Read the Initial Assessment published by the NCP 2 March 2023: English
Read the Final Statement published by the NCP 27 September 2023: English

On 28 July 2021, an attorney, acting as the legal representative of the Chagos Refugees Group UK (an NGO) and Crypto Currency Resolution Trust, submitted a specific instance to the Ireland NCP alleging that Afilias Ltd., Internet Computer Bureau Ltd. (ICB), and 101domain GRS Ltd., companies providing domain name services, had not observed the Human Rights (Chapter IV) and Consumer Interests (Chapter VIII) provisions of the Guidelines. Specifically, the submitters claimed that the companies had abetted in violations of their human rights through business operations using a digital asset controlled by the companies, and that services marketed by the companies enabled the conduct of unregulated e-commerce activity which led to the defrauding of consumers. The submitters claimed that the companies had violated the Guidelines by failing to have a policy commitment to human rights; failing to conduct proper human rights due diligence; and failing to provide for or co-operate in the remediation of adverse human rights impacts.

The Ireland NCP coordinated with the NCPs of the UK and US given that some of the companies’ actions took place on their territory. The Irish NCP noted challenges in handling the complaint, specifically the complex nature of the complaint, questions of jurisdiction, and coordination.

On 2 March 2023, the NCP published an initial assessment deciding to accept the case for further examination. The companies refused the NCP’s offers of mediation. Afilias and ICB, under the same parent group, continued to engage in the fact-finding process through submission of information, and 101domain GRS Ltd. declined any further participation. The NCP moved to make its own examination of the issues.

On 27 September 2023, the NCP published a final statement without agreement between the parties, issuing the following recommendations:

• Parties to specific instances should note the non-judicial nature of the process and engage in a constructive manner
• If a product is associated with long-running disputes concerning human rights, enterprises should be able to demonstrate human rights due diligence and be apprised of OECD due diligence guidance
• MNEs should express their commitment to human rights through a publicly available policy
• MNEs should provide consumers with appropriate non-judicial dispute resolution as per OECD guidance
• Enterprises should engage with public authorities to help prevent deceptive marketing practices
• MNEs informed by an NCP that they are the subject of a specific instance should engage with the NCP, including making submissions outlining their position on the complaint.

Noting the distance between the positions of the parties in this case, and the position taken by the companies with respect to the NCP process, the NCP considered that conducting a follow-up would not be constructive or advance the aims of the Guidelines. The specific instance is therefore concluded.

#nationallaw #directlylinked #riskmanagementsystem #duediligence #civilandpoliticalrights #ESCR #deceptivemarketing #e-commerce #coordination #legitimateinterest #fact-finding #localsubsidiary #recommendations