DEBRE BIRHAN UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF LAW AND GOVERNANCE

DEPARTMENT OF LAW

Assessing the Effectiveness of National Human Rights Institutions in the protection of Business-
related Human Rights Abuses: The Case of the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission.

A thesis proposal Submitted to Debre Birhan University, Department of Law

Masters of Business and investment law, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Masters of Business and investment law.

Prepared by: Tsion Haileleul

ID: DBU1400579

Advisor: Honelegn Hailu Mekonen (Ph.D)

February, 2016,

ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA

Acronyms

BHR ………………………..Business and human rights

CSR ………………………..Corporate social responsibility
UNGPs ……………….. United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights
UN ……………………. United Nations
 Chapter one

1. Introduction

1. 1 Background

In 2008, the Special Representative to the Secretary-General on Business and Human Rights
(SRSG) John Ruggie presented the Protect–Respect–Remedy Framework which has triggered
the development of a regulatory dynamic resulting in what Ruggie has called a ‘business and
human rights ecosystem’. The SRSG stressed the role of National Human Rights Institutions
(NHRIs), noting that:
The actual and potential importance of these institutions cannot be overstated. Where NHRIs are
able to address grievances involving companies, they can provide a means to hold business
accountable. NHRIs are particularly well-positioned to provide processes – whether adjudicative
or mediation-based – that are culturally appropriate, accessible, and expeditious. Even where
they cannot themselves handle grievances, they can provide information and advice on other
avenues of recourse to those seeking remedy. Through increased interchange of information,
they could act as lynchpins within the wider system of grievance mechanisms, linking local,
national and international levels across countries and regions. (UN Doc A/HRC/8/5 (2008) para
97).
The idea that NHRIs have an important role to play in the quest to hold business accountable for
human rights abuse, be it as advisors, mediators or adjudicators is increasingly being recognized.
The 2011 UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) point out several
roles that NHRIs can take on in the business and human rights domain such as ‘helping States
identify whether relevant laws are aligned with their human rights obligations and are being
effectively enforced, and in providing guidance on human rights also to business enterprises and
other non-State actors’ and as an example of State-based grievance mechanisms. (Commentary
to Principle 25, UNGPS (2011)). NHRIs themselves are increasingly claiming a role in this field
and various international organizations have pointed out that NHRIs have a role to play. (inter
alia, the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers Recommendation CM/Rec(2016) 3c to
Member States on human rights and business, which stresses a role for NHRIs in developing
National Action Plans (para 11), assist in offering due diligence training (para 28) and as a
nonstate based judicial mechanism that can receive and adjudicate complaints (para 51)
<https://edoc.coe.int/en/fundamental-freedoms/7302-human-rights-and-business
recommendationcmrec20163-of-the-committee-of-ministers-to-member-states.html> accessed
17 July 2020).

This development is also reflected in the ongoing process towards an international treaty on
business and human rights (BHR-Treaty). This process, which started at the United Nations in
20148, has culminated in a draft text, a zero-draft, in 2018. (On 16 July 2019, the Open-Ended
Intergovernmental Working Group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises
(OEIGWG) released a revised draft text of the draft treaty text. This revised text was discussed
during the intergovernmental negotiations at the firth session of the OEIGWG held from 14 to 18
October 2019. The second revised draft text was released in August 2020).

The text of an Optional Protocol to the BHR-Treaty was also released and contains an obligation
for States Parties to establish a National Implementation Mechanism (NIM).The Optional
Protocol has NHRIs in mind given the reference to the so-called Paris Principles, the Guidelines
relating to the status of NHRIs. The Optional Protocol carves out a key role for such National
Implementation Mechanisms to promote, monitor and implement the BHR-Treaty. With such an
institutional arrangement, the future treaty would join the ranks of what has been called a new
generation of human right treaties which call for the establishment of independent national
bodies to connect a top down with a bottom up approach.13 Such institutional innovation
dispersing and localizing authority aims to address the disconnect that exists in global human
rights governance between international rules and domestic practice. (Draft Optional Protocol to
The Legally Binding Instrument to Regulate, in International Human Rights Law, the Activities
of Transnational Corporations And Other Business Enterprises, OEIGWG, 2018).

Ethiopia is on a path to continued economic liberalization. Advancing economic and social

development is one of the objectives of the Ethiopian State.( [FDREConstitution], Preamble,
Para 1). Attracting foreign direct investment (FDI), creating a vibrant private sector that
generates jobs and other opportunities to the country’s youthful population, integrating the
economy to the global market are high on the national agenda. Meanwhile, in Ethiopia and
elsewhere, expectations are growing for business and economic interests to be balanced with
other social interests such as the environment and human rights. These expectations are generally
framed in terms of corporate social responsibility (CSR). There are also related paradigms such
as environmental, social, and corporate governance, otherwise known as environmental, social,
and governance (ESG).

In Ethiopia, the dominant discourse is CSR. The relevant literature shows that the development
of CSR is at “an infancy stage” and that CSR is largely “unregulated” or “under regulated.”
Tasew Abitew (2021). Others argue that the CSR practice manifests priorities different from the
global trend.( Sumeyye Kusakci and Ibrahim Bushera (2023)). Observations further indicate a
tendency to “synonymize CSR with philanthropy,” ( Tasew Abitew (2021)). Which fails to view
business activity in the broader environmental and social context. (Berihu Gereziher and
Yohannes Shiferaw (2020)). Related to this is thus another tendency to view CSR as a tool for
brand management –which in turn feeds to the profitability mindset– rather than viewing CSR as
an act of responsibility (Dakito Alemu Kesto (2017)). Finally, yet importantly, there is a lack of
comprehensive legal and policy framework on CSR. Ethiopia does not have a self-contained
legislation or policy on CSR. The existing legal scholarship that explores the potential of existing
laws observes that such laws in general govern CSR impliedly or incidentally.( Bereket
Alemayehu Hagos ,2022).

In the past decade, a discourse on business and human rights (BHR) is emerging, from and/or
alongside the CSR framework. This article attempts to assess the status of BHR law and practice
in Ethiopia. In contexts with fragmented CSR landscape, BHR could help consolidate the
regulatory framework. This is because human rights are moral claims that are supposed to be
“binding and pre-existing, whether or not they are protected by States or respected by
businesses.” Judith Schrempf-Stirling, Harry J. Van Buren, and Florian Wettstein (2022).
Another important justification is that BHR aims to govern the activities of transnational
companies, which may at times be beyond the ambit of domestic laws or the regulation capacity
of the State (Mizanie Abate Tadesse, 2016). This applies equally to multinational companies of
Ethiopian origin, which would come under increased expectations based on BHR norms
elsewhere with Ethiopia’s integr ation to the global economy.
Ethiopia is a country that has experienced significant economic growth in recent years, attracting
foreign investment and increasing the presence of multinational corporations. However, this
economic growth has been accompanied by reports of human rights abuses, including forced
evictions, exploitation of workers, and environmental pollution. The Ethiopian Human Rights
Commission (EHRC) is the national institution responsible for promoting and protecting human
rights in the country.

Therefore the proposal for a national implementation mechanism in the Optional Protocol to the
treaty on business and human rights offers an example of how the relationships between key
governance actors are being rearticulated in the global human rights governance architecture in
general. This paper critically examines the significance of NHRIs in the business and human
rights domain.

1.2. Statement of the Problem:

Despite the increasing recognition of the importance of human rights in business practices, there
is a growing concern about the prevalence of business-related human rights abuses in Ethiopia
and the effectiveness of the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission in addressing these violations.
While National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) play a crucial role in monitoring and
addressing human rights issues, including those related to business activities, there is limited
empirical evidence on the actual impact of NHRIs in protecting individuals and communities
from human rights abuses perpetrated by businesses.

The problem at hand is the lack of comprehensive understanding of the effectiveness of the
Ethiopian Human Rights Commission in addressing business-related human rights abuses. There
is a need to assess the Commission's policies, procedures, resources, and outcomes in handling
human rights violations in the context of business activities. Without a clear understanding of the
strengths and weaknesses of the Commission's approach, it is challenging to identify areas for
improvement and ensure the protection of human rights in the business sector in Ethiopia.

Therefore, this study will aims to assess the effectiveness of the Ethiopian Human Rights
Commission in the protection of business-related human rights abuses and contribute to the
ongoing discourse on the role of NHRIs in promoting human rights in the business sector. By
identifying challenges and opportunities for the Commission to enhance its impact, this research
seeks to inform policy and practice that can ultimately lead to better protection of human rights
in the context of business activities in Ethiopia.

1.3. Research Questions:

1. What is the extent to which the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is effectively
fulfilling its mandate to address human rights abuses related to business activities in Ethiopia?

2. How does the EHRC collaborate with other stakeholders, such as government agencies, civil
society organizations, and businesses, in addressing human rights abuses within the business
sector?

3. What are the key challenges and opportunities encountered by the EHRC in carrying out its
mandate to protect against business-related human rights abuses in Ethiopia?

1.4. Research Objectives of the study

1.4.1General objective

The main objective of this research will be to assess the effectiveness of the EHRC in protecting
against business-related human rights abuses in Ethiopia.

1.4.2 Specific objective

Specifically, this research will aims to:

 Examine the mandate, capacity, and practices of the EHRC in addressing human rights
abuses related to business activities.
 Evaluate the EHRC's collaboration with other stakeholders, including government
agencies, civil society organizations, and businesses, in addressing business-related
human rights abuses.
 Identify challenges and opportunities faced by the EHRC in fulfilling its mandate to
protect against business-related human rights abuses.

