental monitors...