Business and human rights (BHR) refers to businesses’ responsibility to respect human rights in their operations, supply chains, and overall business conduct. This concept has gained prominence internationally, especially with the rise of corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives and the evolving recognition of businesses’ roles in safeguarding human rights.

In Belgium, as in many EU Member States, the legal framework relating to BHR is shaped by national legislation, EU directives and regulations, and international treaties and standards, such as the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.

Belgium is a founding member of many international and European organisations committed to protecting and promoting human rights. For instance, Belgium has been a member of the Council of Europe since its founding in 1949. It is also a founding member of the International Labour Organization (ILO) (since 1919) and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) since 1961.

Moreover, Belgium was one of the six founding countries of the European Economic Community in 1957, which later evolved into the European Union (EU). In recent years, the EU has intensified its focus on critical issues such as climate change, child labour, and forced labour. Several legislative initiatives have recently been introduced, including the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and the Forced Labour Regulation (FLR).

At the national level, human rights are enshrined in the Belgian Constitution and in various laws prohibiting forced labour, child labour and human trafficking, among others. In response to recent EU directives, Belgium is also introducing new national legislation specifically addressing corporate sustainability, reporting, and due diligence. These developments will impose additional obligations on many companies, particularly large enterprises, in the near future.

In this context, Belgium’s second National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights of 2024 outlines the government’s strategy to encourage companies to conduct human rights due diligence, with a particular focus on supply chain transparency and respect for workers’ rights.

Belgium has a long-standing commitment to human rights, having signed, ratified, and adopted several key international and European treaties, conventions, and agreements.

Belgium is a signatory to the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR) and has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).

The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) outline the responsibilities of states and businesses to prevent and address human rights abuses linked to business activities. Belgium has endorsed these principles, reinforcing its commitment to ethical business conduct. It also adheres to the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (OECD Guidelines).

Belgium supports the ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy, which provides guidance on labour practices, including fair wages, safe working conditions, and the elimination of forced labour. Belgium has ratified several core ILO conventions protecting workers’ rights, including forced labour, child labour, discrimination, and freedom of association. These conventions form the backbone of global labour rights standards and ensure that businesses uphold human rights in their employment practices.

At the European level, Belgium is a member of the Council of Europe. The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) protects the human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals within the jurisdiction of its member states. The European Social Charter (ESC) complements the ECHR by safeguarding social and economic rights, including the right to work, social protection, and housing.

The European Union also plays a central role. Legislation such as the EU Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD) requires large public-interest entities to report annually on environmental, social, and human resources matters. This directive has recently been revised under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), which aims to enhance the quality, scope, and comparability of sustainability reporting. Additionally, the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) introduces obligations for companies to mitigate the negative impacts of their business activities on both the environment and human rights.

In Belgium, corporate liability concerning BHR is evolving, with a growing emphasis on civil and criminal accountability for companies that fail to uphold human rights standards. This development is driven by national legislation, EU directives and regulations, and Belgium’s adherence to international frameworks such as the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.

Belgium has taken steps to ensure that businesses are held accountable for human rights violations within their operations and across their global supply chains. This includes due diligence obligations, transparency and reporting requirements, and sanctions for non-compliance.

Under Belgian civil law, companies can be held civilly liable for harm caused by their actions or omissions, including human rights abuses in their operations or supply chains. Tort liability (based on negligence, fault, or strict liability) allows individuals or groups harmed by business activities to seek compensation.

Belgium also recognises corporate criminal liability, particularly in cases involving forced labour, human trafficking, and other serious violations. While corporate criminal liability in Belgium has traditionally focused on areas like environmental offences, corruption, and health and safety violations, recent developments indicate an increasing focus on business and human rights.

Belgian authorities, such as the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the Labour Inspectorate, are responsible for investigating and enforcing civil and criminal liability regarding BHR. Civil suits and criminal charges may be brought before Belgian courts, which have the power to impose penalties or mandate corrective actions.

