"Why Are Monitory Democracies Not Monitoring Supply Chain Slavery?", 28 August 2020

... Now, after 20-30 years of abuse disclosures by corporate watchdogs and media, several Western democracies – and even the EU itself – are developing legislation to address the private sector’s failed supply chain due diligence. Promising parts of the new laws and proposals include the possibility of sanctions for companies and the recognition of remedy for victims, but a key part is missing: Who will monitor? How do we adequately and systemically monitor for supply chain abuses that goes beyond status quo, the flawed private audit efforts and the fragmented civil society efforts. How do we transcend that border?

...

Currently, it is possible to speak about three distinct – private, public and civil society – monitory approaches:

...

Each of these three monitory approaches – private, public and civil society – have merits and flaws, but it is safe to say that none of them are currently meeting the bar for an adequate, systemic and global monitory model.

...

Below, I share some simplified monitory model ideas that might fill the cross-border monitory gap. In brackets, I state the key operator of each model:

#1: The auditor liability model (private sector)

#2: The multitude model (civil society)

#3: The monitory model (civil society legitimized by individual governments)

#4: The mandate model (civil society legitimized by multiple governments)

...

Credible and systemic cross-border supply chain monitoring would serve a threefold purpose by:

1. Having a preventive effect on worker abuses by employers, and empowering worker groups involved in workplace monitory systems.
2. Increasing the pile of labour abuse evidence, which would inform the work of groups who are building lawsuits against companies covered by the new due diligence laws or sharing evidence with relevant authorities who have mandate to act, e.g. the American Customs and Border Protection agency.
3. Distributing more equally and fairly the monitory attention to all companies covered by the new laws. In a lawsuit paradigm, the few companies taken to court receive most of the attention, while the majority fly beneath the radar.