Task Force on Sports Sponsors. Human Rights Guiding Questions for Sporting Event Sponsors. Draft Not for publication, circulation or citation.

Similar documents
SPORT, SPONSORSHIP AND HUMAN RIGHTS GUIDING QUESTIONS

Sporting Chance White Paper 1.3 Version 1, January Corruption and Human Rights in the Sports Context

Community Development and CSR: Managing Expectations & Balancing Interests

Major Projects and Procurement Committee Charter

SUBMISSION TO THE UNITED NATIONS OFFICE OF HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

Human rights defenders and civic space the business & human rights dimension

OHCHR Consultation: The Relevance of Human Rights Due Diligence to Determinations of Corporate Liability. Concept Note

Sporting Chance White Paper 1.2 Version 1, January Sports Governing Bodies and Human Rights Due Diligence

THE IMPLICATIONS FOR BUSINESSES OF THEIR FAILURE TO RESPECT HUMAN RIGHTS

Report on the 2016 UN Forum on Business and Human Rights

PROPOSAL FOR A UNITED HUMAN RIGHTS STRATEGY. United 2026

Ethics Committee Terms of Reference

20 October International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) International Transport Workers Federation (ITF)

Submission to the. Parliamentary Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade inquiry into Modern Slavery Act in Australia

PLEDGE REALISATION: CHILD LABOUR SELF ASSESSMENT OUTCOMES

Human rights and a global corporation

Panel 2, 1 March. 3-4:30 pm, Conference room 4, UNHQ

Commonwealth Advisory Body on Sport (CABOS)

WEBINAR SUMMARY. Business & Human Rights in ASEAN & China: Trends, Risks and Practices 26 August 2015 OVERVIEW

Report Human rights and mega sporting events Wednesday 18 Friday 20 November 2015 WP1428

Risk Committee Terms of Reference

Human Rights & Business

LESSON 14: Involving the private sector in the corruption prevention strategy

COMPILED RECOMMENDATIONS FROM INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN THE VARIOUS COMMUNICATIONS TO THE WORLD BANK 1

BUYERS. Buyers have a responsibility to adopt the 3-pillar policy, and establish clear operational protocols stating requirements for their suppliers.

Human Rights Policy July Version 2 - FINAL

Principles for an Internationally Legally Binding Instrument on TNC and other Business Enterprises with respect to Human Rights

The Gender Lens to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

Mining Toolkit. In-Migration

Local Governing Bodies: Constitution and Terms of Delegation

Safeguarding against possible conflicts of interest in nutrition programmes

REPORT 2016/063 INTERNAL AUDIT DIVISION. Audit of the operations in Nepal for the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

Inter-American Development Bank. Operational Policy on Indigenous Peoples

Sport and Sports Betting Integrity Action Plan 2018

REPORT BY THE FIFA HUMAN RIGHTS ADVISORY BOARD FIRST REPORT WITH THE ADVISORY BOARD S RECOMMENDATIONS AND AN UPDATE BY FIFA

SUMMARY EQUIVALENCE ASSESSMENT BY POLICY PRINCIPLE AND KEY ELEMENTS

Anti-bribery Policy. Approving Body: Council. Date of Approval: 26 November Policy owner: Director of Finance and Corporate Services

Amended and Restated. Organisational Regulations. Coca-Cola HBC AG

SPORTS DIRECT INTERNATIONAL PLC (THE COMPANY) Adopted by the board on 6 September 2017

THE OPTIONS CLEARING CORPORATION RISK COMMITTEE CHARTER 1

Submission to the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Day of General Discussion, 21 February 2017

3.13. Settlement and Integration Services for Newcomers. Chapter 3 Section. 1.0 Summary. Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration

THE CONCEPT OF DUE DILIGENCE IN THE UN GUIDING PRINCIPLES ON BUSINESS AND HUMAN RIGHTS: REPLY TO PROFESSORS BONNITCHA AND McCORQUODALE*

Industry Agenda. PACI Principles for Countering Corruption

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR MEMBER STATES: BUSINESS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Key Considerations for Implementing Bodies and Oversight Actors

REPORT 2014/154 INTERNAL AUDIT DIVISION

A majority of the members of the Committee must be independent non-executive Directors in accordance with the criteria set out in Annexure A.

