The experiences of Germany and Norway on mHREDD legislation

Podcast Summary – 4th episode of the Podcast Series of the NOVA BHRE: “Perspectives on the Omnibus Proposal”

 

Claire Bright is Associate Professor in Private Law as well as the Founder and Director of the NOVA Centre on Business, Human Rights and the Environment at NOVA Law School in Lisbon, Daniel Schönfelder is a Legal Adviser at the Responsible Contracting Project and Kristel Tonstad is a Policy Director at the Norwegian National Contact Point.

 

Date: 23 June 2025
Host: Claire Bright (NOVA BHRE)
Guests:

• Daniel Schönfelder, Legal Adviser at the Responsible Contracting Project
• Kristel Tonstad, Policy Director, Norwegian National Contact Point

 

🇩🇪 Key Lessons from the German Supply Chain Act (LkSG):

Positive impacts:

• Clear obligations helped companies implement meaningful human rights due diligence (HRDD).
• Companies hired HR experts and set up implementation teams.
• The law enabled exploited workers (e.g., truck drivers) to claim stolen wages and other remedies.
• Influenced global actors (e.g., in China, Colombia, Vietnam) and encouraged responsible competitiveness.
• BAFA (enforcement authority) supported companies with tools and took a learning-based, dialogue-oriented approach.

Challenges:

• Over-focus on Tier 1 suppliers created inefficiencies; real human rights risks often lie deeper in the supply chain.
• Bureaucratic, checkbox-style compliance (e.g., generic supplier questionnaires) undermined effectiveness.
• Climate obligations were vague.
• Legal uncertainty around civil liability created confusion.

 

🇳🇴 Insights from the Norwegian Transparency Act:

Positive outcomes:

• Demonstrated that regulating risk-based HRDD in line with UNGPs and OECD Guidelines is feasible.
• Covers ~9,000 companies, including SMEs, who largely reported the law as “clear and manageable.”
• Encouraged deeper supply chain engagement, responsible recruitment, living wages, and project termination in adverse impact scenarios.
• Created synergies through collaboration between supervisory bodies and national contact points.

Challenges:

• Some legal terms remain unclear, requiring better guidance.
• Risk of excessive bureaucracy through one-size-fits-all approaches.
• Remediation is still poorly understood and implemented.

 

📘 Lessons Learned for the CSDDD:

• The original 2024 CSDDD draft incorporated many positive elements:
  • Clear climate obligations.
  • Civil liability provisions.
  • Tier-n, risk-based approach (inspired by Norway).
  • Authority-led, evidence-based enforcement (inspired by Germany).
  • Provisions for supporting SMEs.
• However, the Omnibus proposal risks:
  • Reversing progress by replacing simplification with deregulation.
  • Creating confusion with new terms that diverge from international standards.
  • Weakening core obligations (e.g., climate plans without implementation requirements).

 

🛠️ Policy Recommendations from Speakers:

• Daniel Schönfelder:
  • Avoid tier-1-only focus; promote risk-based due diligence across the chain.
  • Don’t dilute the directive to respond to lobbying—focus on evidence-based regulation.
  • Provide practical tools (e.g., better risk checks, living wage data, streamlined templates).
• Kristel Tonstad:
  • Avoid introducing unnecessary new terminology.
  • Ensure adequate resources for guidance and supervisory capacity.
  • Foster stakeholder engagement platforms for discussion and learning.
  • Keep rights-holders central and support global consistency.

 

Suggested citation: L. Rocha ‘Modern Slavery in 2025: Overcoming Persistent Legal and Practical Challenges in Brazil and Beyond‘, Nova Centre on Business, Human Rights and the Environment Blog, 25 June 2025