European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights e.V. (ECCHR)

Will the #CSU& #CDU start their election campaign by accepting votes by Nazis against a #CSU law? The series, "𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫-𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐤𝐒𝐆" continues. The upcoming episode could be called "𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐝𝐥𝐲 𝐛𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬-𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝." - if that episode would not have been played so many times already. Lets take a look at the what happened in previous seasons and episodes and what the future might bring: #2020: The German #NAP evaluation shows that businesses do not implement voluntary standards on BHR, so the coalition of CDU, CSU and SPD starts a legislative procedure; in other news, the EU Council decides that it wants to push for a European Law. #2021: Under the leadership of CSU minister Gerd Müller and SPD`s Hubertus Heil, the coalition propose a law, the LkSG. Several CDU & CSU parliamentarians argue for an economy that puts, in a christian ethics way, humans and their needs at its heart. The law is passed with the votes of CDU, CSU, SPD and the greens. #2022: German companies start investing in cross-functional projects, building BHR expertise, building tools and procedures to fulfill the LkSG. At the same time, the EU starts its legislative procedure for the CSDDD. The CSDDD`s text is based to at least 70% on the LkSG. #2023: The LkSG enters into force, German companies face the task of implementing the new and complex rules. They are unfortunately sometimes advised to take burocratic rick-boxing approaches of compliance that ignore the risk-based approach - leading to the creation of the legend of the mystical bureaucracy monster. #2024: The CSDDD is finally adapted. A lot of attention worldwide and EU-wide turns to German BHR practice, for guidance, for inspiration, for lessons learned from mistakes and successes. And first positive impacts can be seen: labour unions in many countries say they are heard more, exploited truckers in Germany receive remedy, corporate culture starts shifting, burocratic tick-boxing slowly starts to wither and to evolve into risk-based due diligence. All this puts us on a pathway to BHR practice that will be 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐛𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐬 𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬. #2025 could be many things. It could be a year in which responsible parties of a new government evaluate where LkSG practice was effective and where it was too burocratic. They could use CSDDD and CSRD to make changes in the spirit of the risk-based approach, helping German companies mature their approaches and being a 𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐬𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐄𝐔 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐠𝐥𝐨𝐛𝐚𝐥 𝐁𝐇𝐑 𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞. Or it could be the year in which 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐯𝐨𝐭𝐞 accept votes by 𝐍𝐚𝐳𝐢𝐬 to destroy investments companies have done to soften the rough edges of the globalized economy and make it more humane. What 2025 do you want?

The courageous actions of ‘Caesar’, a defector from the Syrian military police, were fundamental in coming to terms with the crimes of the Syrian regime in Europe. He has now been deservedly awarded the French Human Rights Prize for his efforts 👏 https://lnkd.in/dCb-4CnV Between 2011 and 2013, ‘Caesar’ took over 20,000 photos in a Syrian government detention centre. They show lifeless bodies of killed and tortured prisoners. Years later, many relatives were able to identify their family members from the photos. The so-called Caesar photos are thus unique proof of the systematic nature of the Syrian government's torture and killing machinery. They served as key evidence in the world's first trial against two perpetrators of the Assad regime before the Koblenz Higher Regional Court. They have also been used in many other proceedings, for example at the Higher Regional Courts of Hamburg, Frankfurt and Stuttgart. 🏆 ‘The award recognises the fact that Caesar smuggled the evidence of Assad's death machine out of Syria at personal risk. He therefore deserves great thanks for uncovering and contributing to the legal reappraisal of the crimes’, says Patrick Kroker, Caesar's lawyer.