1.5. Significance of the Study:

 The significance of this study is manifold. Firstly, it aims to enhance accountability
mechanisms in Ethiopia by evaluating the effectiveness of the Ethiopian Human Rights
Commission in addressing human rights abuses within the business sector. By identifying the
Commission's strengths and weaknesses, the study can pave the way for improvements in its
practices and better hold businesses accountable for violations of human rights. Secondly, the
research contributes to the promotion and protection of fundamental human rights in Ethiopia
by assessing the Commission's effectiveness in safeguarding rights in the context of business
activities. It can pinpoint gaps in the current system and inform policy recommendations to
bolster human rights protections. Moreover, the findings have the potential to strengthen
National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) by offering insights into best practices and
strategies for effectively tackling business-related human rights abuses. This can support
NHRIs globally in upholding human rights standards in the business sector and reinforcing
their role as essential protectors of human rights. Additionally, the study results can influence
policy decisions and practices aimed at enhancing the protection of human rights in business
operations within Ethiopia. By advocating for legislative reforms and developing guidelines
for businesses to respect human rights, the research can enhance the Ethiopian Human Rights
Commission's capacity to fulfill its mandate. Lastly, by engaging with key stakeholders
throughout the research process, the study empowers affected communities, civil society
organizations, businesses, and government officials to actively participate in preventing and
addressing business-related human rights abuses. It raises awareness, builds capacity, and
fosters dialogue among stakeholders on the importance of human rights in business practices.
Overall, the significance of this study lies in its potential to contribute to human rights
protection in the business sector, strengthen the role of NHRIs in safeguarding rights, and
promote accountability and respect for fundamental rights not only in Ethiopia but also
beyond its borders.

1.6. Scope of the Study:

The study will specifically focus on assessing the effectiveness of the Ethiopian Human Rights
Commission in addressing business-related human rights abuses. It will examine the
Commission's policies, procedures, resources, and outcomes in handling human rights violations
related to business activities in Ethiopia.
Overall, the scope of the study will be focused on assessing the effectiveness of the Ethiopian
Human Rights Commission in the protection of business-related human rights abuses, with the
aim of generating insights and recommendations to strengthen human rights protections in the
business sector in Ethiopia.

1.7. Organization of the Study:

This study will explores the role of National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) in protecting
human rights within business operations, focusing specifically on the effectiveness of the
Ethiopian Human Rights Commission. The research aims to evaluate the Commission's mandate,
structure, and operations in promoting and protecting human rights in the business sector. The
study starts with an introduction providing background information, research questions,
objectives, significance, and scope. The literature review delves into the role of NHRIs in
addressing business-related human rights abuses, with a focus on case studies. The theoretical
framework identifies key principles and standards for human rights protection in the business
context. The methodology section outlines the research design, data collection methods,
sampling strategy, and data analysis techniques. Following this, an overview of the Ethiopian
Human Rights Commission is provided, detailing its mandate, functions, structure, and
challenges. The effectiveness of the Commission is then assessed through an analysis of its legal
framework, policies, resources, and case studies. Findings and analysis are presented,
highlighting strengths, weaknesses, successes, and challenges. Recommendations are given for
enhancing the effectiveness of the Commission and improving human rights protections within
the business sector. The study concludes by summarizing the findings, discussing implications
for policy and practice, and suggesting future research directions.
 Chapter two

2. Literature Review

2.1 Overview of National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs)

To analyze the role of NHRIs in the business and human rights field, a better understanding
of NHRIs is necessary. A NHRI is a ‘body which is established by a Government under the
Constitution, or by law or decree, the functions of which are specifically defined in terms of
the promotion and protection of human rights’. The idea of establishing national human
rights institutions was first conceived in the aftermath of World War II. In 1946, the UN
Economic and Social Council invited Member States to consider establishing information
groups or local human rights committees. Subsequently, the UN General Assembly requested
the Secretary-general to submit a detailed report on NHRIs. In 1991, the first international
workshop on National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights took
place in Paris. A key outcome of this conference was the adoption by the UN General
Assembly in 1993 of the Paris Principles relating to the status of national institutions
(hereinafter: the Paris Principles), now broadly accepted as the international standard for
NHRIs testing an institution’s legitimacy and credibility. The Paris Principles lay down the
requirements an entity must meet to show it has the capacity to be a NHRI. These
requirements are quite general and focus on such things as the necessity of a broad mandate
and independence. But there is no prescribed model for an NHRI and thus the diversity
among NHRIs is great. Around the world six models can be discerned: human rights
commissions; human rights ombudsman institutions; hybrid institutions; consultative and
advisory bodies; institutes and centers and multiple institutions. The main types of NHRIs are
national human rights commissions or institutes and national human rights Ombudsperson
institutions. Mandates, resources and local context differ substantively. Given the vast
diversity, the Paris Principles have formulated a rather generic description of what
requirements a NHRI must meet, putting specific attention on formal independence,
composition, mandate and competence of the institution. According to the Paris Principles, a
NHRI must:

 be established by law;
 have a clearly specified role and a mandate that is as broad as possible;
 reflect pluralism in governing structures and independence of appointment
procedures;
 have an infrastructure in accordance with its functions, with particular importance
attached to the need for adequate funding;
 have the ability to perform a monitoring, advisory and recommendation function on
various matters relating to human rights;
 relate to regional and international organizations; – must promote public awareness,
teaching and research on human rights;
 Provide the possibility of handling individual complaints or petitions on human rights
grounds.

The United Nations Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) is
mandated to review and accredit NHRIs that are in compliance with the Paris Principles. This
is done through a peer-review process undertaken by GANHRI’s Sub-Committee on
Accreditation (SCA). When compliant with the Paris Principles, the GANHRI can grant the
institution A or B status. In general, GANHRI only accredits one institution per jurisdiction.
Fully compliant NHRIs are granted the A-status which provides them with certain
prerogatives. A-status NHRIs may make an oral statement under all substantive agenda items
of the Human Rights Council; participate through video messages in the HRC plenary
debates, including during the adoption of the outcome of the Universal Periodic Review of
the country by the Council, the interactive dialogue following the presentation of a country
mission report by a special procedures mandate holder and panels or annual discussions;
submit documents, which will be issued with UN Document symbol; and take separate
seating in all sessions. As pointed out by Reif, the accreditation-process of GANHRI that
puts certain pressure on NHRIs and States to comply with the Paris Principles in order to be
bestowed with certain (reputational) prerogatives, thus functions as a gatekeeper mechanism.
In their interactions with the human rights’ supervisory mechanisms, NHRIs form a bridge
between the national and the international level. NHRIs are actively involved in the national
reporting cycles and monitor follow up of international recommendations. In accordance with
the Paris Principles, NHRIs shall promote and protect human rights at the national level.
Human rights promotion is understood as to ‘include those functions which seek to create a
society where human rights are more broadly understood and respected. Such functions may
include education, training, advising, public outreach and advocacy.’ Typically, NHRIs will
be involved in advising government on legislation with a human rights dimension,
monitoring compliance with international treaty obligations, pushing for the ratification of
human rights treaties and protocols, human rights education and overall monitoring of the
human rights situation in the country. The protection functions of NHRIs ‘may be understood
as those that address and seek to prevent actual human rights violations. Such functions
include monitoring, inquiring, investigating and reporting on human rights violations, and
may include individual complaint-handling’. The Paris Principles do not require NHRIs to
have a complaints-handling function yet some NHRIs do have the mandate that allows
individual dispute resolution. Even though it is not required, it has been recommended that
NHRIs may handle complaints submitted to them by a complainant and by settling the case
through conciliation and mediation, thereby relieving the existing case-load of courts;
ensuring victims of human rights violations receive compensation, including encouragement
of the establishment of the fund for this purpose; assisting victims seeking redress with
information on the law and the legal system’ as well as seeking ‘informal legal redress
mechanisms through conciliation or through binding decisions. Finally, the importance is
stressed of ‘regular and constructive engagement with all relevant stakeholders’, through
‘working relationships, as appropriate, with other domestic institutions established for the
promotion and protection of human rights, including subnational statutory human rights
institutions, thematic institutions, as well as civil society and non-governmental
organizations.

2.2. Emerging Recognition of NHRIs in the Business and Human Rights Field

Traditionally, NHRIs have focused on the State and its compliance with human rights. In
recent years, we see NHRIs increasingly using their mandate to address human rights abuse
by private actors. At the time when the Paris Principles were adopted, there was less attention
for the impact of corporations on human rights than is the case nowadays. The traditional
State-centric focus of international human rights law may provide an explanation for the fact
that the Paris Principles do not explicitly mention the need for NHRIs to engage with non-
State actors. Nevertheless, it is argued that the Paris Principles do provide sufficient space for
NHRIs to take up a critical role in preventing and responding to human rights violations
committed by corporations. Brodie distinguishes four specific ways in which the Paris
Principles can be read as encouraging NHRI engagement with business and human rights. In
general, the Paris Principles state that NHRIs must be vested with competence to promote
and protect human rights and be given as broad a mandate as possible. The Paris Principles
do not limit this to State actors. Secondly, under ‘methods of operation’, the Paris Principles
state that NHRI may engage with non-state actors by providing that an NHRI shall ‘freely
consider any information and any documents necessary for assessing situations falling within
its competence’. Furthermore, the Paris Principles require institutions to ‘maintain
consultations with other bodies, whether jurisdictional or otherwise, responsible for the
promotion and protection of human rights’. Moreover, in the General Observations which
provide interpretations of the Paris Principles, it is stated that:

An NHRI’s mandate should be interpreted in a broad, liberal and purposive manner to

promote a progressive definition of human rights which includes all rights set out in
international, regional and domestic instruments, including economic, social and cultural
rights. Specifically, the mandate should: extend to the acts and omissions of both the public
and private sectors.

