Where companies have not fulfilled their commitments, or where they have caused or contributed to adverse human rights or environmental impacts, they provide for or cooperate in the remediation of any associated harms. An effective grievance mechanism is in place to facilitate access to remedy. This Principle applies to all companies; roles in providing for or cooperating in remediation may differ depending on the company’s position in the supply chain and its ownership or management role(s) in the operations triggering the need for remedy.


The company provides for or cooperates in providing fair and just remedy in the case of adverse impacts to human rights and effective restoration and/or compensation commensurate with the values lost in the case of deforestation, conversion, and associated environmental impacts. The appropriate remedy and respective obligations of different supply chain actors depend on context and follow credible approaches as elaborated further in the Operational Guidance on Remediation and Access to Remedy and Operational Guidance on Environmental Restoration and Compensation.


The company establishes an effective company grievance mechanism that adheres to the Effectiveness Criteria of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The company assesses existing State and non-State grievance mechanisms and supports efforts to strengthen and facilitate access to these as necessary to help identify and resolve grievances within their operations and supply chains.


The company does not divest its interests in land until: i) outstanding grievances are fully resolved, or ii) obligations have been legally transferred to another party (e.g., the new owner).


Companies purchasing or acquiring interests in commodity-producing properties assume responsibility to remediate past harms, unless this
responsibility is explicitly and legally transferred to or retained by another party.

Return to top