POPULAR CONTENT

Human Rights Toolkit
for Financial Institutions

A step-by-step toolkit to help financial institutions align their practices with
the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs).

Policy

Clear commitments to respecting human rights provide the basis for a financial institution’s human rights approach.

Human Rights Due Diligence

Human rights due diligence allows financial institutions to identify, prevent, and mitigate human rights impacts.

Grievance and Remedy

Financial institutions have a key role to play in remedy and access to grievance mechanisms.

Stakeholder engagement

Meaningful stakeholder engagement is key to a financial institution’s human rights approach.

Sector Profiles

Guidance on key human rights due diligence topics are supplemented by sector-specific analyses of risks, opportunities, and actions.

About the toolkit

How to use this toolkit

This toolkit is organised according to three components of the corporate responsibility to respect human rights as described in the UNGPs: Policy Commitments, Human Rights Due Diligence, and Access to Remedy. Stakeholder engagement, which is a cross-cutting theme that is relevant to all aspects of the tool, is addressed in an overarching section.  The toolkit provides recommendations in relation to both FI ‘lending and investment activities’, as well as ‘own operations and consumer banking activities’. Sector-specific information is also included and is accecssible throughout the tool.

Target audience

The target audience is financial institutions (banks), particularly corporate lenders and project financiers. Nevertheless, the tool aims at being useful for all relevant stakeholders, including investors, insurance companies, civil society, States, real economy companies, and national Human Rights Institutions, among others.


Glossary

Key terms used throughout the toolkit can be found here in the glossary. Glossary definitions stem from a wide range of sources, however reference should be made to official UN documents for questions of interpretation.

Contact details
United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative
Chemin des Anémones, 15
CH-1219, Genève,
Switzerland


humanrights@unepfi.org

Financed and developed with the support of the European Investment Bank

Disclaimer: This toolkit does not intend to set new standards or obligations, but rather aims to support understanding of the UNGPs. For any question on interpretation please refer to official UN documents.

Introduction to human rights: key concepts

The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) constitute the main internationally recognised framework on how businesses are required to respect human rights. This Toolkit aims to support the implementation of the UNGPs by financial institutions. Key terms and concepts that are referred to throughout this guidance are defined in the glossary.

Structured along its three pillars, the UNGPs set out responsibilities for both states and businesses:

  • States have a duty to protect human rights against abuse by third parties, including businesses, through appropriate policies, legislation, regulations and adjudication.
  • Businesses have a responsibility to respect human rights, even where states are not (fully) meeting their responsibilities. Depending on how businesses are involved with the impacts, this entails different responsibilities to avoid, cease, prevent, mitigate and remediate the impacts.
  • States and businesses have a responsibility to ensure that affected rightsholders have access to effective remedy when experiencing actual negative impacts on their rights.

Whereas corporate risk assessments aim at identifying potential risks to the business, the UNGPs require businesses, including financial sector actors, to identify risks to people in order to address and account for actual and potential human rights impacts. The UNGPs outline the corporate responsibility to respect human rights: 

Policy commitment
  • Establish policies and management systems to embed respect for human rights into company operating systems. This includes a senior leadership commitment to respecting human rights as well as institutionalising human rights due diligence processes as laid out below.
Human rights due diligence
  • Implement human rights due diligence (HRDD), meaning an ongoing management process that allows companies to identify, prevent, mitigate, and account for how they address adverse human rights impacts related to their own activities or directly linked to their operations, products, or services by their business relationships. Key elements of the HRDD process include: risk assessment; taking action; tracking and measuring; communicating and disclosing; and enabling access to remedy.
Access to remedy
  • If negative impacts have materialised, provide remedy or cooperate in the remediation process, where the company has caused or contributed to impacts.

To apply the UNGPs, it is essential that businesses engage in a meaningful manner, throughout all steps of the process, those rightsholders affected or potentially affected by the business’s activities or their legitimate representatives. This concept of meaningful consultation is elaborated in the page on ‘Stakeholder Engagement’ for both financing and own operations.

Human rights are the most basic rights and freedoms which every person in the world should enjoy by virtue of being human. They are universal and based on the principle that all humans are equal in their dignity. Human rights are considered inalienable (cannot be taken away). All human rights are also indivisible and interdependent: this means that one set of rights cannot be enjoyed fully without the other. In international law, human rights are enshrined in the International Bill of Rights which includes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as well as The Core International Human Rights Instruments and their monitoring bodies and other UN conventions and agreements.

Labour-specific human rights are further defined in the International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, as amended in 2022. Beyond the rights elaborated in the International Bill of Rights and the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, new rights and issues have occasionally emerged. For example, the UN Human Rights Council recognised the right to a Clean, Healthy and Sustainable Environment in 2022. The Advisory Opinion No. 23/17 of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has also recognised the right to a healthy environment as an autonomous human right. Other judicial decisions, including decisions by the European Court of Human Rights, have also drawn a strong link between climate impacts and human rights. Regional agreements are also relevant, such as agreements on access to information, public participation and justice on environmental matters in Europe (Aarhus Convention) or Latin America and the Caribbean (Escazú Agreement).

The right to a healthy environment was recognised by the UN General Assembly in July 2022. The right to a healthy environment generally contains both substantive and procedural elements.

  • Substantive elements include: safe climate; clean air; healthy ecosystems / biodiversity; safe and sufficient water; healthy and sustainable food; non-toxic environment.
  • Procedural elements include: access to information; public participation; and access to justice (including securing rights free from reprisal or retaliation).

