Morning session

The 11th session of the Open-Ended Intergovernmental Working Group (OEIGWG) opened today in Geneva. Peggy Hicks, Director of the Thematic Engagement, Special Procedures and Right to Development Division of the OHCHR, noted that despite some challenges, corporate accountability is showing promising advancements, reflected in national legislation, corporate alignment with international human rights standards, and promising jurisprudential developments. In this context, the legally binding instrument (LBI) offers an opportunity to establish clear standards for business, ensure a level playing field, and affirm that human rights are central to economic governance. Pichamon Yeophantong, Chairperson of the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights, stressed that the LBI remains vital to corporate accountability given uneven legal development across regions and even regressions in some, and that it must remain moored to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). She called for “cooperation grounded in solidarity” to weather the intersecting crises of our time.

The Chairperson-Rapporteur highlighted that the process represents an “exceptional opportunity” to consolidate progress in strengthening international law, while ensuring prevention, access to justice, and reparations for victims and increasing legal certainty for all stakeholders, including business.

The EU voiced support for an international legal framework on business and human rights, calling for it to avoid “unnecessary burdens” on companies and to integrate environmental protection.

The Gulf Cooperation Council, explained it would support an instrument that does not impact on other international instruments, particularly investment treaties, while emphasising voluntary commitments rather than obligations and respect for sovereignty.

Many Latin American states, including Mexico, Brazil and Honduras, along with South Africa, Indonesia, Egypt and Palestine voiced strong commitment to the LBI, while Colombia and Uruguay also underscored the need for specific measures to protect vulnerable groups such as women, children, Indigenous Peoples, and persons with disabilities.

Other stakeholders then delivered opening statements. The International Chamber of Commerce raised concerns over various aspects of the draft LBI, such as the need to align with the UNGPs, as well as the fact that it applies to all businesses (not only transnational corporations (TNCs)). The Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions deemed the treaty essential to closing regulatory gaps in global supply chains. Civil society organisations (CSOs) called for progress toward adoption and for the text to reflect the perspectives and needs of vulnerable groups.

The recording of the morning session is available on UN TV here.

Afternoon session

The afternoon session continued with CSOs’ general statements. They reiterated the need for a binding treaty that responds to the lived realities of Indigenous Peoples and other vulnerable groups. They warned that the treaty process cannot be rushed for political expediency, nor the draft watered down for the sake of consensus. CSOs highlighted the complicity of TNCs in abuses linked to conflict and occupation, and called on states to adopt mandatory conflict-sensitive due diligence, recognise forum necessitatis, and address power asymmetries between states and corporations.

Plenary negotiations then turned to Articles 12 (mutual legal assistance) and 13 (international cooperation). Many states, including Colombia, stressed the importance of mutual legal assistance and international cooperation for securing justice, while others, such as Japan, Saudi Arabia, and the UK, sought to limit obligations by conditioning cooperation on domestic legal systems. Palestine emphasised Article12 as the treaty’s procedural backbone.

Business organisations, including the International Organisation of Employers and the US Council for International Business, cautioned that Articles 12 and 13 could cause economic harm, lacked sufficient consultation with business, and should either align fully with the UNGPs or be removed. NGOs denounced efforts to weaken Article 12 by making information sharing discretionary rather than mandatory, and cautioned that diluting the article would undermine access to remedy.

Tomorrow NGOs will make further submissions on Article 13, and legal experts will be given the opportunity to respond to states’ questions.

The recording of the afternoon session is available on UN TV here.