A. Involuntary resettlement should be avoided where feasible, or minimized, exploring all viable alternative project designs. B.

Enhancing the Effective Engagement of Indigenous Peoples and Non-Party Stakeholders

Livelihood Restoration in Practice: Key Challenges and Opportunities

Annex II. The Benefits of Integrating Human Rights Risk Information into the World Bank s Due Diligence

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9

Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates (Crime) Invitation to Tender

MARYLAND STADIUM AUTHORITY RESOLUTIONS PROCUREMENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

REPORT 2016/084 INTERNAL AUDIT DIVISION

REVIEW OF THE COMMON CASH FACILITY APPROACH IN JORDAN HEIDI GILERT AND LOIS AUSTIN. The Cash Learning Partnership

HUMAN RIGHTS ADVISORY BOARD TERMS OF REFERENCE NOVEMBER 2016

SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN ISO 9001:2008 (DRAFT INTERNATIONAL STANDARD)

IHRB Submission to the UK Parliament Joint Committee on Human Rights

NORTHERN IRELAND PRACTICE AND EDUCATION COUNCIL FOR NURSING AND MIDWIFERY

INTERNAL AUDIT DIVISION REPORT 2017/105. Audit of the operations in Jordan for the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

Policy/Procedure WORKING WITH INTEGRITY

1. The Primacy of Human Rights

Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. Ambassador Madina Jarbussynova. OSCE Special Representative and Co-ordinator

Audit Quality Committee Terms of Reference

Modern Slavery Statement 2017

WTO TRADE FACILITATION NEGOTIATIONS SUPPORT GUIDE

Ensuring U.S. Businesses Respect Human Rights in Myanmar (Burma)

BRIEFING PAPER: HUMAN RIGHTS DUE DILIGENCE. Robert McCorquodale and Marcos Orellana

THE MODERN SLAVERY ACT

India: Delhi Meerut Regional Rapid Transit System Project

I. General Comments. Submitted by

Policy Summary. Overview Why is the policy required? Awareness and legal compliance with Bribery Act is required to minimise risk to UHI and its staff

NHS Dorset Clinical Commissioning Group s response to the requirements of the Modern Slavery Act 2015

1.1 The Committee operates under delegated authority from the Board.

Helpdesk Research Report: Policies on Displacement and Resettlement

The London Declaration. Declaration on Sport and Human Rights

American Indian & Alaska Native. Tribal Government Policy

Guidance Note 5 Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement

RESETTLEMENT FRAMEWORK. Supplementary Appendix to the Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors. on the

Managing Social Risks and Impacts in Geothermal Projects Turkey Geothermal Development Project

Compensation & Human Resources Committee Mandate. The Committee will assist the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities, by:

ST. JAMES S PLACE PLC RISK COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE

Amnesty International Submission to the World Bank Safeguards Policies Review and Update. 30 April 2013

Governance. Financial Reporting Council. October Governance Bible

PRINCIPLES GOVERNING IPCC WORK

DURHAM REGION TRANSIT ADVISORY COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE

Talent Development Committee. Terms of Reference

ICC Working Group on Business and Human Rights

Law No. 3 of 2005 Promulgating the Law on the Protection of Competition and the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices

Policy Checklist Interim Southern Health & Social Care Trust Safeguarding Vulnerable Adults Policy, Operational Procedures and Guidance

Paper 4.1 Public Health Reform (PHR) Public Health Priorities For Scotland Public Health Oversight Board 19 th April 2018

Anti-Bribery and Corruption Policy

A submission to the Consultation by the Government of Ireland on a National Action Plan for Business and Human Rights

Bribery Act Reference Number: Version: 1.2 Name of Originator / Author & Organisation:

Summary of the Indigenous Peoples' Consultation with the Asian Development Bank, November 27 th 2007

ELEMENTS FOR THE DRAFT LEGALLY BINDING INSTRUMENT ON TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS AND OTHER BUSINESS ENTERPRISES WITH RESPECT TO HUMAN RIGHTS

ADDENDUM ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM DC ITB A D D E N D U M # 1

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 2014

Transcription:

Task Force on Sports Sponsors Human Rights Guiding Questions for Sporting Event Sponsors Draft Not for publication, circulation or citation. Contents About this Document... 0 Introduction... 1 Sponsor Engagement Points... 2 Sponsorship Agreements... 3 About this Document This document has been produced as part of a series developed for discussion at the Sporting Chance Forum on Mega-Sporting Events and Human Rights convened by the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, Institute for Human Rights and Business (IHRB), and Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights (MSE Platform), on 30 November-1 December 2017 in Geneva. This series has been developed within the MSE Platform s different Task Forces, namely: Sports Governing Bodies; Host Actors; Sponsors; and Broadcasters. Each paper is in draft form and has been provided to participants at the Sporting Chance Forum for discussion purposes only. Subsequent drafts will be developed based on input at the Forum, with a proposed publication date of January 2018. These draft Human Rights Guiding Questions for Sporting Event Sponsors have been developed for the MSE Platform, with four major international sponsors providing input: ABInBev, adidas Group, the Coca-Cola Company, and P&G. It does not necessarily reflect the views of all the sponsors involved, nor any other MSE Platform members. Any comments would be gratefully received to alison.biscoe@ihrb.org.

Introduction Many sponsors have a responsibility, within their own operations and throughout their supply chains, to respect human rights. Mega-sporting events (MSEs) are no different from any other business relationship in terms of needing to proactively take account of potential human rights risks. In 2016, a group of international sponsors of MSEs came together to contribute to the white paper on Sponsors and Human Rights in the Sports Context. 1 This formed part of a broader white paper series and explored human rights risks as they relate to sponsor MSE relationships. One year later, draft Human Rights Guiding Questions for Sporting Event Sponsors were developed to support sponsors risk assessment and planning processes as they relate to a company s involvement in sponsoring a mega-sporting event. These questions form part of a sponsors individual commitment to manage their human rights risks in line with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). These questions do not intend to encompass all business areas where sponsors should conduct human rights due diligence, such as sourcing or procurement. They also do not consider due diligence that sports bodies themselves should conduct when selecting sponsors to partner with, though such two-way due diligence should be undertaken and sports body guidance developed in the future. The questions in this tool are intended to prompt sponsors identification of issues to consider at the earliest stages of developing a relationship, and in the sponsor agreement itself. In particular, these questions should help sponsors consider how they might create effective leverage to address risks throughout the lifetime of the sponsor relationship. 2 Each sponsor retains the independent right to decide whether or not to sponsor any sports body and any associated mega-sporting event and define the specific business terms associated with the sponsorship. The questions in this form can be used as an illustrative tool to support a sponsor s engagements with sports governing bodies and event organizers, and inform the sponsor s broader human rights due diligence process. They are equally relevant both to broadcasters role as sponsors and to local sponsorships where a sponsor enters directly into a sponsorship agreement with a local organising committee (LOC). 1 See further: https://www.ihrb.org/focus-areas/mega-sporting-events/white-paper-3.1-sponsors 2 Under the UN Guiding Principles on Business & Human Rights, companies can be involved in a human rights risks or impact in one of three ways, and the appropriate action depends on which: Where a business causes or may cause an adverse human rights impact, it should take the necessary steps to cease or prevent the impact. Where a business contributes or may contribute to an adverse human rights impact, it should take the necessary steps to cease or prevent its contribution and use its leverage to mitigate any remaining impact to the greatest extent possible. Where a business has neither cause nor contribute to the impact, but is involved because the impact is caused by an entity with which it has a business relationship and is linked to its own operations, products, or services, the business should use its leverage to encourage the entity that caused or contributed to the impact to prevent or mitigate its recurrence. Not for Publication, Circulation or Citation 1