Because the environment mediates a large number of human rights impacts, aligning with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights requires financial institutions and other businesses to consider environmental impacts within their human rights practices. This includes ensuring that due diligence, consultation, and other human rights practices reflect the substantive and procedural elements of the right to a healthy environment described above (e.g. through environmental impact assessments). Further information can be found in the information note by UN OHCHR, UNEP & UNDP exploring What is the Right to a Healthy Environment?

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was adopted in 2015 by all United Nations Member States and seeks “to realize the human rights of all (…)”. The 2030 Agenda defines actions for people, planet, and prosperity across in 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). All SDGs are rooted in human rights and represent a call on business enterprises to use innovative solutions and resolve sustainable development challenges whilst protecting labour and human rights in accordance with relevant international standards.

Further reading
  • ILO & UNEP FIJust Transition Finance Pathways for Banking and InsuranceGuidance for the banking and insurance industries on how to promote a just transition to low-carbon, climate-resilient economies through their activities, together with examples of related innovations and emerging best practice.
  • DIHRThe Human Rights Guide to the Sustainable Development GoalsGuide illustrating the link between human rights and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. Users can look for the SDG and/or target they are interested in and receive information on associated human rights considerations.

Human rights and the finance sector 

For FIs, relevant human rights risks will differ based on a range of factors including size, operations, geographic context, and investment approach. Human rights considerations are also relevant across a range of different FI activities and operations. Some examples of relevant human rights considerations across different bank operations include:

Area of operations Examples of human rights considerations

FI’s own operations

  • Respect for labour rights of employees and contracted workers
  • Procurement of goods and services potentially associated with human rights impacts (e.g. working conditions of supply chain workers, environmental impacts linked to supplier operations)

Consumer banking

  • Discrimination in the context of banking services, whether direct or indirect (e.g. in context of loan approvals or access to services and facilities)
  • Privacy and data protection issues
  • Misuse of the financial system by customers, particularly where linkages to human rights impacts can be drawn (e.g. trafficking, money laundering or criminal proceeds)
  • Lack of or constrained access to banking or financial inclusion (e.g. for low income or vulnerable customers)
  • Concerns related to product and service mis-selling and general handling, and management of customer complaints

Lending and investment activities

Institutional banking:

  • Impacts of project financing and corporate lending activities on surrounding communities (e.g. land use, resettlement, forced labour, child labour, deforestation)
  • Clients use of proceeds which negatively impacts customers or other stakeholders (e.g. misuse of customer data, financing illegal activities).
  • Adverse impacts on human rights and the environment from activities facilitated by capital market services such as bond issuances or equity IPOs

Investments:

  • Negative human rights impacts by companies for which a financial institution assumed the risk of issuing and selling bonds or shares (underwriting)
  • Negative impacts on human rights by a private company where a financial institution is an owner (private equity). An example is mass layoffs of workers by the new majority investor owners of the company
  • Negative impacts on human rights and the environment from a publicly listed company in which the bank is a shareholder (public equity)

Across its activities, an FI can be connected to human rights impacts by causing, contributing to, or being directly linked to a negative human rights impact. The distinction between contribution and direct linkage can be seen as a “continuum” and will depend on, inter alia, the extent to which an FI facilitated or encouraged human rights harm by another company; the extent to which it could or should have known of such harm; and the quality of mitigants and preventive measures implemented to address risks and impacts. 

Cause
  • An FI can cause an adverse impact when its activities (actions or omissions) on their own ‘remove or reduce’ a person’s (or group of persons’) ability to enjoy a human right, i.e. where the bank’s activities alone (without those of clients or other stakeholders) are sufficient to result in the adverse impact. This is most likely to arise in the context of the FI’s banks own operations and retail banking, such as a reported case of discrimination or harassment against an employee or retail customer client.
Contribute
  • An FI can contribute to an adverse impact through its own activities (actions or omissions) either directly alongside other entities (contribution in parallel), or through some outside entity, such as a client or customer (contribution through a third party). Contribution can encompass cases where FIs incentivise or motivate negative human rights impacts; facilitate human rights abuses (e.g. when an FI knows or should have known about human rights risks associated with a client or project and mitigation or preventive actions were insufficient); or have insufficient human rights due diligence processes, leading to overlooked impacts and insufficient prevention and mitigation measures.
Directly Linked
  • ‘Direct linkage’ refers to situations where an FI has not caused or contributed to an adverse impact, but there is nevertheless a direct link between the operations, products or services of the FI and an adverse impact, through the FI’s business relationships. An example may include cases where a bank is the lead manager in a company’s bond issuance and the company in question has faced allegations of human rights abuses in its value chain, or where inadequate due diligence has been conducted and the client’s activities cause harm to communities.

The UNGPs have been embedded in different initiatives and standards, many of which are of particular relevance to the financial sector. A few important examples include:

Standards Description

Industry and overarching standards

Project finance

  • The Equator Principles (EPs) are intended to serve as a common baseline and risk management framework for financial institutions to identify, assess and manage environmental and social risks when financing projects. The EPs recognizes that financial institutions and their clients have a responsibility to respect Human Rights. EPs Financial Institutions will fulfil this responsibility in line with the UNGPs by carrying out Human Rights due diligence on the projects financed by EPFIs (EP4 Preamble). The EPs Association has developed guidance on the Implementation of Human Rights Assessments under the Equator Principles and on access to remedy.

International finance institution (IFI) / Development finance institution (DFI) standards

Further reading
  • Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprisesLetter to the Thun GroupElaborates key aspects of the UNGP’s remedy framework, including the potential for banks to cause or contribute to human rights abuses as well as the application of remedy principles to the banking sector
  • Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprisesInvestors, environmental, social and governance approaches and human rightsReport exploring the responsibility of investors under the UNGPs as well as the opportunities for aligning ESG approaches with international human rights due diligence standards