In Belgium, company directors and officers can be held personally liable for human rights abuses committed by the corporation, particularly if they were directly involved in or failed to prevent such abuses. Directors and officers may incur both civil and criminal liability, depending on their role in the violations and the nature and severity of those violations. The evolving legal framework surrounding BHR, including due diligence obligations and preventing human rights harms, increases the potential for liability at the leadership level.

Under Belgian law, directors and officers have a duty of care to ensure that the company’s operations do not harm or violate human rights. If they neglect this duty – for example, by failing to implement or oversee due diligence processes or by ignoring human rights risks in the supply chain – they may be held personally liable for the resulting harm.

In civil proceedings, directors and officers may be liable for tortious acts if their actions or omissions contributed to the harm. This includes the obligation to compensate victims for damages caused by the company’s conduct.

In addition to civil liability, Belgian law allows for criminal prosecution of individuals within a company, including directors and officers, for serious offences such as forced labour, human trafficking and other violations of labour and human rights laws. If convicted, directors and officers may face fines, imprisonment (in serious cases) and disqualification from holding directorial positions.

Judicial proceedings can enforce both civil and criminal liability. Victims, regulatory authorities, or the Public Prosecutor’s Office may bring cases. The Labour Inspectorate also plays a key role in investigating and referring cases involving corporate leadership.

In Belgium, courts may disregard the separate legal personality of corporate entities and hold a parent company liable for the acts or omissions of its subsidiary, particularly in the context of human rights claims. This principle is rooted in both national and international legal frameworks designed to address the responsibility of multinational corporations for human rights abuses that occur in their supply chains or operations, even if subsidiaries carry out those activities.

The legal doctrine of “piercing the corporate veil” is the concept that, in certain situations, the court may disregard a corporation’s separate legal personality and hold its shareholders or parent company liable for the actions of a subsidiary. While Belgian law generally adheres to the principle that corporate entities have distinct legal personalities (meaning a parent company is not automatically responsible for the actions of its subsidiary), exceptions exist, particularly in cases where human rights abuses are involved.

Courts may consider piercing the corporate veil if:

• the parent company exercises direct control over the subsidiary’s operations, particularly in areas related to human rights, such as labour conditions, environmental practices, or supply chain oversight;
• the parent company’s policies, decisions, or omissions are shown to have contributed to or caused the human rights violations; and
• there is a lack of operational independence between the parent and subsidiary, or the subsidiary is effectively acting as an instrument of the parent company.

In such cases, Belgian courts may hold the parent company jointly or solely liable for the harm caused by the subsidiary. This approach aligns with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) and the OECD Guidelines, which emphasise the responsibility of parent companies to ensure that their subsidiaries and business partners respect human rights.

In Belgium, state-based enforcement activities relating to BHR are gradually expanding, particularly as Belgium strengthens its legal framework for holding companies accountable for human rights violations. These enforcement activities are largely driven by national laws, EU legislation and international commitments, which collectively aim to ensure that companies uphold human rights standards and avoid violations in their operations and supply chains.

Enforcement is carried out by a range of public authorities, each with specific mandates, as outlined below.

• The Federal Public Service (FPS) Economy plays a key role in enforcing certain business and human rights obligations, particularly in relation to due diligence and corporate governance. The FPS Economy is involved in overseeing the implementation of Belgian laws on corporate responsibility, including non-financial reporting obligations. It also serves as a contact point for complaints and inquiries related to corporate conduct that may violate human rights.
• The Financial Services and Markets Authority (FSMA) is responsible for monitoring corporate transparency and ensuring that companies comply with securities laws that require the disclosure of non-financial information, including human rights-related risks and impacts.
• The Belgian Labour Inspectorate, part of the FPS Employment, enforces labour laws, including those that protect against labour exploitation and human trafficking. The inspectorate monitors companies to ensure compliance with labour standards, and it plays an important role in ensuring companies are not involved in forced labour or child labour. While its primary mandate is labour law compliance, the Labour Inspectorate also has a significant role in enforcing standards related to human rights at the workplace level. It can investigate human rights violations in businesses and issue fines or orders to remedy violations.
• The FPS Foreign Affairs is also involved in international human rights issues and represents Belgium in international bodies focused on BHR. It is also tasked with ensuring Belgium’s compliance with international human rights conventions.
• Furthermore, Belgian courts play a role in state-based enforcement of human rights in the corporate sector, particularly when victims of human rights abuses seek legal redress and accountability for harm caused by Belgian or multinational companies.
• Finally, civil society organisations, including NGOs and trade unions, play an important role in monitoring corporate conduct, filing complaints, and raising awareness of BHR issues.

