Swiss Review 5/2020

Swiss Review / September 2020 / No.5 13 Politics THEODORA PETER In Zambia, sulphur fumes at a copper mine cause respiratorydiseases among the local population. A quarter of all children in theAustralianmining town of Mount Isa have excessively high lev- els of lead in their blood. In both cases, responsibility for the harmful emis- sions lies with businesses inwhich the Swiss mining company Glencore has a majority stake. At times, emissions at the Zambian copper mine have been significantly above the accepted levels set by the World Health Organization (WHO). One of the smelters in need of upgrade has now been shut down by the Glencore-owned company operat- ing the plant. Glencore say that they have already done a lot to cut pollution overall. In Australia, the company also paid for televisionadverts showing the local population how to clean contam- inated dust from their homes. Critics say that Glencore are merely treating the symptoms, not the cause. Other Swiss mining companies also regularly come under fire for their business models. For example, raw gold processed at Swiss refineriesmay potentially come fromdubiousmines where working conditions violate hu- man rights (see “Swiss Review” 3/2019 for more details). The initiative “for responsible com- panies – protecting human rights and the environment” (Responsible Busi- ness Initiative) is backed by an alliance comprising 120relief agencies aswell as churches, trade unions, and environ- mentalandhumanrightsorganisations, all of whomwant Swiss-basedmultina- tionals – potentially around 1,500 com- panies – to be heldmore accountable. They say that companies should not only be bound by due diligence, but should also be liable for damage An uncomfortable issue for multinationals Should Swiss companies be liable for human rights abuses or environmental violations that they have caused in other countries? Yes, according to the Responsible Business Initiative that was submitted in 2016. After years of political horse-trading, voters will give their verdict on 29 November. that they or any of their subsidiaries have caused as a result of human rights abuses or environmental viola- tions. Specifically, victims should be able to seek redress in the Swiss civil courts. To escape liability, defendants would have to prove that they did everything within their power to ex- ercise due diligence. Hard bargaining in parliament The initiative has alarmed businesses that see it as a threat to their global op- erations and commercial freedom. Yet polls show that the idea has significant public support. Parliament’s search for a compromise proposal involved a considerable degree of horse-trading. The National Council wanted to meet the authors of the initiative halfway – satisfying their core demands by pro- posing new corporate liability re- quirements in company law. But the Council of States blocked this, a majority of its members view- ing the regulation as unnecessary and damaging for Swiss business. Ulti- mately, both parliamentary chambers agreed on a watered-down indirect counterproposal to impose reporting obligations, whereby companies would merely have to include details in their annual reports of how they carry out their duty of care. This ar- rangement is equivalent to the EU’s ac- countability principle (see box). It would automatically come into effect if the initiative was rejected. “Token counterproposal” Dick Marty, co-chair of the Responsi- ble Business Initiative, has called it a Daily life in the Zambian town of Kankoyo, where people live directly adjacent to the Mopani copper mines. Archive photo 2015: Keystone