abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb
Article

UK NCP final statement: Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights (LPHR) and G4S PLC, findings and recommendations

The UK NCP considers that actions of G4S before September 2011 are consistent with its obligation under Chapter II Paragraph 2 at that time. This includes the company’s actions in entering into the relationships that are the subject of the complaint. From September 2011, however, the UK NCP considers that the company’s actions are technically inconsistent with its obligation under Chapter II, Paragraph  2 to respect human rights. Similarly, the UK NCP considers that the company’s actions are technically inconsistent its obligation under Chapter IV Paragraph 1 to respect human rights...the technical inconsistency arises because G4S is not adequately meeting a specific obligation that is included within the broad obligation. The UK NCP does not find any broad failure by G4S to respect the human rights of people on whose behalf the complaint is made.  The specific obligation that is not adequately met is the obligation under Chapter IV, Paragraph 3 to seek to address impacts of its business relationships. The UK NCP finds the company’s actions inconsistent with its obligation under Chapter IV, Paragraph 3.

Story Timeline