Due Diligence and Due Remedy? A Critical Evaluation of Human Rights Due Diligence in the UN Binding Treaty on Business and Human Rights: Lessons from Marikana and Comparative Case Studies.
(2025) JAMM07 20251Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- The discourse on Business and Human Rights (BHR) has evolved substantially over the past two decades, particularly since the adoption of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) in 2011. While the UNGPs established the corporate responsibility to respect human rights through Human Rights Due Diligence (HRDD), their voluntary nature has resulted in fragmented implementation and persistent accountability gaps. In response, the ongoing negotiations for a UN Binding Treaty on Business and Human Rights aim to establish legally enforceable corporate obligations, including compulsory HRDD and liability for human rights violations.
This thesis critically evaluates whether the HRDD provisions in the 2023 Updated Draft of... (More) - The discourse on Business and Human Rights (BHR) has evolved substantially over the past two decades, particularly since the adoption of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) in 2011. While the UNGPs established the corporate responsibility to respect human rights through Human Rights Due Diligence (HRDD), their voluntary nature has resulted in fragmented implementation and persistent accountability gaps. In response, the ongoing negotiations for a UN Binding Treaty on Business and Human Rights aim to establish legally enforceable corporate obligations, including compulsory HRDD and liability for human rights violations.
This thesis critically evaluates whether the HRDD provisions in the 2023 Updated Draft of the UN Binding Treaty are sufficient to ensure effective access to remedy for victims of corporate-related human rights abuses. Drawing on case studies of the Marikana Massacre (South Africa, 2012), Shell’s operations in the Niger Delta (Nigeria), and the Rana Plaza factory collapse (Bangladesh, 2013), the research demonstrates that HRDD, even when legally mandated, remains predominantly preventative and fails to guarantee enforceable remedies. Structural power imbalances, weak state enforcement, and jurisdictional constraints continue to impede access to justice.
The study argues that HRDD must be complemented by binding liability regimes, extraterritorial enforcement, and victim-centred grievance mechanisms to achieve meaningful corporate accountability. In doing so, it contributes both analytically and prescriptively to the development of the UN Binding Treaty, offering policy recommendations aimed at transforming HRDD from a procedural obligation into a mechanism capable of delivering tangible rights and remedies. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9215236
- author
- Mpedi, Amanda LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- JAMM07 20251
- year
- 2025
- type
- H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
- subject
- language
- English
- id
- 9215236
- date added to LUP
- 2025-11-12 12:12:45
- date last changed
- 2025-11-12 12:12:45
@misc{9215236,
abstract = {{The discourse on Business and Human Rights (BHR) has evolved substantially over the past two decades, particularly since the adoption of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) in 2011. While the UNGPs established the corporate responsibility to respect human rights through Human Rights Due Diligence (HRDD), their voluntary nature has resulted in fragmented implementation and persistent accountability gaps. In response, the ongoing negotiations for a UN Binding Treaty on Business and Human Rights aim to establish legally enforceable corporate obligations, including compulsory HRDD and liability for human rights violations.
This thesis critically evaluates whether the HRDD provisions in the 2023 Updated Draft of the UN Binding Treaty are sufficient to ensure effective access to remedy for victims of corporate-related human rights abuses. Drawing on case studies of the Marikana Massacre (South Africa, 2012), Shell’s operations in the Niger Delta (Nigeria), and the Rana Plaza factory collapse (Bangladesh, 2013), the research demonstrates that HRDD, even when legally mandated, remains predominantly preventative and fails to guarantee enforceable remedies. Structural power imbalances, weak state enforcement, and jurisdictional constraints continue to impede access to justice.
The study argues that HRDD must be complemented by binding liability regimes, extraterritorial enforcement, and victim-centred grievance mechanisms to achieve meaningful corporate accountability. In doing so, it contributes both analytically and prescriptively to the development of the UN Binding Treaty, offering policy recommendations aimed at transforming HRDD from a procedural obligation into a mechanism capable of delivering tangible rights and remedies.}},
author = {{Mpedi, Amanda}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Due Diligence and Due Remedy? A Critical Evaluation of Human Rights Due Diligence in the UN Binding Treaty on Business and Human Rights: Lessons from Marikana and Comparative Case Studies.}},
year = {{2025}},
}