Sponsor Engagement Points It is important that from the outset the sponsor attaches a human rights lens to their discussions to determine alignment and identify gaps. Key questions to ask local organising committees, sports governing bodies, and others include: a. Country/Host: i. What country/host selection process exists and does the sports body take steps to promote and respect human rights? ii. What is the hosting methodology of the sports body? What steps will the sports body take to ensure potential host countries/loc take all possible steps to promote and respect human rights? b. Vulnerable Groups: i. What is the LOC/sports body s process for identifying vulnerable groups? What steps are being taken by responsible parties to promote and respect the human rights of those potentially affected? (e.g. in relation to land acquisitions, clearance, resettlement, or other issues.)? ii. How are potentially affected stakeholders meaningfully engaged in all key processes including but not limited to ongoing risk assessments and the development of grievance mechanisms? iii. What grievance mechanisms are or will be in place to enable people to raise concerns/complaints with the sports body/loc? What are the associated escalation and remediation processes? Are these grievance mechanisms effective 3 for potentially affected groups (e.g. ethnic minorities, people who are disabled, children, amongst others)? What is the timeframe for resolving grievances? c. Monitoring: i. During the sourcing, planning, and event delivery stages of the event, how does the sports body/loc intend to monitor the promotion and respect of human rights and what are the steps to be taken to escalate and remediate? d. Sustaining process: i. What process will the sports body/loc establish to continue to mitigate and remediate human rights issues post-event? Will sponsors be involved in that process and what is the timeframe? 3 See UN Guiding Principle 31 for criteria on effective grievance mechanisms: http://www.ohchr.org/documents/publications/guidingprinciplesbusinesshr_en.pdf 2 Not For Publication, Circulation or Citation

Key questions to raise internally within your own company include: a. Human Rights Defenders 4 : i. Given the location of an MSE, what risks to human rights defenders may arise and how should those risks be responded to by the sponsor, the sports body, or jointly (e.g. freedom of speech, women s rights, indigenous peoples, athletes protesting, amongst others)? b. Monitoring: i. During the sourcing, planning, and event delivery stages of the megasporting event, how do we (the sponsor) intend to monitor the promotion and respect of human rights? What are the steps to be taken to escalate issues to the sports body/loc and monitor remediation? Sponsorship Agreements It is important that from the outset the sponsor reviews any agreement with a human rights lens. Key questions to consider when agreeing the specific terms include: a. Does the sports body have a human rights policy and/or human rights language defined or referenced in the agreement for the hosting of an MSE? How is this policy implemented? Does it guarantee participation of the local population? b. Do any commercial terms pose adverse human rights risks and how could those risks be prevented or mitigated (e.g. impacts on local vendors)? c. What language can be included to encourage/require a human rights impact assessment (HRIA) be made by the sports body, once a host country has been identified? d. What language is available to provide the sponsor with the ability to disclose human rights concerns to the sports body, and what obligations does the sports body have to follow up on those concerns with either the host country or LOC? e. Does the sponsorship involve the delivery of products or services? i. If yes, what measures has the sponsor taken to confirm that the procurement process meets in full the sports bodies /LOCs human rights standards? 4 There is no specific definition of who is or can be a human rights defender. It is a term used to describe people who, individually or with others, act to promote or protect human rights. See further, United Nations, Human Rights Defenders: Protecting the Right to Defend Human Rights, Fact Sheet No.29 at: http://www.ohchr.org/documents/publications/factsheet29en.pdf Not for Publication, Circulation or Citation 3

ii. What action has the sponsor taken to integrate its own supplier requirements into the sponsorship agreement? f. What is the documented process should a human rights concern be raised during the term of the sponsorship agreement? g. What ability is there contractually for a sponsor to be released from its sponsorship agreement in the event of human rights breaches or to secure other legal remedies? 4 Not For Publication, Circulation or Citation