A Symposium on Access to Justice under the European Union Business Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) was held in Vienna on 7 and 8 April 2025. Natalija Ferlež, a representative of the Human Rights Centre of the Ombudsman, attended the Symposium on behalf of the institution of the Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia (Ombudsman). The purpose of the event was to examine whether the CSDDD effectively ensures corporate accountability in the field of human rights and environmental protection and how it establishes access to justice.

The discussions revealed the complexity and difficulty of the areas regulated by the CSDDD Directive, which imposes new legal obligations on large companies in the areas of respect for human rights and environmental protection. The Directive obliges large companies to conduct due diligence and, among other things, provides victims of abuse with access to legal protection. An important turning point is the recently presented legislative proposal by the new European Commission regarding simplifications in the area of ​​corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence in companies regarding sustainability (the so-called Omnibus I package), which significantly interferes with the content of the CSDDD Directive and some other already adopted EU legislative acts. The Symposium participants were very critical of the aforementioned changes, as they significantly weaken some important aspects of the CSDDD. They agreed that this is a major step backwards from the already established international consensus on corporate responsibility in the area of ​​human rights and the environment.

The Ombudsman's representative, Natalija Ferlež, pointed out that the Ombudsman, as a national human rights institution, is committed to the protection and promotion of human rights in all areas, including within the business sector, and has therefore been monitoring developments in this area for a long time. In February, in cooperation with the environmental NGO Focus, the Association for Sustainable Development, the Ombudsman also prepared an inter-stakeholder consultation, the aim of which was to encourage the transposition of the CSDDD Directive into Slovenian law. In March, the Ombudsman informed the competent Ministry of the Economy, Tourism and Sport, the Government of the Republic of Slovenia and Slovenian members of the European Parliament of its critical views on the Omnibus I package.

The Ombudsman assesses that the European Commission's proposals in the Omnibus I legislative package are mostly inadequate and disproportionate, and harmful to the areas of human rights and the environment. The amendments significantly reduce the ability of the instruments implemented by the CSDDD and CSRD (European Union Directive on Corporate Sustainability Reporting) to effectively address challenges in the field of human rights and environmental protection. Given the long-standing commitment of the Republic of Slovenia to the protection of human rights and the environment, including in the European and international environment, the Ombudsman called on the competent ministry to ensure that Slovenia takes an ambitious position in the Council of the EU and advocates for as few interventions as possible in already adopted legislative acts, which have already gone through a lengthy democratic legislative procedure and represented a difficult compromise upon adoption.

The Ombudsman also stressed that the entire process should be conducted as transparently and openly as possible, taking into account the views of the widest possible range of stakeholders, which the European Commission unfortunately did not take into account when preparing Omnibus I. Therefore, the Ombudsman also calls on Slovenia to strive for maximum transparency in the legislative process, which will enable the views of all stakeholders to be heard and duly taken into account.

From the Ombudsman's point of view, we highlight some key shortcomings of the Omnibus I package proposals, which the Ombudsman perceives as concerning:

Limiting due diligence to direct business partners (i.e. Tier 1), except in cases where the company has credible information indicating that negative impacts have occurred or could occur. This ignores the fact that most human rights violations and environmental risks occur further down the value chain, which Omnibus I does not address at all. This misses the opportunity for positive effects on the entire value chain, which was an important added value of the CSDDD Directive. Therefore, the Ombudsman recommends that Slovenia advocates for the elimination of these proposed changes and the limitation of due diligence to Tier 1 only, and thus supports the existing regulation, which establishes a risk-based due diligence approach and corporate responsibility for the entire value chain.

Reducing the frequency of due diligence to five years instead of every 12 months. The Ombudsman considers that the proposed review period is significantly too long, as it does not ensure the permanence and continuity necessary for the effective detection of potential violations and risks.

Limiting the definition of stakeholders to only those who are directly affected by the company's products, services, or business practices. This greatly reduces the ability of companies to adequately and effectively identify and detect the most critical risks and to design appropriate measures, as stakeholder involvement is of paramount importance in this regard. The Ombudsman believes that the role and participation of stakeholders in the due diligence process is crucial, as without it we risk that the procedures will become mere administrative compliance, without any added value, as the knowledge and experience of different stakeholders will not contribute to optimal results in detecting and identifying negative impacts on human rights and the environment.

The abolition of the civil liability regime at EU level, leaving this issue to the national laws of the Member States. This creates fragmentation and also calls into question the provision of effective legal protection, which is essential for the success of the directive. The mandatory primacy of the application of national law over the otherwise applicable rules of the third country in which the damage occurred is abolished, which creates additional legal uncertainty and weakens the effectiveness of legal protection. It also limits the possibility for victims to be represented by non-governmental organisations and trade unions. The Ombudsman therefore recommends that the original provisions on civil liability be maintained, with the aim of ensuring harmonisation of the conditions for corporate civil liability across the EU and of enabling effective access to justice for rightsholders in all EU Member States.

Weaker obligation of the provisions on climate transition plans. The new proposal only imposes an obligation on companies to adopt climate transition plans, but not a commitment to implement them. The Ombudsman therefore recommends that a closer examination be carried out to determine whether the change in question would actually represent progress in reducing emissions and thus contribute to achieving the EU’s environmental and climate objectives, or whether it would provide companies with an excuse for not implementing their own climate transition plans.

More detailed positions of the Ombudsman are available by clicking on the link.

The Symposium brought together academics from various European countries, representatives of various human rights organisations, non-governmental organisations, and national human rights institutions. The event was organised by the Danish Institute for Human Rights, the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), the German Institute for Human Rights, and the French National Consultative Commission for Human Rights.

Following the symposium, a workshop of national human rights institutions on the Omnibus I proposals was held on Wednesday, 9 April 2025, to discuss how national human rights institutions can actively advocate for strong due diligence and corporate accountability legislation.