This provides NHRIs with the mandate to engage with national, regional and international
bodies that work on business and human rights such as the OECD and its National Contact
Points or the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights. Fourthly, Brodie points
out that the requirement that a NHRI must consult with various representative groups can be
read as to include also the private sector. Thus, Brodie concludes that such a reading of the
Paris Principles provides that legislation establishing an NHRI should enable engagement
with corporations or at the very least not exclude such engagement. Recently, NHRIs have
actively started to utilize the room the Paris Principles allow to engage with the issue of
business and human rights. The next section will provide some illustrations of such activities.
Collaborative networks of NHRIs have confirmed that NHRIs have a role to play in
addressing business and human rights issues. In 2009, the global network of NHRIs,
GANHRI (then called the International Coordinating Committee, ICC), established a
Working Group on Business and Human Rights, the first ICC’s thematic Working Group. In
2010, the ICC’s 10th Biennial Conference held in Scotland was dedicated to the topic of
business and human rights. Over 80 NHRIs adopted the Edinburgh Declaration. This
declaration affirms the mandate, identifies the role and indicates the functions of NHRIs on
business and human rights across the three pillars of the UN Protect, Respect and Remedy
Framework. The Edinburgh Declaration emphasized ‘the important role national human
rights institutions can play in addressing corporate-related human rights challenges, both as a
body at the international level, at the regional level and individually at the national level’.
The Declaration provides a number of examples of activities NHRIs could take up, such as:
engaging with governments to promote greater awareness of the impact of business
enterprises on the realization of human rights and advocating and advising government to
introduce national legislation; provide guidance to business on how to integrate human rights
into their daily business; research business impact on human rights; facilitate dialogue
between corporations, government and civil society; document violations and examine
conditions of access to justice. The Edinburg Declaration also calls on NHRIs with complaint
handling functions to consider utilizing these to address business and human rights issues and
for NHRIs to mediate between corporations, governments, trade unions and victims.
Regional collaborative networks have also recognized the role NHRIs can play in the field of
human rights and business. On the African continent, NHRIs cooperating in NANHRI
adopted the 2011 Yaoundé Plan of Action affirming their collective commitment to
strengthen their capacity on business and human rights, address business-related human
rights abuses, highlighting three specific areas: labour, environment and land related human
rights abuses. In Europe, the NHRIs collaborate in ENNHRI, the European Network of
National Human Rights Institutions. One of its four working groups engages with business
and human rights. In the Americas, in 2011, the NHRI-Network organized a regional seminar
on business and human rights, resulting in a declaration and action plan. Besides NHRI
claiming a role for themselves, international organizations have also increasingly started to
acknowledge NHRIs as important actors in the field. When the Human Rights Council
adopted the UNGPs, the Council welcomed ‘the important role of [NHRIs] established in
accordance with the Paris Principles in relation to business and human rights, and encourages
[NHRIs] to develop further their capacity to fulfil that role effectively’. The role envisioned
in most documents concerns mainly the promotional tasks of NHRIs such as providing
information and advice to government, corporations and civil society. But increasingly,
expectations are also expressed regarding the functions of NHRIs in protecting human rights
by facilitating access to remedy. As the above mentioned quote by the SRSG Ruggie makes
clear, NHRIs are seen as particularly adept at facilitating access to remedy by acting ‘as
lynchpins within the wider system of grievance mechanisms’. The UN Working Group on
Business and Human Rights has started a project to analyze the role of NHRIs in facilitating
access to remedy for business-related human rights abuses. The growing expectations
regarding a role for NHRIs in the field of business and human rights, NHRIs have culminated
in the Optional Protocol to the future BHR treaty which envisions a role for national
implementation mechanisms to promote compliance, monitor and implement the future
treaty. In sum, a development can be discerned where there is an increasing expectation that
NHRIs have a significant role to play in addressing business and human rights issues. NHRIs
have gradually seized the room that the Paris Principles allow for these entities to take up
such a role. In the next section, some examples of NHRI engagement will be discussed.

2.3. Role of NHRIs in Protecting Human Rights in Business Operations

The previous section has demonstrated how NHRIs are increasingly are being referred to as
actors of growing significance in the business and human rights domain, a role NHRIs are
gradually starting to acknowledge and take up themselves. But only NHRIs with jurisdiction
over both public and private actors and broad promotion and protection powers are able to
engage with business and human rights matters in practice. This section provides an
overview of some of the activities that NHRIs have started to deploy in this field,
independently and/or in collaboration with others. This is by no means an exhaustive
overview but rather serves to illustrate some of the current involvement of NHRIs which
brings to light several challenges facing NHRIs involvement in this field. NHRIs differ vastly
when it comes to their mandates, resources and capacities and as a result their activities in the
field of business and human rights also differ considerably. It is thus not possible to speak of
the role for NHRIs in the business and human rights domain. The diverse landscape makes is
hard to compare or present a comprehensive overview. Yet, by discussing some of the recent
activities of various NHRIs, it is possible to draw some conclusions about the common
challenges NHRIs face when engaging with business and human rights. At the national level,
NHRIs are increasingly picking up a role in the BHR domain across the three pillars of the
‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ framework.

(i) State duty to protect

According to principle 1 of the UNGPs:

States must protect against human rights abuse within their territory and/or jurisdiction by
third parties, including business enterprises. This requires taking appropriate steps to
prevent, investigate, punish and redress such abuse through effective policies, legislation,
regulations and adjudication.

Furthermore, ‘States should set out clearly the expectation that all business enterprises
domiciled in their territory and/or jurisdiction respect human rights throughout their
operations.’ And Principle 3 explains how States should operationalize their obligation to
protect by enforcing laws; making sure that other laws and policies do not constrain but
enable business respect for human rights; provide effective guidance to business enterprises
on how to respect human rights and encourage, business enterprises to communicate how
they address their human rights impacts. The Commentary to Principle 3 states that NHRIs
that are compliant with the Paris Principles ‘have an important role to play in helping States
identify whether relevant laws are aligned with their human rights obligations and are being
effectively enforced, and in providing guidance on human rights also to business enterprises
and other non-State actors’. Several NHRIs have taken up a role in monitoring the State
obligation to protect against corporate human rights abuse. NHRIs have been involved, to
different degrees, in the creation of National Action Plans on Business and Human Rights
(NAPs). The European Union called on its members to adopt national action plans laying out
how they would implement the UNGPs. The development of NAPs on Business and Human
Rights has been pushed by civil society organizations and is also found strong support with
the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights. In 2014, the Human Rights Council
encouraged all UN Member States to adopt NAPs. Also at the regional level, States have
been called upon to adopt national action plans on business and human rights. At the time of
writing, 23 countries across the world have adopted a NAP and 14 countries are in the
process of doing so. The UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights has
recommended that NHRIs are invited to contribute to the process of creating a NAP and
should also be involved in the monitoring thereof. In several countries, NHRIs have indeed
played an active role, to different degrees, in the NAP process. For example, the NHRIs of
Germany and Zambia undertook a national base-line assessment in preparation of the NAP.
NHRIs in countries such as the Netherlands, Scotland, Kenya and North Ireland have been
involved in different ways in the development of NAPs. Many NAPs make direct reference
to NHRIs, some highlighting specific roles. For example, the NAP of Chile, commits the
Chilean NHRI to train staff, update material, and introduce the UNGPs into the
recommendations they make to the State. Notably, Italy’s NAP mandates that the State
establish an NHRI. Besides a role in the creation of National Action Plans on Business and
Human Rights, various NHRIs have advanced specific proposals for legal reform to promote
the implementation of the UNGPs at the national level. For example, NHRIs have been
engaged, with the nascent trend towards the adoption of national laws mandating human
rights due diligence. Several NHRIs have conducted research in specific areas which have
led to evidence-based recommendations for adjusting laws. Moreover, an increasing number
of NHRIs are addressing the duties of States regarding business and human rights in their
interactions with international and regional human rights bodies. For example, The Canadian
and Danish NHRI have included relevant recommendations in the second round of the
Universal Periodic Review. The European network of NHRIs has taken a position on the
BHR-treaty calling on States to actively contribute to the negotiations.

(ii) Corporate responsibility to respect.

According to Principle 11 of the UNGPs: ‘Business enterprises should respect human rights.
This means that they should avoid infringing on the human rights of others and should
address adverse human rights impacts with which they are involved.’ The UNGPs explain
which processes and policies companies must have in place to act with due diligence and
meet their responsibility to respect. NHRIs are only briefly mentioned in the commentary to
Principle 23 which addresses the responsibility of corporations when operating in conflict-
affected areas. The commentary provides that ‘in complex contexts such as these, business
enterprises should ensure that they do not exacerbate the situation. In assessing how best to
respond, they will often be well advised to also […] consult externally with credible,
independent experts, including from Governments, civil society, Danish Human Rights
Institute has taken on an active role in advising companies on the corporate responsibility to
respect. Other NHRIs have also developed guidance for business on human rights. Often,
these activities such as promoting ways to combat discrimination in hiring and employment
termination or covering other labor issues are not labelled as ‘business and human rights’
matters which is often associated more with addressing transnational corporate activity.
However, these promotional activities must also be considered as belonging to the business
and human rights domain.

