Five-Year Overview of the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights

Executive Summary

The Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights (Voluntary Principles or Principles) — which were developed in 2000 and involve the governments of the U.S., U.K., Norway and the Netherlands; extractive and energy companies; and human rights NGOs—assist companies in maintaining the safety and security of their operations within a framework that ensures respect for human rights. The Principles provide guidance for companies on identifying human rights and security risk, as well as engaging and collaborating with state and private security forces.

This report details company perceptions, successes, lessons learned and challenges associated with implementing the Voluntary Principles over the initiative's first five years of existence. The following are key highlights:

  • The Voluntary Principles are seen as genuinely filling a critical void for companies seeking guidance about managing potential exposure to risks related to their security and human rights practices, especially in countries that are often associated with conflict or alleged abuses.
  • The Principles are seen as credible, thanks in part to multi-stakeholder participation, and palatable to both executives and home and host government bodies, given their voluntary nature and flexible guidelines. However, there is a concern that the lack of an audit mechanism may foster the perception among some stakeholders that the Voluntary Principles lack transparency.
  • For some, the Voluntary Principles are perceived as unnecessarily exclusive and would be open to seeing a broader membership that includes others in the extractives sector, services sector or other sectors facing similar issues.
  • The Voluntary Principles help to raise internal corporate awareness about security and human rights risks, thus elevating the profile of such risks and ensuring they become "top of mind" among corporate and operations management. Early CEO or senior executive sponsorship is viewed as key to ensuring smooth internal engagement with other business units and departments.
  • There is consensus that the Principles need to provide clearer language and guidance, and several companies noted they would welcome specific tools and implementation guidelines. Training is a significant area of interest for many companies, with a few companies already conducting trainings and others planning to do so in the future.
  • Many companies feel that home governments and NGOs need to become more involved and lend greater support and commitment to the implementation effort, especially in the area of host government engagement. That said, most companies have had very little, if any, experience in engaging host governments directly on the Voluntary Principles, and few have engaged with NGOs regarding implementation of the Principles.
  • Most companies had general social responsibility policies in place prior to implementing the Voluntary Principles, but few had specific extant human rights policies. Most have not set specific timelines for general implementation; however, several companies are well underway towards incorporating the Principles in overarching management frameworks.
  • While almost all companies reported that they have a process in place for anonymously reporting human rights abuses and "whistle-blower" protection, some have not yet established a comprehensive set of guidelines for responding to alleged abuses.
  • Companies are including the Voluntary Principles in at least some of their contracts, particularly with private security providers; however, some companies noted that they have had limited exposure to public security arrangements in their countries of operation.
  • For many companies, assessing risks associated with security and human rights is part of a larger risk or impact assessment. Many rely on a variety of different tools and sources of information, including the expertise of local country and regional managers who engage with local stakeholders and NGOs.

Furthermore, the following emerging best practices in implementation were identified:

  • Voluntary Principles are incorporated in all private security contracts, agreements with governments and standard company risk assessments.
  • The Principles are incorporated into Social Impact Assessments so that approval by government authorities means commitment to implementation and ongoing engagement.
  • The Principles are repeatedly emphasized and awareness should be continually raised among company employees and internal and external security staff by integrating the Voluntary Principles into orientations, trainings and evaluation processes.
  • Engage in human rights and humanitarian law training with state forces through a third party, and in as transparent a manner as possible.
  • Establish an anonymous "whistle blower" process for capturing concerns and grievances and internal guidelines for addressing alleged human rights abuses and sharing incident reviews with NGOs.
  • Share best practices on implementation across the company and with peers.
  • NGOs and/or other third parties are engaged in reviewing security arrangements and other human-rights-related conditions.
  • Include the Principles in government agreements and in contractual agreements with local police.
  • Begin the process of internal engagement at a high level within the company and secure buy-in from senior executives before engaging broadly across departments.

In addition, the following are key findings from the in-country working groups launched in Indonesia and Colombia:

  • Five energy companies involved in the Indonesian working group have signed MOUs with BP Migas, which is the Indonesian government's oil and gas coordinating body, and the Area Police Command (Polda) that include adherence to the Voluntary Principles.
  • The Colombian Ministry of Defense agreed to include language on human rights protection, including a commitment to the Voluntary Principles, in agreements that the state-owned oil company, Ecopetrol, signs with the Colombian armed Forces to provide protection for oil operations with which it is involved.
  • The Colombian working group has also developed a draft set of best practice guidelines for risk assessment, and continues to organize a series of on-going best practice exchange workshops.
  • The Colombian process was catalyzed by support from Colombian Vice President Francisco Santos, and the process has also achieved much of its success because the country's oil industry association, Asociaciõn Colombiana del Petrõleo (ACP), has served as a process champion for the working group.
  • Both the Indonesian and Colombian working groups are struggling with both a lack of NGO involvement and some company hesitation in sharing sensitive human rights information with NGOs.
  • The Indonesian and Colombian working groups have found engaging host country governments to be a significant challenge due to company concerns over jurisdiction, disparate levels of understanding and acceptance of the Principles among regional public security forces, vague language of the Principles regarding engagement of public security and varied support from home country governments.

Back to the top ⇑

Methodology

The Information Working Group of the Voluntary Principles (IWG) collected information on the experiences and learnings associated with company efforts to implement the Voluntary Principles over the last five years. Companies were offered a variety of options for sharing information with the IWG, including:

  • Completing one of two written surveys (one longer and more detailed than the other);
  • Participating in a telephone interview conducted by Business for Social Responsibility personnel, or
  • Proposing an information sharing mechanism of the company's own design.

These data collection tactics resulted in participation by all 16 company members of the Voluntary Principles; however, the multiple tactics also resulted in varying depth and breadth in the information captured, which is reflected in the structure of this report. Trends and themes have been identified where possible, primarily in the sections on company perceptions and general implementation, whereas the section on component-specific implementation provides a more detailed look at a select few companies' systems and processes, since fewer companies responded to these more detailed questions. It should be noted that companies are at varying stages of implementation—with some companies only very recently joining the membership—and that companies have varying levels of exposure to, for example, arrangements with public security. As a result, not all companies were able to respond to the component-specific questions.

Back to the top ⇑