In June 2014, the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva adopted a resolution establishing an Open-ended Intergovernmental Working Group (OEIGWG) with the mandate to elaborate an international legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights.

Since then, several rounds of negotiations have taken place to advance successive drafts of the Binding Treaty. Key issues under discussion include the scope of the Treaty—which companies would be covered—mandatory human rights due diligence, civil and, in some cases, criminal liability, access to justice for victims, international judicial cooperation, and jurisdiction over parent companies and global supply chains.

Among the organizations involved in this process is the International Network for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ESCR-Net), which has participated in the Treaty process from the outset. “In fact, it was a call led by ESCR-Net members and allies that helped set this process in motion,” explains Mona Sabella, ESCR-Net’s Corporate Accountability Coordinator, in this interview with ComunicarSe.

From your perspective, how would you assess the current situation regarding business and human rights?

Today, there is a major gap in international law when it comes to protecting people and communities from human rights violations committed by corporations. At the same time, the growing concentration of wealth and economic power in the hands of a small number of transnational corporations and ultra-wealthy actors poses increasingly serious challenges to the protection of human rights.

The current economic system is based on the constant accumulation of capital and the maximization of profits. This model is generating historic levels of inequality. According to the World Inequality Report 2026, the richest 10% of the world’s population holds approximately three-quarters of global wealth, while the poorest half owns just 2%. The approximately 60,000 people who make up the richest 0.001% of the world now control three times more wealth than the poorest half of humanity combined.

For many communities, particularly in the Global South, these dynamics reproduce historical patterns of colonial domination: territories are turned into resource extraction zones, and communities are displaced to make way for data centers, large-scale mining projects, or major infrastructure, while the benefits are concentrated far from those who bear the social, environmental, and human costs.

When people lose access to housing, water, or a healthy environment, too little attention is often paid to the role played by the concentration of economic power, corporate capture of decision-making spaces, and deep structural inequalities. Yet many of these conflicts are linked to development models that prioritize short-term profits over human rights and environmental sustainability.

To transform this situation, we need a legally binding instrument that prevents these violations, strengthens access to justice, and ensures that transnational corporations are held accountable when human rights violations occur. We also need mechanisms to end corporate influence over public decision-making processes. The Binding Treaty represents an opportunity to establish international standards on prevention and accountability that can then be implemented and strengthened at the national level.

How did the United Nations Binding Treaty on Business and Human Rights come about?

The process emerged from calls by social movements, communities, and civil society organizations for the international community to adopt an international legal instrument capable of holding corporations and economic elites accountable for their actions, particularly when these are transnational in nature. Many transnational corporations operate in exploitative ways, particularly in contexts marked by violence, conflict, occupation, and war. Because of gaps in international law, they are often able to evade accountability for abuses committed by their subsidiaries abroad. This is unacceptable and must be addressed urgently.

What are its main objectives?

The Treaty’s main objective is to regulate the activities of transnational corporations and help put an end to corporate impunity. Although the specific mechanism that the instrument will establish has yet to be defined, it must focus on the activities of transnational corporations. It is essential that they can be held accountable internationally, particularly when national mechanisms do not exist, are ineffective, or lack the willingness to investigate and sanction human rights violations and abuses committed by corporations.

What mechanisms does the Treaty propose to prevent corporate abuses? What should be the main role of businesses under the Treaty, and how should States act?

The primary role of businesses should be to comply with international law. While companies currently have guidance such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the purpose of this Treaty goes beyond voluntary guidelines: it seeks to establish legally binding obligations.

The need to strengthen prevention mechanisms is clear. According to the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre, 790 attacks against human rights defenders raising concerns about business-related abuses were documented across 80 countries in 2025—the highest number recorded since 2020. Three-quarters of these attacks targeted land, climate, and environmental defenders, and nearly one-third affected Indigenous Peoples. These figures show that, in many contexts, those seeking accountability continue to face threats, criminalization, and even violence.

In this process, the primary role of corporations should be to refrain from interfering in the development of the Treaty. Otherwise, it would be like inviting someone accused of a crime to participate in determining their own sentence.

Does this mean that all businesses are criminals? Absolutely not. But when a company seeks to weaken accountability standards or reduce the obligations that could apply to it, it is legitimate to ask why.

States, for their part, must listen to the demands of communities and people affected by corporate power and ensure that the legally binding instrument establishes strong standards on prevention, accountability, and access to justice.

Which countries and regional groups have played a particularly important role in the negotiations?

In general, countries in the Global South are the most affected by the lack of accountability of transnational corporations. For this reason, many have actively participated in this process and played a prominent role, as demonstrated by Ecuador’s continued leadership as Chair of the intergovernmental working group.

That said, it is important to consider how geopolitical developments over the past twelve years have inevitably affected not only the Treaty process but the multilateral system as a whole. Recent years have been particularly difficult due to the genocide in Palestine, the war in Sudan, and other conflicts and atrocities affecting countries across Africa and Asia. The consequences are felt around the world and have enabled economic elites and those who support them to continue accumulating profits, while the other 99% face the loss of rights, territories, nature, and the environment.

Finally, what are the main challenges to achieving the adoption of the Treaty?

It is essential that States support this Treaty because, ultimately, it is designed to protect the vast majority of the world’s population. Allowing corporations to continue operating with impunity benefits neither States nor their people.

The main challenge is that some States, heavily influenced or captured by corporate power, will attempt to obstruct this process and weaken its content. We must protect both the process and its purpose, particularly now that the text is likely to be finalized for adoption within the next two years. The time to act—and to ensure that this process fulfills its mandate—is now.