(iii) Access to remedy

The third pillar of the Protect, Respect, and Remedy Framework addressed access to remedy:

As part of their duty to protect against business-related human rights abuse, States must
take appropriate steps to ensure, through judicial, administrative, legislative or other
appropriate means, that when such abuses occur within their territory and/or jurisdiction
those affected have access to effective remedy.

It is especially in the field of providing access to remedy for victims of corporate related
human rights abuse where high expectations for a role for NHRIs are held. In fact, the
UNGPs envision NHRIs as State-based, non-judicial grievance mechanisms which can
provide effective and accessible remedies for business-related human rights abuse.
According to Principle 27, States should provide effective and appropriate non-judicial
grievance mechanisms and the Commentary to this Principle stipulates that NHRIs ‘have a
particularly important role to play’ as State based non-judicial grievance mechanism.
National human rights institutions and relevant multi-stakeholder initiatives.’ 88 NHRIs have
started to play a role in the second pillar of the Framework by Access to remedy can be
considered in a narrow and in a broader sense. In a narrow sense, access to remedy concerns
adjudicating individual or collective disputes. As mentioned previously, the Paris Principles
do not require NHRIs to have a complaint handling mandate but where NHRIs do have such
a mandate it is argued that these NHRIs can contribute to improve access to remedy in cases
of adverse human right effect caused by business activity. Some NHRIs have a mandate for
adjudicative dispute resolution regarding human rights in general or with regard to certain
categories, for example, employment discrimination or labor disputes. In such cases, NHRI
may issue binding decisions or non-binding recommendations. NHRIs sometimes have the
mandate to act as mediators or conciliators, in other words these NHRIs can play a role in
agreement-based dispute resolution. Many NHRIs, however, do not have the mandate to
directly address individual complaints of corporate abuse. Nevertheless, many NHRIs play a
role in access to remedy if this is perceived in a broader sense as facilitating such access by
supporting victims, providing information and advice on which remedy-avenues are available
or by using their investigatory powers to identify obstacles for victims and suggest
improvements in national legislation to improve access to remedy. In recent years, several
NHRIs have used their mandate to conduct inquiries to investigate specific situations of
human rights abuse and remedy-related issues. For example, in 2018, the Australian NHRI
announced a national inquiry into sexual harassment in Australian workplaces. In 2016,
Kenya’s National Commission on Human Rights has conducted a public inquiring into
certain mining activities. Based on these experiences, the Commission reached the
conclusion that the public inquiry’s is a successful instrument to provide remedy to victims
of business-related human rights abuses as it brings together multiple duty-bearers and rights-
holders. The Portuguese NHRI, which is the Ombudsman, has the mandate to investigate.
Moreover, the Ombudsman is entitled to compel evidence as well as testimony, conduct
inspection visits without prior notice and request actions within the investigation’s example
of a creative interpretation of the mandate of a NHRI is the ongoing investigation by the
Commission on Human Rights of the Republic of the Philippines. The Commission has held
public hearings in various places around the world on the potential liability of major fossil
fuel companies for climate change-related impacts on human rights in the Philippines.

In sum, as mentioned previously, in the UNGPs, the potential of NHRIs in the field of
business and human rights is stressed. This expectation has resonated in multiple policy
documents and been repeated by many scholars. NHRIs are frequently referred to as
promising actors in the business and human rights domain. As the examples above show,
NHRIs are indeed involved in many ways ranging from the promotion of human rights
towards States and corporations and also in protecting human rights by facilitating access to
remedy in a narrow and in a broader sense. NHRIs have started to take up these functions
across the three pillars of the Protect-Respect, Remedy Framework. Nevertheless, the
engagement with business and human rights matters remains quite limited in light of the
mounting expectations. The next section will address some of the challenges NHRIs face
when engaging with business and human rights.

2.4. Effectiveness of NHRIs in Addressing Business-related Human Rights Abuses

How does the draft Optional Protocol to the BHR-Treaty envision the role of NHRIs and how should
this proposal be evaluated also in light of the discussion of the current obstacles NHRIs face?

In accordance with Article 1 of the Optional Protocol, each State Party shall designate or establish,
within 2 years a National Implementation Mechanism (NIM) to promote compliance with, monitor
and implement the treaty on business and human rights. With a reference to the Paris Principles States
parties are required, inter alia, to ensure the independence of the NIM and its officers and ensure
necessary resources. According to the draft Optional Protocol, the NIM would have three key
functions:

(i) raising awareness of the BHR-Treaty at the domestic level;

(ii) conducting due diligence reviews;
(iii) Running a mediation process.

The first task of the NIM would be to make the treaty content known to the general public, business
and victims; to cooperate with other national institutions, foreign NIMs and civil society
organizations and to raise awareness on the implementation of the treaty and to make
recommendations to a State Party’s competent authorities. Beyond these awareness-raising activities,
which fit well with the promotional tasks NHRIs have, the NIM would have quite far-reaching
investigatory and review-competences. According to Article 5, the National Mechanism would be
granted the competence to conduct reviews on the implementation of due diligence obligations as
provided in the BHR-Treaty. Article 9 of the zero draft of the BHR-Treaty provides that

State Parties shall ensure in their domestic legislation that all persons with business activity of
transnational character within such States Parties’ territory or otherwise under their jurisdiction or
control shall undertake due diligence obligations throughout such business activities […].

A very broad range of actors may request the NIM to conduct a review of the due diligence
obligations: ‘victims, natural or legal persons conducting business activities of a transnational
character, or all other persons with a legitimate interest’. To prevent human rights violations in the
context of business activities, the OP states that NIMs would have the power to request all necessary
information from a State Party in relation to the implementation of the treaty which may include
reports on human rights matters provided by natural or legal persons under their jurisdiction.
Presumably, the power to request all necessary information refers to the information corporations
would be required to produce in the context of their due diligence obligations. The article refers to
information concerning ‘internal policies, outcomes and indicators of environmental and human
rights impact assessments. The NIM would also have the power to request such information from
other State Parties in the case of transnational business activity. This addresses the restrictions most
NHRIs now face in addressing the transnational activities of multinational enterprises. To conduct
due diligence reviews, the national implementation mechanism would have the competence to visit
and inspect business enterprise’s facilities, and conduct joint visits and inspections with other NIMs
to monitor the implementation and follow up of due diligence plans or policies. Provisions that would
equip the NIM to request and cooperate with mechanisms in other countries would overcome the
jurisdictional restraints NHRIs currently often face in the business and human rights field. In case of
non-compliance, the NIM would provide recommendations to natural or legal persons conducting
business activities in order for it to bring its operation into compliance, or inform the competent
authorities. By granting the NIM the competence to review the implementation of due diligence, the
Optional Protocol aims to address an important gap in the current business and human rights
governance structures. As pointed out by Bernaz, increasingly, ‘corporations are required to report on
their human rights performance but there is no consequence for poor reporting, and no systematic
process to check whether corporations have done enough, or even the veracity of those reports.
Instead, states rely on civil society scrutiny.’ As will be discussed in Section 7, this relates to what
some scholars have identified as ‘a principle deficiency’ of the UNGPs, the failure to institutionalize,
to provide tools to empower the participatory rights and roles of civil society. Institutionalizing this
role by granting the NIM the power to conduct such reviews would be a significant step towards
bridging the governance gap that currently exists. In the next section, it will be explained how the
proposal to establish national implementation mechanisms fits in a broader development towards
institutional innovation in human rights governance. The Optional Protocol also carves out a role for
the NIM in providing access to remedy. National Mechanisms may have the competence ‘to receive
and consider complaints of human rights violations alleged to have been committed by natural or
legal persons conducting business activities of a transnational nature brought by victims, their
representatives or other interested parties’. In the course of such proceedings the NIM may, inter alia,
request and receive all information, conduct visits and receive testimony. Subsequently, the national
mechanism will offer its good offices in order to reach an amicable settlement and, if reached,
monitor compliance with this settlement. This function is similar to the mediation role that the OECD
National Contact Points currently undertake In sum, the Optional Protocol foresees a role for NHRIs
as National Implementation Mechanisms in the future BHR-Treaty which would entail awareness
raising, a task NHRIs are familiar with, and quite far-reaching powers to conduct reviews of human
rights due diligence obligations. Moreover, the future NIM would have a role as mediator in business
and human rights conflicts. Besides the review and mediation by the NIM, the Optional Protocol
relies on international supervision by establishing an individual complaint procedure mirroring the
procedures of traditional international human rights treaties. According to Article 8, States Parties to
the draft Optional Protocol recognize the competence of the committee supervising compliance with
the business and human rights treaty, ‘to receive and consider communications from or on behalf of
individuals or group of individuals and [those parties that have reached an amicable agreement], with
regards to human rights violations in the context of business activities of transnational character under
the jurisdiction of a State Party […].’ A rather novel element is that the supervisory body will have
the competence to not only invite concerned States Parties but also ‘the involved person conducting
business activities of a transnational character to co-operate in the examination of the
communications received’. After the examination, the committee will send its findings and
recommendations to the State Party but also to involved person conducting the business activity.
Directly involving corporations in the UN supervisory proceedings is potentially groundbreaking. The
reception of the Optional Protocol was lukewarm. Whereas employers’ organizations criticized the
Optional Protocol for going too far, several civil society organizations felt the Optional Protocol does
not go far enough. The International Organization of Employers (IOE) criticized the unclear status of
the NIM pointing out the competence to conduct visits and inspections to business’ facilities is ‘very
vague and problematic’ as ‘only competent national authorities should have the authority to visit and
inspect company facilities’. However, it should be pointed out that many NHRIs currently already
have similar investigatory powers. The employers also raised many practical issues such as the
question how a NIM would deal with the sheer number of due diligence reviews it could potentially
be confronted with. NGOs have been especially dismissive of the fact that enforcement is left to an
international supervisory body of experts and national implementation mechanisms. Relying on
mediation will not provide better access to remedy and would in fact even weaken the provisions in
the BHR-Treaty it is argued. NGOs would like to see the NIM have standing to bring business and
human rights cases before a court of law. They argue that the focus in the Optional Protocol is too
much on conciliation and mediation and no reference is made to the protection function of NHRIs as
mentioned in the Paris Principles, especially the possibility of hearing complaints or petitions of
human rights violations, and transmitting them to the competent administrative and judicial national
authorities.

