Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

You are here: Home / Case database / Human Rights Law Centre vs. Rio Tinto

Guideline: Commentary Ch. IV Paragraph 46

Description When enterprises identify through their human rights due diligence process or other means that they have caused or contributed to an adverse impact, the Guidelines recommend that enterprises have processes in place to enable remediation. Some situations require cooperation with judicial or State-based non-judicial mechanisms. In others, operational-level grievance mechanisms for those potentially impacted by enterprises’ activities can be an effective means of providing for such processes when they meet the core criteria of: legitimacy, accessibility, predictability, equitability, compatibility with the Guidelines and transparency, and are based on dialogue and engagement with a view to seeking agreed solutions. Such mechanisms can be administered by an enterprise alone or in collaboration with other stakeholders and can be a source of continuous learning. Operationallevel grievance mechanisms should not be used to undermine the role of trade unions in addressing labour-related disputes, nor should such mechanisms preclude access to judicial or non-judicial grievance mechanisms, including the National Contact Points under the Guidelines.

1 cases relating to 'Commentary Ch. IV Paragraph 46':

Title Issue Date filed Status
Human Rights Law Centre vs. Rio Tinto Rio Tinto former mine pollution impacts indigenous PNG commu 29 September 2020 Pending

Personal tools

OECD Watch is hosted by