Human Rights Due Diligence (Procurement)

Human rights due diligence has shifted from a voluntary framework championed by the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights into a mandatory legal obligation for companies operating in European markets. The EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and related legislation mean that companies supplying European public authorities will face binding requirements to conduct, document, and act on human rights risk assessments across their supply chains.

What is Human Rights Due Diligence (Procurement)?

Human rights due diligence (HRDD) is a risk-based process through which a company identifies adverse human rights impacts connected to its operations and supply chains, takes action to prevent or mitigate them, tracks the effectiveness of those actions, and communicates externally about what it has found and done. The concept originates in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), endorsed by the UN Human Rights Council in 2011, which established that all business enterprises have a responsibility to respect human rights.

In procurement specifically, HRDD applies in two directions. Contracting authorities conducting their own purchasing are increasingly expected to assess the human rights implications of what they buy and from whom they buy it: this is the rationale behind sustainable procurement policies, responsible sourcing standards, and the social clauses embedded in public contracts. Suppliers tendering for those contracts are expected to demonstrate that their own operations and supply chains meet applicable human rights standards.

The EU regulatory framework is the most significant driver of mandatory HRDD for European public procurement suppliers. The CSDDD (Directive 2024/1760) requires companies above defined size and turnover thresholds operating in the EU to conduct due diligence across their entire chain of activities, including identifying and addressing adverse impacts on a broad range of internationally recognised human rights. Companies that fail to meet their due diligence obligations face civil liability for resulting harm, administrative fines, and potential exclusion from public procurement.

Article 57(4)(a) of Directive 2014/24/EU already allows contracting authorities to exclude operators who have breached applicable obligations in social and labour law, which includes internationally recognised human rights standards where applicable national law incorporates them. The CSDDD adds a layer of mandatory proactive obligation on top of this reactive exclusion ground.

In the UK, the framework for HRDD in procurement is built on the Modern Slavery Act 2015 (see modern slavery statement), the Procurement Act 2023 (which provides grounds for exclusion based on labour market misconduct), and Government guidance on responsible supply chains. The UK's post-Brexit regulatory trajectory on HRDD is developing independently from the EU but in a broadly comparable direction.

Why it matters for bidders

Suppliers operating across European markets face a growing set of HRDD-related requirements from public buyers. Selection questionnaires increasingly ask about supply chain risk assessment processes, audit programmes, corrective action procedures, and disclosure of identified issues. Suppliers with no structured HRDD process are disadvantaged in competitive evaluations and face growing legal exposure as mandatory due diligence legislation comes into force.

Practically, building HRDD capability means: mapping your supply chain to identify where human rights risks are concentrated (by geography, sector, and commodity); conducting risk assessments informed by country and sector risk data; engaging with suppliers on their own practices; commissioning audits of high-risk suppliers; establishing remediation processes when issues are identified; and training staff who manage supplier relationships. Companies that integrate HRDD into their procurement function, rather than treating it as a reporting exercise, are better positioned to identify and address real risks before they become public or legal incidents.

Example

A Norwegian technology hardware company sells equipment to public authorities across Europe. Its supply chain includes component manufacturers in Southeast Asia and Africa. Following the entry into force of the CSDDD, the company conducts a formal human rights impact assessment of its supply chain. It identifies elevated risk of forced labour in a cobalt mining supplier in Central Africa. The company engages the supplier, commissions an independent audit, and requires a corrective action plan with a time-bound implementation schedule. It discloses the process and its findings in its CSDDD-compliant sustainability report. When tendering for a major EU institution IT contract, it provides the assessment and its remediation track record as evidence of its human rights due diligence programme.

Frequently Asked Questions

What human rights are covered by the due diligence obligation?

The CSDDD references internationally recognised human rights as defined in core UN human rights instruments and ILO core conventions. These include the right to life and physical integrity, prohibition of forced and child labour, freedom of association and collective bargaining, non-discrimination, fair wages, safe working conditions, and indigenous peoples' rights. Environmental human rights (the right to a safe, clean, and sustainable environment) are also increasingly integrated.

How does HRDD differ from an ethical sourcing programme?

Ethical sourcing is broader in scope and includes environmental as well as social standards, and is often articulated through codes of conduct and audit frameworks. HRDD is a specific process defined by the UNGPs and now EU legislation, focused on identifying, assessing, preventing, and remediating adverse human rights impacts. An ethical sourcing programme may incorporate HRDD, but HRDD is the legal standard that companies must meet to satisfy CSDDD obligations.

When do CSDDD obligations apply?

The CSDDD applies in phases based on company size. The largest companies (over 5,000 employees and 1.5 billion euros global turnover) were subject to the Directive from 2027. Smaller companies (over 1,000 employees and 450 million euros turnover) face obligations from 2028. Member states are responsible for transposing the Directive into national law, and the precise implementation timelines and enforcement mechanisms vary. Suppliers should monitor both EU and national law developments in each market where they operate.