2.5. Case Studies of NHRIs in Protecting Human Rights in the Business Sector

Case Study 1: Danish Institute for Human Rights (DIHR)

The Danish Institute for Human Rights (DIHR) stands out as a notable example of a National
Human Rights Institution (NHRI) actively engaged in protecting human rights in the business
sector. Through its Business and Human Rights program, DIHR works to promote respect for
human rights by businesses operating in Denmark and globally. The DIHR provides
guidance to companies on how to integrate human rights into their policies and practices,
conducts research on human rights issues in the business sector, and collaborates with
stakeholders to address human rights abuses. One noteworthy initiative of DIHR is its
involvement in the development of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and
Human Rights, demonstrating its commitment to advancing human rights standards in the
corporate world.

Case Study 2: Ghana Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ)

The Ghana Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) has made
significant strides in protecting human rights in the business sector within the Ghanaian
context. CHRAJ's Human Rights and Business Unit focuses on monitoring and addressing
human rights abuses by businesses, particularly in relation to land rights, labor rights, and
environmental concerns. CHRAJ conducts investigations, provides legal assistance to victims
of human rights violations, and collaborates with industry associations to promote human
rights standards. A notable achievement of CHRAJ is its role in addressing child labor issues
in the cocoa industry through awareness-raising campaigns and advocacy for better working
conditions.

Case Study 3: Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)

The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has been actively involved in promoting
human rights in the business sector in Australia. AHRC's Business and Human Rights Unit
works to ensure that businesses respect human rights throughout their operations. AHRC
engages with businesses through consultations, training sessions, and guidance on human
rights due diligence. In addition, AHRC has investigated complaints of human rights abuses
by corporations and has facilitated dialogue between businesses and affected communities to
address grievances. An impactful initiative of AHRC is its collaboration with industry
partners to develop sector-specific human rights guidelines and toolkits for businesses to
improve their human rights performance.

These case studies highlight the important role that NHRIs play in protecting human rights in
the business sector by engaging with businesses, stakeholders, and communities to promote
respect for human rights standards and address human rights abuses effectively.

2.6. Theoretical Framework

2.6.1 Conceptual Framework for Assessing Effectiveness of NHRIs

Conceptual Framework for Assessing the Effectiveness of National Human Rights

Institutions (NHRIs) in Protecting Human Rights in the Business Sector:

1. Mandate and Legal Framework:

- Clarity and breadth of NHRI's mandate in addressing human rights abuses related to
business activities.

- Alignment of NHRI's mandate with international human rights standards and guidelines.

- Legal powers and independence of the NHRI to investigate and address human rights
violations by businesses.
2. Capacity and Resources:

- Adequacy of funding and staffing to effectively carry out the NHRI's mandate in the
business sector.

- Existence of specialized units or mechanisms focused on business and human rights within
the NHRI.

- Access to relevant expertise, training, and partnerships to enhance the NHRI's capacity in
addressing human rights abuses.

3. Collaboration and Stakeholder Engagement:

- Engagement with government agencies, civil society organizations, businesses, and affected
communities in addressing business-related human rights abuses.

- Mechanisms for fostering dialogue and cooperation between stakeholders to promote

respect for human rights standards.

- Utilization of multi-stakeholder platforms and partnerships to address systemic issues and

promote accountability in the business sector.

4. Monitoring and Evaluation:

- Systems and mechanisms for monitoring, documenting, and reporting on human rights
abuses by businesses.

- Use of indicators and benchmarks to assess the effectiveness of the NHRI's interventions
and initiatives.

- Regular evaluation of the NHRI's performance in protecting human rights in the business
sector and addressing gaps or challenges.

5. Impact and Outcomes:

- Demonstrated impact of NHRI's interventions in preventing human rights abuses,

remedying violations, and promoting positive change in the business sector.

- Contribution to the development and implementation of human rights policies, regulations,

and guidelines for businesses.
- Empowerment of affected communities and individuals to seek redress for human rights
violations and hold businesses accountable.

By considering these key elements within the conceptual framework, the effectiveness of
NHRIs in protecting human rights in the business sector can be assessed comprehensively,
leading to enhanced accountability, respect for human rights, and sustainable business
practices.

2.6.2. Key Principles and Standards for Human Rights Protection in Business Context

The global BHR framework currently encompasses the UN Global Compact (2000) and the
UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (2011). Both instruments are non-
binding. With no agreement yet reached in ongoing negotiations for a binding instrument, the
system is still based on voluntary commitment by businesses. The UN Global Compact is a
voluntary membership scheme encouraging businesses to follow a set of 10 principles in the
areas of human rights, labor, environment, and anti-corruption. The principles are compiled
from norms already set out in relevant human rights instruments and International Labour
Organization (ILO) standards. Principles 1 and 2 pertain to human rights. According to these
principles, businesses are required to “support and respect the protection of internationally
proclaimed human rights” and to be “not complicit in human rights abuses.”22 Principles 3
to 6 are about labor standards. Accordingly, businesses should uphold “freedom of
association” and the “right to collective bargaining;” eliminate “all forms of forced and
compulsory labour;” abolish “child labor;” and eliminate “discrimination” pertaining to
employment. The next three principles (Principles 7 to 9) are related to the environment.
They require business to “support a precautionary approach to environmental challenges;”
“promote greater environmental responsibility;” and “encourage the development and
diffusion of environmentally friendly technologies.” The last (and the tenth) principle
prohibits “corruption in all its forms, including extortion and bribery.”

The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) were adopted in June
2011 by the UN Human Rights Council through resolution 17/4. On the enduring question of
whether businesses can be directly held responsible for their impact on human rights, the
UNGPs settle for a “Protect, Respect, Remedy” framework and stand on these three pillars.
Pillar I is the State duty to protect against human rights by third parties including businesses.
Pillar II is the corporate responsibility to respect human rights. Pillar III is about ensuring
effective access to remedy (by both States and businesses). It is to be noted that the UNGPs
uses the word “duty” (for States) and “responsibility” (for businesses). Legally speaking, this
is intended not to imply new obligations on businesses, yet responsibility can arise from
ethical, social, and other grounds short of requirements by law. Thus in the language of
UNGPs, one can speak of “obligations” of States but not of businesses. The non-binding
nature of UNGPs is emphasized in the very opening (General Principle’s section) of the
document which reads: “Nothing in these Guiding Principles should be read as creating new
international law obligations.” The UNGPs elaborate both general and operational principles
for States and businesses to follow under each of the three pillars. After underscoring the
State duty to protect in Pillar I, Principle 11 (under Pillar II) elaborates the business
responsibility to respect human rights. In a nutshell, the responsibility entails that businesses
“should avoid infringing on the human rights of others and should address adverse human
rights impacts with which they are involved. “The UNGPs underline that there should be no
confusion about what the business responsibility to respect human rights entails with regard
to the State’s duty to protect. It can neither be used as an excuse to shift nor to imply reduced
obligations on the part of States. The responsibility to respect human rights by businesses
“exists independently of States’ abilities and/or willingness to fulfil their own human rights
obligations, and does not diminish those obligations.”

Business activities have the potential to affect virtually all rights. The UNGPs expect
businesses to respect at least internationally recognized human rights. Paragraph 12 of the
UNGPs provides that the “responsibility of business enterprises to respect human rights
refers to internationally recognized human rights –understood, at a minimum, as those
expressed in the International Bill of Human Rights and the principles concerning
fundamental rights set out in the International Labour Organization’s Declaration on
Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work.” With regard to scope, the UNGPs apply to all
types of businesses (both transnational and others, irrespective of size, sector, location,
ownership, and structure). The UNGPs require businesses to adhere to the standard of
“human rights due diligence.” The exercise is meant to “identify, prevent, mitigate and
account for how they address their adverse human rights impacts,” and entails “assessing
actual and potential human rights impacts, integrating and acting upon the findings, tracking
 responses, and communicating how impacts are addressed.” If and once harm materializes,
Pillar III outlines mechanisms to ensure effective remedy through State-based judicial and
non-judicial mechanisms, and non-State-based grievance mechanisms. Coming to the UN
draft BHR treaty, the ongoing negotiation process –for a binding instrument– is one of at
least three such attempts. A draft Code of Conduct (1990) and draft norms (2003) did not
lead to binding instruments. Both businesses and several States resisted the 2003 draft norms
in particular for their own respective reasons. The norms (if operational) would have
provided for direct human rights obligations on corporations, which would also amount to
bestowing legal personality for corporations under international law. Corporations resisted
the possibility of bearing direct obligations. States were also not sure about the precedent the
norms would set in upgrading the status of transnational corporations as legal persons in the
eyes of international law. Developed States also preferred a non-binding framework. The
process was replaced by a procedure that ultimately led to the drafting and the final adoption
of the non-binding UNGPS in 2011.

