Despite being an internationally accepted corporate social responsibility framework, the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights have not managed to provide victims of corporate human rights violations with access to remedy. The European Commission has announced plans to introduce an EU-level human rights due diligence directive which may include corporate grievance mechanisms. This article considers potential synergies between the planned directive and the mechanism laid down in the Whistleblowing Directive. Three issues are highlighted. First, stakeholders usually face retaliation after making a complaint about human rights abuses in a company’s operations. By setting formal levels of protection against retaliation, the Whistleblowing Directive offers a regulatory framework to change this reality. Second, conducting effective human rights due diligence must be based on meaningful consultation with all relevant stakeholders. If companies approach this issue in a top-down manner using auditing firms, they risk non-compliance with human rights due diligence requirements. Therefore, the legislation should include corporate grievance mechanisms to match remedies with victims’ expectations. Third, in terms of corporate grievance mechanisms, victims often lack resources to participate in them in a fair and respectful manner. This requires EU Member States to use their legislative power to lay down regulations that effectively enhance cooperation and coordination with independent monitoring bodies. To enhance the development as to access to remedy, the Whistleblowing Directive offers synergies through which to achieve greater accessibility, transparency, and victim empowerment. Corporate grievance mechanisms, facilitated by the Whistleblowing Directive, could take this a step further.

尽管是国际公认的企业社会责任框架，但《联合国商业与人权指导原则》并未设法为企业侵犯人权的受害者提供获得补救的机会。欧盟委员会已宣布计划引入欧盟层面的人权尽职调查指令，其中可能包括企业申诉机制。本文考虑了计划中的指令与举报指令中规定的机制之间的潜在协同作用。突出三个问题。首先，利益相关者在对公司运营中的侵犯人权行为提出投诉后，通常会面临报复。通过设置针对报复的正式保护级别，举报指令提供了一个监管框架来改变这一现实。第二，开展有效的人权尽职调查必须以与所有相关利益攸关方进行有意义的协商为基础。如果公司以一种方式处理这个问题自上而下的方式使用审计公司，他们冒着不遵守人权尽职调查要求的风险。因此，立法应包括公司申诉机制，使补救措施与受害者的期望相匹配。第三，在企业申诉机制方面，受害者往往缺乏以公平和尊重的方式参与其中的资源。这要求欧盟成员国利用其立法权制定法规，有效加强与独立监督机构的合作与协调。为了促进获得补救的发展，举报指令提供了协同作用，通过这些协同作用来实现更大的可及性、透明度和受害者赋权。在举报指令的推动下，企业申诉机制可以更进一步。