Global South’s Concerns Over EU Omnibus Amendment: A Call for EU Member States to Prevent Backsliding on Corporate Accountability

By Joseph Byomuhangyi – Coordinator, Uganda Consortium on Corporate Accountability (UCCA)

The European Union (EU) has long positioned itself as a global leader in corporate accountability and sustainable business practices. However, recent developments surrounding the Omnibus amendment suggest a concerning retreat from these commitments. Reports indicate that the European Commission is considering reopening the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), potentially weakening its scope and effectiveness. For civil society organizations and affected communities in the Global South, this move represents a significant setback in the fight for human rights and environmental protection in global supply chains.

A Critical Moment for Corporate Accountability

The CSDDD, adopted in July 2024, set a new global standard for mandatory due diligence, requiring multinational corporations to ensure their supply chains respect human rights and environmental standards. While not perfect, the directive marked a significant shift from ineffective voluntary measures to binding obligations. Key provisions—such as extending due diligence beyond direct suppliers, including civil liability for companies, and ensuring robust enforcement—offered a blueprint for responsible corporate conduct worldwide.

However, the proposed Omnibus amendment threatens to dilute these protections. Among its most troubling aspects is the narrowing of due diligence obligations to only direct suppliers. This approach creates a dangerous loophole, as some of the most severe human rights abuses and environmental violations occur deeper in supply chains, often among subcontractors and informal workers in the Global South. By shifting responsibility away from corporations unless “reasonable reports of abuses” emerge, the amendment significantly weakens proactive oversight and accountability.

The Real-World Consequences of Weakening the CSDDD

The consequences of weak corporate due diligence are not hypothetical; they are already evident across the Global South. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, child labor in cobalt and lithium mines—critical for the EU’s green transition—has been widely documented. Without stringent due diligence, multinational corporations can continue to profit from exploitative labor conditions. Similarly, in Bangladesh, the 2013 Rana Plaza factory collapse, which claimed over 1,100 lives, exposed the dangers of unchecked subcontracting. Many European brands sourced from factories that failed safety standards, yet their legal liability was minimal.

The environmental toll is just as severe. In Brazil, rampant deforestation in the Amazon has been linked to EU-bound soy and beef exports, with supply chain opacity allowing illegal land grabs and indigenous rights violations to persist unchecked. Uganda has also seen troubling corporate human rights abuses. The extractive industry, particularly in the gold and oil sectors, has been marred by land dispossession and environmental degradation. Mining companies supplying European markets have displaced indigenous communities in Karamoja without fair compensation. Similarly, oil exploration projects in the Albertine region, notably linked to the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP), have resulted in forced evictions and inadequate resettlement for affected communities.

A Flawed and Opaque Process

Equally troubling is the lack of transparency in the decision to reconsider the CSDDD. The extensive consultative process that led to its adoption included input from over 174,000 individuals and civil society organizations worldwide, many from the Global South. Yet, the current revision process has excluded these voices, undermining the inclusive approach that initially gave the directive legitimacy. This opacity not only weakens trust in EU decision-making but also signals a disregard for the perspectives of those most affected by corporate negligence.

Moreover, the amendment allows EU member states to remove civil liability, eliminating one of the strongest incentives for corporate compliance. Without the threat of legal repercussions, companies have little motivation to take their due diligence obligations seriously, leaving affected communities without recourse for justice.

The EU Must Uphold Its Commitments

Contrary to claims that weakening the CSDDD will enhance economic growth or international trade, such a move will only perpetuate a status quo where companies profit from social and environmental exploitation. The competitiveness of the European economy should not rely on business practices that harm vulnerable communities.

The Global South has long called for robust corporate accountability measures, and the CSDDD represented a hard-won step in the right direction. If the EU chooses to dilute its commitments, it risks undermining global efforts to establish responsible business conduct. The European Union must resist pressure to weaken the directive and instead ensure its full and timely implementation.

The world is watching. If the EU walks back on the CSDDD, it will not only fail workers and the environment but also erode its credibility as a leader in corporate accountability. Now is the time to strengthen—rather than weaken—protections for people and the planet. This is a call to action for EU member state policymakers and civil society to stand up and prevent the proposed changes that would be a move backward.