2.6.3. The Role of NHRIs in Promoting Business Respect for Human Rights

National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) play a crucial role in promoting business respect
for human rights and safeguarding against business-related human rights abuses. NHRIs are
uniquely positioned to monitor, investigate, and address human rights violations by businesses,
ensuring accountability and redress for affected individuals and communities. NHRIs can
provide guidance to businesses on integrating human rights into their policies and practices,
promote dialogue between government, businesses, and civil society on human rights issues, and
raise awareness about human rights standards in the business sector.

NHRIs also serve as a bridge between national governments and international human rights
frameworks, advocating for the implementation of international human rights standards in
national laws and policies related to business activities. Through collaboration with other
stakeholders such as businesses, civil society organizations, and affected communities, NHRIs
can work towards creating a business environment that respects and upholds human rights
principles.
By monitoring and reporting on human rights abuses by businesses, conducting investigations,
and providing recommendations for improvements, NHRIs can contribute to preventing and
addressing business-related human rights violations. NHRIs can also provide access to remedy
for individuals and communities affected by such violations through their complaint mechanisms
and engagement with relevant stakeholders.
Overall, NHRIs play a critical role in promoting a culture of respect for human rights in business
practices, contributing to the protection of individuals and communities from human rights
abuses in the context of business activities. Their effectiveness in safeguarding against business-
related human rights abuses depends on their independence, resources, capacity, and the level of
cooperation and engagement with key stakeholders.
Ethiopia is a country that has experienced significant economic growth in recent years, attracting
foreign investment and increasing the presence of multinational corporations. However, this
economic growth has been accompanied by reports of human rights abuses, including forced
evictions, exploitation of workers, and environmental pollution. The Ethiopian Human Rights
Commission (EHRC) is the national institution responsible for promoting and protecting human
rights in the country.
 Chapter Three

3. Methodology

This research will employ a mixed-methods approach, combining both qualitative and
quantitative research methods. The qualitative component will involve a desk review of relevant
literature on the role of NHRIs in protecting against business-related human rights abuses, as
well as an analysis of EHRC reports, publications, and interviews with key stakeholders. The
quantitative component will include a survey of businesses and civil society organizations in
Ethiopia to gather data on their perceptions of the EHRC's effectiveness in addressing business-
related human rights abuses.

3.1. Study area

The study area focuses on assessing the effectiveness of National Human Rights Institutions in
safeguarding against business-related human rights abuses, with a specific focus on the Ethiopian
Human Rights Commission. This research seeks to investigate the role and impact of the
Commission in addressing human rights violations within the business sector in Ethiopia. By
examining the Commission's activities, approaches, and challenges in protecting against
business-related human rights abuses, this study aims to provide valuable insights into the
functioning and effectiveness of National Human Rights Institutions in upholding human rights
standards in the context of business operations. Through a thorough examination of the Ethiopian
Human Rights Commission's efforts, this research will contribute to a broader understanding of
the role of such institutions in promoting respect for human rights within the business sector and
inform potential strategies for enhancing their effectiveness in addressing human rights abuses.

3.2. Research Approach:

The research approach proposed for examining the role and practices of the Ethiopian Human
Rights Commission in addressing business-related human rights abuses involves several key
elements. Firstly, a comparative analysis will be conducted to compare the Commission with
successful National Human Rights Institutions globally, identifying best practices and areas for
improvement. Secondly, stakeholder engagement will be a vital component, with key
stakeholders such as government officials, businesses, civil society organizations, affected
communities, and international human rights organizations being consulted through various
methods like interviews and surveys. Additionally, a case study approach will be used to delve
into the policies, procedures, and outcomes of the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission in
handling human rights abuses by businesses. Furthermore, a mixed methods approach will be
adopted, utilizing both qualitative and quantitative methods to collect data on the Commission's
effectiveness. Lastly, a human rights-based approach will underpin the research, focusing on
principles such as dignity, equality, accountability, and participation to assess the Commission's
efforts in protecting human rights in business operations.

3.3. Research Design

The research design for examining the effectiveness of the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission
in addressing business-related human rights abuses includes a purposeful sampling strategy to
select key stakeholders such as government officials, businesses, civil society organizations, and
affected communities in Ethiopia. Data collection will involve quantitative surveys with these
stakeholders to measure their perception of the Commission's effectiveness, alongside qualitative
in-depth interviews and focus group discussions to gather their experiences and perspectives.
The collected data will be analyzed using statistical methods for quantitative data and thematic
analysis for qualitative data to identify trends and key themes. Furthermore, a comparative
analysis will be conducted to benchmark the findings against international best practices for
National Human Rights Institutions in addressing business-related human rights abuses. Finally,
recommendations will be formulated based on the research findings to enhance the effectiveness
of the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission in protecting human rights in business activities.

3.4. Data Collection Methods

Various data collection methods will be utilized to evaluate the effectiveness of the Ethiopian
Human Rights Commission in addressing business-related human rights abuses. Interviews will
be conducted with key stakeholders to gather qualitative data on their perceptions. Focus group
discussions will involve a diverse group of participants to explore differing perspectives on the
Commission's role. A survey will be distributed to businesses operating in Ethiopia to gather
quantitative data on their experiences and human rights practices. Document analysis will be
conducted on relevant reports and publications. In addition, observational methods may be
employed to observe interactions and interventions between the Commission and businesses. By
combining these methods, a comprehensive assessment can be made on the Commission's
effectiveness in protecting against human rights abuses in the business sector.

3.5. Population and target population

The target population, as described by Frederic (2010), refers to the complete set of
individuals, events, or objects, whether actual or hypothetical, that the researcher aims to
generalize the findings to (Parveen, 2015, pp. 118-120).The population of interest for this
study includes various stakeholders involved in business-related human rights abuses in
Ethiopia. This may include government officials, representatives from the Ethiopian Human
Rights Commission, business owners, employees, human rights organizations, and
individuals affected by human rights abuses in the business sector.

3.6 Sample size and sampling techniques

Sample size

Sampling involves selecting a subset from a larger population, a sample from which the
researcher intends to draw broader conclusions in order to accurately represent the entire group
(Leedy, 1989). The growing necessity for research has highlighted the importance of an effective
approach to determining the required sample size to adequately reflect a specific population.
The sampling strategy for this study on business-related human rights abuses and the
effectiveness of the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission will involve constructing a sampling
frame based on the target population, including businesses in Ethiopia, relevant government
agencies, and human rights organizations. Purposive sampling and snowball sampling techniques
will be used to select participants, with an emphasis on key stakeholders with direct knowledge
or experience in human rights abuses and the Commission. The sample size for each stakeholder
group will be determined based on data saturation and diversity of perspectives. Criteria for
participant selection will include involvement in human rights policy-making, operations in
Ethiopia for business owners, and direct experience with human rights violations for affected
individuals. Data will be collected through interviews, focus groups, surveys, and document
analysis, tailored to each participant group and research question. This comprehensive sampling
strategy aims to capture a wide range of perspectives on the effectiveness of the Ethiopian
Human Rights Commission in addressing human rights abuses in the business sector,
contributing to the advancement of human rights protection in Ethiopia.
For a study focusing on assessing the effectiveness of the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission
in protecting against business-related human rights abuses from a population size of 3000, the
sample size can be determined based on several factors such as the level of confidence desired,
the margin of error acceptable, and the anticipated effect size.

A common formula used to calculate sample size is:

n = (Z^2 * p * q) / E^2

Where:

n = required sample size

Z = Z-score corresponding to the desired confidence level (e.g., 1.96 for 95% confidence)

p = estimated proportion of the population with a particular characteristic

q=1-p

E = margin of error
For a population size of 3000, researchers may choose a sample size that allows for
reasonable statistical power and generalizability of findings. If, for instance, a confidence
level of 95% and a margin of error of +/-5% are desired, and assuming a proportion (p) of
50% (to yield the largest sample size for a given population), the calculation would look like
this:

n = (1.96^2 * 0.5 * 0.5) / 0.05^2

n = (3.8416 * 0.25) / 0.0025

n = 0.9604 / 0.0025

n ≈ 384

Therefore, a sample size of approximately 384 participants from the population of 3000
would be selected for this study.

The sample size governed by the researcher’s time and funding. Purposive sampling was
employed to choose a sample from the population of this study.

Sampling Techniques:

Data collection methods such as interviews, focus group discussions, surveys, and document
analysis will be used to gather information from the selected participants. Each sampling
technique will be tailored to the characteristics of the participant group and the specific
research questions being addressed in the study.

By implementing this sampling strategy, researchers can ensure the comprehensive

representation of diverse perspectives and experiences related to business-related human
rights abuses and the role of the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission in addressing these
issues. The findings obtained through this sampling strategy will enable a nuanced
understanding of the Commission's effectiveness and contribute to the advancement of
human rights protection in the business sector in Ethiopia.

3.7. Data Analysis Techniques:

The researchers will utilize various data analysis techniques to examine the effectiveness of
the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission in addressing business-related human rights
abuses. Thematic analysis will be used to identify patterns and trends in qualitative data
gathered from interviews, focus group discussions, and document analysis. Descriptive
statistics will summarize quantitative data obtained from surveys with businesses in Ethiopia.
A comparative analysis will be conducted to compare the perspectives of different
stakeholder groups. Content analysis will examine documents related to the Commission's
activities. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) may be used to explore the
experiences of individuals affected by human rights abuses. These techniques will provide a
comprehensive understanding of the Commission's role in protecting human rights in the
business sector and inform recommendations for improvement.