Today, ECCHR is at the Assembly of States Parties of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. The central topics are double standards in international law and the severe limitations on the ability to prosecute crimes of aggression. Unlike the other core crimes under international law – war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity – the ICC faces obstacles when it comes to the crime of aggression unless referred to by the UN Security Council: If the attacking or the attacked state is not a party to the Rome Statute, the ICC has no jurisdiction. And even if both states are parties, they can currently refuse to recognize the court's jurisdiction. These gaps enable aggressors to go unpunished and undermine the effectiveness of international law. To be able to prosecute aggressors more consistently, the ICC must have the same jurisdiction over crimes of aggression as it has over the other core international crimes. The review of the ICC's jurisdiction over the crime of aggression planned for 2025 provides an opportunity to make this change. So far, the reform has been supported by around 30 states (including Germany). Without the necessary political will, this historic opportunity could be wasted – with devastating consequences for international criminal law and global justice. Together with other civil society organizations, ECCHR is calling on all states parties to support this long-overdue reform. Read more in our statement. During the 23rd Assembly of States Parties of the ICC, ECCHR and other civil society, academic and political actors are hosting the event Reviewing the ICC's Jurisdiction over the Crime of Aggression: Addressing a Double Standard in International Law. The aim of the discussion is to identify ways to reform the ICC's jurisdiction. More about the event 👉 https://lnkd.in/di9DNEZm

Unser Kollege Dr. Alexander Schwarz war im Podcast "Über Israel und Palästina sprechen" zu Gast. Hört mal rein! ▶️ https://lnkd.in/dcz5kqrc

🌱Argentinien, Brasilien, Paraguay und Bolivien zählen zu den Top 10 Sojaproduzenten der Welt. Doch hinter dem intensiven Sojaanbau steckt ein zerstörerisches Agrarmodell. Die Dokumentarreihe „Por la Tierra – Im Namen der Erde“ zeigt, wie Gesundheit, Umwelt, Ernährungssicherheit und Landrechte durch dieses Modell gefährdet werden. 👉 Seht euch hier den Trailer (mit Englischen Untertiteln) an: https://lnkd.in/dSqnYSC4 Anhand von Geschichten aus den vier südamerikanischen Ländern wird unter Regie von Irene Kuten erzählt, wie das Vordringen der Agrarindustrie, Umwelt und Menschenrechte bedroht und wie lokale Gemeinschaften Widerstand leisten. Ihre Stimmen sind entscheidend, um Missstände aufzudecken und für eine gerechte und nachhaltige Zukunft einzustehen. Wir gehen juristisch gegen europäische Agrarkonzerne wie die Bayer AG vor. Sie tragen maßgeblich zur systematischen Umweltzerstörung und zu Menschenrechtsverletzungen in der Region bei. Mehr zu unserer gemeinsamen Beschwerde mit dem Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales CELS, Terra de Direitos, BASE-IS, Fundación TIERRA und Misereor gegen Bayer: https://lnkd.in/dJzXc-Cx

And thank you so much to the (all 💥 women!) organizing committee for inviting me once again to NOVA's Annual Conference on Business, Human Rights and the Environment. I said it last year and it's even more true this year, it is one of the rare conferences that attempts and in fact manages to break silos and to cross perspectives on human rights and environmental due diligence, between civil society orgs, engineers, researchers, lawyers, policy makers, and company representatives... More of this is needed, in my view. So well done and thanks to Claire Bright, Céline da Graça Pires, Alison E. Holm, Anaïs Tobalagba, PhD who also did a great job a moderating in a friendly but timely way our session, Ana Santos Duarte and Laura Íñigo Álvarez). Below a summary of one of my great panelist, Céline da Graça Pires who spoke about meaningful stakeholders engagement and what it *really* takes to be more than a nice formulation on paper. I spoke about the negative impacts on the right to health, food, land and a healthy environment associated with agrochemical giant Bayer's distribution and use of genetically modified soy seeds and pesticides, for communities in Bolivia, Brasil, Paraguay and Argentina. 📖 To those who expressed interest in learning more about the OECD National Contact Point complaint that I've introduced in my talk, please read: https://lnkd.in/epjUbGid ✊ The complaint was filed by four civil society organizations from South America, the Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS) from Argentina, Terra de Direitos from Brazil, BASE-IS from Paraguay, Fundación TIERRA from Bolivia, together with Misereor and European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights e.V. (ECCHR). My colleagues Laura Duarte Reyes and Silvia Rojas Castro worked intensively on this complaint for the last 3 years and can answer any detailed question much better than I will be able to :-)

"Anstatt weiterhin daran zu arbeiten, ihre völkerrechtliche Glaubwürdigkeit zu verspielen, sollte sich die Bundesregierung konstruktiv auf die Autorität des Haager Richterspruchs berufen", schreibt Dr. Alexander Schwarz, stellvertretender Programmleiter im Team »Völkerstraftaten und rechtliche Verantwortung«, im neuen deutschland. https://lnkd.in/dSaqj3za

