Background

​​​

National Contact Points for Responsible Business Conduct (NCPs) are the implementation mechanism of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (the OECD MNE Guidelines). They exist in all the 51 countries around the world adhering to the OECD MNE Guidelines. 

​

The OECD MNE Guidelines are a set of recommendations for business covering all areas of business responsibility, including labour and human rights issues, environment, disclosure, anti-corruption, consumer interests, science and technology, competition, and taxation. The OECD MNE Guidelines are aligned with, and complement, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy.

​

NCPs have three unique functions, which are to: 

• raise awareness and promote the uptake of the OECD MNE Guidelines;

• act as a non-judicial grievance mechanism for alleged breaches of the OECD MNE Guidelines by companies (known as ‘specific instances’); and

• support their government’s policy efforts to promote responsible business conduct, where appropriate. 

 

The NCP mechanism may not be widely known; however, it is a grievance mechanism available to individuals and communities who may be adversely impacted by the operations or business relationships of multinational enterprises operating in or from any of the 51 countries adhering to the OECD MNE Guidelines. Many of the multinational enterprises headquartered in countries adhering to the OECD MNE Guidelines have supply chains that extend throughout the Asia-Pacific region. The Guidelines’ expectations of responsible business conduct extend along these supply chains, which means that NCPs often receive complaints related to multinational businesses’ operations or business relationships in the region. 

​

Since 2000, NCPs have collectively handled more than 700 complaints addressing impacts from business operations in over 100 countries and territories. Almost half of these cases (46 per cent) relate to activities taking place in non-adherent countries, and approximately 25 per cent relate to business activities in the Asia-Pacific. For example, NCPs have handled complaints relating to human rights issues in sugar production in Cambodia; human rights and environmental impacts of mining investments in Papua New Guinea; and adverse impacts from investments in a range of sectors in Myanmar and Indonesia. 

​

NCPs are a relatively accessible grievance mechanism because they have comparatively low jurisdictional and procedural barriers, and participation in the mechanism is free. Facilitating easy access to NCPs’ grievance mechanism by business, trade unions, NGOs, and other members of the public is key to the effectiveness of NCPs in providing access to remedy. Therefore, many NCPs take steps to ensure all complainants and potential complainants are receive appropriate support to use the mechanism to seek access to remedy for business-related harms.

​​​​

Objectives​​

​

To showcase the experiences of organisations or individuals who have used NCPs as a mechanism to seek access to remedy in the Asia-Pacific region, and to hear directly from NCPs about how they ensure the mechanism is accessible to organisations and individuals in the region submitting complaints.

​

Key questions

​

• How do National Contact Points for Responsible Business Conduct (NCPs) work, and where do they fit in the landscape of remedy mechanisms available in relation to business and human rights issues in the Asia-Pacific?

• What types of human rights grievances have communities and organisations brought to NCPs in the past? 

• What types of outcomes can be achieved through the NCP mechanism?

• How do communities and organisations go about submitting a case (called a specific instance) to an NCP? What are some of the practical tips for potential notifiers of cases to keep in mind? 

• What do the OECD MNE Guidelines expect of companies that are the subject of a specific instance?

• What benefits can the specific instance process bring to companies themselves?

• How do NCPs facilitate access to the mechanism by notifiers who might have limited organisational capacity and use languages other than the official language of the NCP?