3.8. Ethical Considerations

Ethical considerations play a crucial role in research, particularly when investigating

sensitive topics such as human rights abuses. In the study examining the effectiveness of the
Ethiopian Human Rights Commission in addressing business-related human rights violations,
several ethical considerations will be carefully observed. Firstly, all participants will be fully
informed about the study's purpose, procedures, risks, and benefits, and their voluntary
consent will be obtained before their involvement. Confidentiality will be strictly maintained
to safeguard participants' privacy, with data securely stored and identities anonymized in
reporting. Respect for participants will be paramount, with researchers ensuring cultural
sensitivity and accurately representing participants' voices. Vulnerable populations will
receive special attention, with support provided as needed to prioritize their well-being. Any
potential conflicts of interest will be openly disclosed and managed to ensure research
integrity. Data will be utilized solely for research purposes and shared only with participants'
consent, with findings reported accurately and ethically. By adhering to these ethical
principles, the study will uphold the values of respect, integrity, and human rights promotion
throughout the research process.
 CHAPTER FOUR
4. WORK PLAN AND BUDGET PLAN
4.1 Work plan

A work plan, sometimes called a project plan, outlines in specific detail how a project will
be conducted, who will work on which part, and when and in what order each part will be
accomplished (Perelman, Barrett, & Para, 2001). Work plans show all the tasks involved
in a project, who is responsible for each task, and when the tasks will be completed (Tools
dev, 2014).The table shown below explains the major activities performed within a
specified time.
Table 4.1 work plan

No Activity month

Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb mar Apr. May June

1 Topic selection

2 Preparation of
research proposal

3 Recommendation
of comment to
the first draft of
the proposal

4 Typing of the
final proposal

5 Submission of
proposal

6 Preparation of
Questionnaire/int
 erview guideline/
Observational
Checklist and
any other data
collection tools

7 Data collection

8 Data screening
encoding, entry,
generating
preliminary
analysis and
interpretation

9 Submission of
preliminary draft
in

softcopy via CD
or Flash disk to
department

10 Submission of
final draft Thesis
in softcopy via
CD or Flash disk
to departments

11 Final Thesis
Defense

12 Submission of
Final Thesis after
incorporating
defense
comments, in
four copies with
book-form
binding. Students
are also expected
to submit
softcopy of their
thesis, and do-
 file in CD

4.2. Cost Budget breakdown

The Budget Justification contains more in depth detail of the costs behind the line items with
their respective quantities in the table below

Table 4.2.Cost budget

category No Item quantity Cost of each item in ETH Birr Total cost in ETH birr
Material cost 1 White 4 package 2 4000
paper /Desta
2 pen 10 20 200
3 Flash 2 500 500
disk/CD 16
GB
4 Flash 2 250 500
memory 32
GB
5 Envelope and 5 150 750
bag
6 transportatio 1000
n
Sub total 6950
Service cost 1 Internet 1 Gb for 6 500 3000
month
2 copy 474 page 10 4740
3 Typing and 474 page 10 4740
printing
4 Binding - - 300
 5 Mobile card 6 times 50 300
6 Statist for - - 2000
analysis

Sub total 15080

total 22030

Reference

1 UN Doc A/HRC/8/5, Protect, Respect and Remedy: A Framework for Business and Human
Rights:
Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the Issue of Human Rights and
Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises, Human Rights Council (7 April
2008).
2 According to Ruggie this regulatory ecosystem differs from a hierarchical system. The
regulatory dynamic that has evolved is ‘one in which public and private governance systems –
corporate as
well as civil – each come to add distinct value, compensate for one another’s weaknesses, and
play mutually reinforcing roles – out of which a more comprehensive and effective global regime
might evolve, including specific legal measures.’ John Gerard Ruggie, ‘Hierarchy of Ecosystem?
Regulating Human Rights Risks of Multinational Enterprises’ in César Rodriguez-Garavito (ed),
Business and Human Rights: Beyond the End of the Beginning (Cambridge University Press
2017) 47.
3 UN Doc A/HRC/8/5 (2008) para 97.
4 Commentary to Principle 3, Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs),
United Nations, HR/PUB/11/04 (2011). <https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/
GuidingPrinciplesBusinessHR_EN.pdf> accessed 17 July 2020.

5 Commentary to Principle 25, UNGPS (2011).

6 See the Edinburgh Declaration, International Co-Coordinating Committee of National Human
Rights Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (ICC) (10 October 2010)
<https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/AboutUs/NHRI/Edinburgh_Declaration_en.pdf> accessed
17 July 2020. The Edinburgh Declaration is discussed in more detail infra.
7 See, inter alia, the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers Recommendation
CM/Rec(2016)3c
to Member States on human rights and business, which stresses a role for NHRIs in developing
National Action Plans (para 11), assist in offering due diligence training (para 28) and as a
nonstate based judicial mechanism that can receive and adjudicate complaints (para 51) <https://
edoc.coe.int/en/fundamental-freedoms/7302-human-rights-and-business-
recommendationcmrec20163-of-the-committee-of-ministers-to-member-states.html> accessed
17 July 2020.
8 UN Doc A/HRC/26/L 22/Rev 1, Elaboration of an international legally binding instrument on
transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights, Human
Rights Council (25 June 2014), online
<https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/LTD/G14/
064/48/PDF/G1406448.pdf?OpenElement> accessed 12 December 2019.
9 On 16 July 2019, the Open-Ended Intergovernmental Working Group on transnational
corporations and other business enterprises (OEIGWG) released a revised draft text of the draft
treaty text. This revised text was discussed during the intergovernmental negotiations at the firth
session of the OEIGWG held from 14 to 18 October 2019. The second revised draft text was
released in August 2020 and is available here online <https://www.ohchr.org/ Documents/ HR
Bodies/ HR Council WGTrans Corp/ Session6/ OEIGWG_ Chair -
Rapporteur_second_revised_draft_LBI_on_TNCs_and_OBEs_with_respect_to_Human_Rights.
pdf> accessed 30 August 2020.
10. Draft Optional Protocol to the Legally Binding Instrument to Regulate, in International
Human Rights Law, the Activities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business
Enterprises,
OEIGWG, 2018: <https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/WGTransCorp/
Session4/ZeroDraftOPLegally.PDF> accessed 17 July 2020. At the time of writing there has
been
no revision of this text presented by the OEIGWG. The references in this paper to the provisions
in the Optional Protocol therefore refer to the 2018 first draft text of the Optional Protocol.
11 Article 1 Optional Protocol (2018).
12 Optional Protocol (2018) Article 2 asserts that States Parties shall consider the Principles
Relating to the Status of National Institutions for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights
(Paris Principles) when designating or establishing the [NIM]. The Paris Principles are further
discussed infra.

2 Tasew Abitew (2021). “Approaches to Regulating Corporate Social Responsibility in

Ethiopia: The Case of Manufacturing Companies” (LL.M. thesis, Addis Ababa
University).
3 Sumeyye Kusakci and Ibrahim Bushera (2023). “Corporate social responsibility
pyramid in Ethiopia: A mixed study on approaches and practices,” International
Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 37-48.
4 Tasew Abitew, supra note 2.
5 Berihu Gereziher and Yohannes Shiferaw (2020). “Corporate Social Responsibility
Practice of Multinational Companies in Ethiopia: A Case Study of Heineken Brewery
S.C,” British Journal of Arts and Humanities Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 36-55.
6 Dakito Alemu Kesto (2017). “Corporate Social Responsibility Practices and
Stakeholders’ Awareness: Case of Ethiopia,” Global Journal of Management and
Business Research: D Accounting and Auditing, Vol. 17, No. 1 (1).
7 See for example, Bereket Alemayehu Hagos (2022), “Legal Aspects of Corporate
Social Responsibility in Ethiopia: A Sustainable Development Perspective,” The
Journal of Sustainable Development Law and Policy, Vol. 13 No. 2.
See also Alemayehu Yismaw Demamu (2020), “Towards Effective Models and Enforcement of
Corporate Social Responsibility in Ethiopia,” Mizan Law Review, Vol.
14 No. 2, pp. 276-309.
8 Judith Schrempf-Stirling, Harry J. Van Buren, and Florian Wettstein (2022). “Human
Rights: A Promising Perspective for Business & Society,” Business and Society, Vol.
61 No. 5, p. 14.

9 Mizanie Abate Tadesse (2016). “Transnational Corporate Liability for Human Rights
Abuses: A Cursory Review of the Ethiopian Legal Framework,” Mekelle University
Law Journal, Vol. 4, p. 34.
10 Surya Deva (2022). “Treaty tantrums: Past, present and future of a business and human
rights treat,” Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, Vol. 40(3), p. 211.
18 Grainne de Búrca, Robert O Keohane and Charles Sabel, ‘New Modes of Pluralist Global
Governance’ (2013) 45 Int’l L & Politics, 723.
19 NHRIs can encompass a broad range of bodies that are mandated to promote and protect
human rights at the national level. For the purpose of this paper, NHRIs are those bodies that are
engaged with the accreditation-process at GANHRI (this process is further discussed infra).
20 UN Center for Human Rights, National Human Rights Institutions: A Handbook on the
Establishment and Strengthening of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of
Human Rights (1995) 39, <https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/blog/document/national-humanrights-
institutions-a-handbook-for-the-establishment-and-strengthening-of-nationalinstitutions-for-the-
promotion-protection-of-human-rights/> accessed 17 July 2020.