⚖️ The principle of universal jurisdiction empowers national prosecutors to bring perpetrators of serious crimes to justice, breaking through barriers where other efforts have failed. 🌍 In the context of the Global Initiative Against Impunity, we aim to enhance cooperation with EU actors in the coming years to support the effective advancement of universal jurisdiction practices: https://lnkd.in/dQsdgPtT 🤝 Our aim: Strengthening legal frameworks and bolstering investigative and prosecutorial capacities are essential to ensuring that there is no safe haven for those who commit genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Read ECCHR's Policy Brief written by Patrick K., Florentina Pircher and Whitney Nosakhare.

Am 1. Januar wird das deutsche Lieferkettengesetz zwei Jahre alt – als nächstes steht die Umsetzung der EU-Lieferkettenrichtlinie an. Anlass genug für eine Bestandsaufnahme: Letzte Woche haben wir daher als European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights e.V. (ECCHR) gemeinsam mit Misereor, Brot für die Welt, Deutsches Institut für Menschenrechte, Germanwatch e.V., medico international, der Initiative Lieferkettengesetz sowie der European Coalition for Corporate Justice Vertreter*innen aus Zivilgesellschaft, Gewerkschaften, Unternehmen und Regierung zur Veranstaltungsreihe "Zwei Jahre Lieferkettengesetz" nach Berlin eingeladen.   Neben einem Workshop zum Wissenstransfer, wie das Gesetz aus der Perspektive von Rechteinhaber*innen sinnvoll angewendet werden kann, waren die Veranstaltungen vor allem eines: ein dringend notwendiger Ort, um sich sachlich über Erfahrungen rund um das LkSG auszutauschen und Kritik zu formulieren: nicht etwa um das Gesetz abzuschießen, sondern sinnvoll weiterzuentwickeln.   Und Kritik am bestehenden Gesetz und insbesondere der bisherigen Umsetzungspraxis gibt es: Zum Beispiel von unseren gewerkschaftlichen Partnern NTUF und HBWWF aus Pakistan! Noch kennt in Pakistan kaum eine Arbeiter*in oder Gewerkschafter*in das Gesetz oder weiß, wie es angewendet werden kann. Dabei soll das Gesetz doch gerade dem Schutz ihrer Rechte dienen und ihnen die Möglichkeit geben, diese aktiv gegenüber verpflichteten Unternehmen in Europa einzufordern. Auch im Umgang von Unternehmen und des BAFA mit Beschwerden über Rechtsverletzungen fehlt es bisher an Transparenz. Betroffene vor Ort werden häufig kaum in die Verfahren einbezogen und bleiben weitgehend außen vor.   Dabei zeigt das Beispiel Pakistan deutlich: Die enge Einbindung der Betroffenen und gerade auch von Gewerkschaften ist für eine wirksame Umsetzung des Gesetzs von zentraler Bedeutung. Meine Kollegin Sigrun Matthiessen hat dies jüngst in ihrem Feature „Durchs Feuer gegangen“ anschaulich zusammengefasst: https://lnkd.in/dj8FqQFa   Für uns als ECCHR geht es jetzt darum: die weitere Umsetzung des LkSG und der EU-Richtlinie kritisch zu begleiten, aber vor allem gemeinsam mit unseren internationalen Partnern dazu beizutragen, dass Rechteinhabende in den Lieferketten deutscher Unternehmen das Gesetz kennen und ihre Rechte aktiv einfordern können. Denn ja, trotz weiter bestehenden Lücken macht das LkSG einen Unterschied für die Rechteinhabenden – es ist bitter nötig und es zeigt bereits Wirkung. Das Gesetz ist „mehr als nur ein internationaler Kampf gegen Kinderarbeit, Sklaverei und unmenschliche Arbeitsbedingungen“, wie meine Kollegin Miriam Saage-Maaß es auf der Veranstaltung ausdrückte. "Das Lieferkettengesetz zwingt uns anzuerkennen, dass der ehrbare Kaufmann eine Illusion ist und der Markt durch Regeln gezähmt werden muss."