21 UN Doc A/RES/48/134, Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions (Paris

Principles),
UN General Assembly Res (1993), <https://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/48/a48r134.htm>
accessed 10 December 2019.
22 According to the website of the United Nations Global Alliance of National Human Rights
Institutions (GANHRI) <https://ganhri.org/nhri/> accessed 17 July 2020.
23 Paris Principles (1993).
24 Formally known as the International Coordinating Committee for National Institutions for the
Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (ICC).
25 GANHRI interprets the Paris Principles in its General Observations: <https://nhri.ohchr.org/
EN/Pages/default.aspx> accessed 5 June 2020.
27 B-status is given to national institutions that are not fully compliant with the Paris Principles.
As of 2019, GANHRI accredited 34 NHRIs with the B-status.
28 There are a few exceptions. For example, in Europe some countries have more than one
accredited institution. These countries are Bulgaria, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.
Besides
the institutions accredited by GANHRI, a country may have multiple national organizations
dealing with human rights issues. These organizations may a have a narrower mandate such as,
for
example, equality bodies. In this article the focus is on NHRIs as accredited by GANHRI.
29 Linda C Reif, ‘The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and Networked
Governance: Improving the Role of Human Rights Ombudsman Institutions as National
Remedies’
(2017) 17 Human Rights Law Review 603, 614-615.
30 ICC Sub-Committee on Accreditation (ICC-SCA) General Observations 1.2 (May 2013)
<https://
nhri.ohchr.org/EN/AboutUs/Governance/Documents/ICC%20SCA%20General
%20Observations. pdf> accessed 17 July 2020. See also, UN Office of the High Commissioner
for Human Rights
(OHCHR) National Human Rights Institutions: History, Principles, Roles and Responsibilities
(2010) 55 <www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/PTS-4Rev1-NHRI_en.pdf> accessed 10
July 2019.
31 For more on the functions of NHRIs see: Linda Reif, ‘The Shifting Boundaries of NHRI
Definition
in the International System’ in Ryan Goodman and Thomas Pegram (eds), Human Rights, State
Compliance, and Social Change (Cambridge University Press 2012) 52.
32 ICC-SCA, General Observation 1.2 (2013).
33 Article 33 (a) Nairobi Declaration (2008), adopted by the Ninth International Conference of
National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights:
<https://www.ohchr.org/
Documents/Countries/NairobiDeclarationEn.pdf> accessed 17 July 2020. See also ICC-SCA
General
Observations 1.10 (2013).
34 GANHRI-SCA, General Observations 1.5 (21 February 2018): <https://nhri.ohchr.org/EN/
AboutUs/GANHRIAccreditation/General%20Observations%201/EN_GeneralObservations_
Revisions_adopted_21.02.2018_vf.pdf> accessed 17 July 2020.

Appendix: Questionnaire for Participants

Dear participants,

This study will be conducted in partial fulfillment for Business and investment law in Debre
Berahan University. Its overall objective is Assessing the Effectiveness of National Human
Rights Institutions in the protection of Business-related Human Rights Abuses: The Case of the
Ethiopian Human Rights Commission. To this end, key informant interview guideline is used to
collect pertinent data from the study participants. If you have questions, please don’t hesitate to
contact the researcher via the following contact address:

Phone:

Email:
 ANNEX A: Open ended questionnaires

1. Personal Information
- Name:
- Sex:
- Age:
- Education:
- Position/Occupation:
- Organization/Community:
- Contact Information:

2. Perceptions of the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission (EHRC)

a. How familiar are you with the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission?

- Very familiar

- Somewhat familiar

- Not familiar at all

b. In your opinion, how effective is the EHRC in addressing business-related human rights
abuses in Ethiopia?
- Very effective

- Somewhat effective

- Not effective

3. Experience with EHRC

a. Have you or your organization/community ever engaged with the EHRC on business-related
human rights issues?
- Yes

- No

b. If yes, please describe your experience with the EHRC in addressing business-related human
rights abuses.

4. Role of EHRC
a. What do you perceive as the main responsibilities of the EHRC in protecting human rights in
the context of business activities?

b. In your opinion, what are the strengths and weaknesses of the EHRC in addressing business-
related human rights abuses?

5. Understanding of EHRC's Mandate, Capacity, and Practices

a. How would you describe the mandate of the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission (EHRC) in
addressing human rights abuses related to business activities?

b. In your opinion, what are the key strengths and limitations of the EHRC's capacity and
practices in addressing business-related human rights abuses?
6. Assessment of Collaboration with Stakeholders
a. Have you observed or experienced any collaboration between the EHRC and other
stakeholders, such as government agencies, civil society organizations, and businesses, in
addressing business-related human rights abuses?

b. In your view, how effective is the EHRC's collaboration with other stakeholders in addressing
business-related human rights abuses? Please provide examples if possible.

7. Identification of Challenges and Opportunities

a. What are some of the main challenges faced by the EHRC in fulfilling its mandate to protect
against business-related human rights abuses?

b. Are there any opportunities for improvement or innovative approaches that could enhance the
EHRC's effectiveness in addressing business-related human rights abuses?

8. Recommendations for Enhancing EHRC's Role

a. Based on your knowledge and experience, what recommendations would you provide to
strengthen the EHRC's role in protecting against business-related human rights abuses?

9. Additional Comments
Is there any other information or insights you would like to share regarding the EHRC's efforts in
addressing human rights abuses related to business activities in Ethiopia?

Thank you for participating in this study. Your feedback is valuable for assessing the
effectiveness of National Human Rights Institutions in the protection of business-related human
rights abuses. Specifically the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission, in safeguarding against
business-related human rights abuses

ANNEX B: FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION

Dear participants,

This study will be conducted in partial fulfillment for Business and investment law in Debre
Berahan University. Its overall objective is Assessing the Effectiveness of National Human
Rights Institutions in the protection of Business-related Human Rights Abuses: The Case of the
Ethiopian Human Rights Commission. To this end, FGD tools are used to collect pertinent data
from the study participants. If you have questions, please don’t hesitate to contact the researcher
via the following contact address: Thank you in advance for your willingness to participate in
this in-Group discussion by sparing your precious time.

Phone:
Email:
1. Personal Information
- Name: ---------------------------------------------
- Sex: -----------
- Age: -----------------------
- Education: --------------------
- Position/Occupation: ---------------
- Organization/Community: -----------
- Contact Information: ----------------
Open ended questionnaires to FG discussion

1. Can you share any experiences or insights on the role of the Ethiopian Human Rights
Commission (EHRC) in addressing human rights abuses related to business activities in
Ethiopia?

2. In your opinion, how effective is the EHRC in holding businesses accountable for human
rights abuses? Can you provide any examples or cases that demonstrate this?

3. How do you perceive the collaboration between the EHRC and other stakeholders, such as
government agencies, civil society organizations, and businesses, in addressing business-related
human rights abuses? Are there any successful partnerships that stand out to you?

4. What do you see as the main challenges faced by the EHRC in protecting against business-
related human rights abuses? How could these challenges be addressed or overcome?
5. In your view, what opportunities exist for the EHRC to enhance its effectiveness in addressing
business-related human rights abuses? Are there any specific initiatives or approaches that you
believe could be beneficial in this regard?

6. How would you suggest improving the EHRC's engagement with businesses to ensure greater
respect for human rights in their operations? What role do you think businesses themselves
should play in this process?

7. From your perspective, what are the key strengths of the EHRC in fulfilling its mandate to
protect against business-related human rights abuses? Are there any areas where the EHRC could
further strengthen its work in this area?

ANNEX F: EXTRACTS (IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW PARTICIPANTS)

Dear participants,

This study will be conducted in partial fulfillment for Business and investment law in Debre
Berahan University. Its overall objective is Assessing the Effectiveness of National Human
Rights Institutions in the protection of Business-related Human Rights Abuses: The Case of the
Ethiopian Human Rights Commission. To this end, this interview are used to collect pertinent
data from the study participants. If you have questions, please don’t hesitate to contact the
researcher via the following contact address: Thank you in advance for your willingness to
participate in this in- depth interview by sparing your precious time.

Phone:
Email:

1. Personal Information
- Name: ---------------------------------------------
- Sex: -----------
- Age: -----------------------
- Education: --------------------
- Position/Occupation: ---------------
- Organization/Community: -----------
- Contact Information: ----------------

Interview Question
1. Can you provide an overview of the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission's mandate in
addressing human rights abuses related to business activities?

2. How does the EHRC assess the capacity and resources available to effectively address
business-related human rights abuses?

3. In your experience, how does the EHRC engage with other stakeholders, such as government
agencies, civil society organizations, and businesses, in addressing business-related human rights
abuses?

4. What are some successful collaborations or initiatives that the EHRC has undertaken in the
past to address business-related human rights abuses?
5. What challenges do you believe the EHRC faces in fulfilling its mandate to protect against
business-related human rights abuses?

6. How do you see the EHRC seizing opportunities to enhance their effectiveness in addressing
business-related human rights abuses?

7. Can you provide examples of specific cases where the EHRC's intervention has resulted in
positive outcomes for victims of business-related human rights abuses?

8. How does the EHRC monitor and evaluate the impact of their actions in addressing business-
related human rights abuses?

9. In your opinion, what changes or improvements could be made to strengthen the EHRC's role
in protecting against business-related human rights abuses?