Belgian case law on human rights, as well as the case law of the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights regarding Belgium, mainly concerns the liability of the Belgian government rather than the liability of companies. It covers issues related to the environment, the reception of asylum seekers, etc. The shift from the state as the primary bearer of human rights obligations to other actors (such as companies) has not yet really manifested itself in Belgian case law.

Moreover, it is not easy to access this case law. This was also demonstrated by the Belgian National Baseline Assessment (NBA) on Business and Human Rights of 2021, which formed the basis of Belgium’s second National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights. The NBA team actively looked for judicial and non-judicial decisions on business-related human rights abuses. However, they faced difficulties in accessing important information. Belgium does not provide systematic access to judgments in many courts, which makes it difficult to conduct a comprehensive analysis of relevant case law.

That said, there is a growing body of case law from Belgian labour courts concerning equal treatment and non-discrimination. These cases are becoming increasingly strict for employers. Once a claimant – whether a job applicant, employee, or former employee – establishes a presumption of discrimination, the burden of proof shifts to the employer, who must demonstrate that no discrimination occurred.

This evolving jurisprudence reflects a broader trend toward strengthening accountability mechanisms for companies, particularly in the area of employment and workplace rights.

State-Based Grievance Mechanisms

Belgium offers several state-based grievance mechanisms – both judicial and non-judicial – through which individuals or organisations can raise business-related human rights concerns.

Federal Institute for Human Rights

Belgium has several state-based non-judicial mechanisms, the first of which is the Federal Institute for Human Rights (FIRM/IFDH). In 2019, the Federal Institute for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights was established. Initially, the FIRM/IFDH focuses on advising the federal authorities on human rights issues, monitoring compliance with international human rights obligations, promoting the ratification of new international human rights instruments and raising public awareness on human rights issues. It can refer cases to the Council of State and the Belgian Constitutional Court for judicial review when they violate fundamental rights but only within the limits of its residual federal competencies. For the time being, the FIRM/IFDH does not have the authority to deal with individual complaints.

National Contact Point

One of Belgium’s most prominent state-based grievance mechanisms is the National Contact Point (NCP), which is responsible for implementing the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. The NCP is part of the Federal Public Service Economy and has a tripartite composition with the participation of employer and employee representatives, as well as representatives from federal and regional governments.

The NCP acts as a mediator and a forum for resolving complaints against companies that allegedly fail to adhere to the OECD Guidelines in their operations, both domestically and abroad. The NCP can receive complaints from individuals, organisations, or communities who claim that a Belgian company has violated the Guidelines, particularly in relation to human rights abuses. The NCP offers a platform for non-judicial dispute resolution, typically using mediation or conciliation. This mechanism aims to encourage companies to address issues related to human rights, environmental harm, and labour practices.

The NCP’s mandate covers a broad range of corporate practices, including violations related to forced labour, child labour, environmental degradation, discrimination, and other human rights abuses in (global) supply chains. It can deal with complaints about Belgian-based companies or companies with significant operations in Belgium.

The NCP cannot impose legal sanctions or penalties but can encourage companies to engage in corrective actions and reconciliation processes. It may issue a final statement evaluating whether a company has violated the OECD Guidelines and making recommendations for remedial action, such as altering business practices or compensating affected parties.

Federal Ombudsman

The Federal Ombudsman in Belgium is another mechanism that individuals or groups may use to lodge complaints, although it is more commonly used for complaints related to public sector administration rather than direct business and human rights issues. However, if a business is involved in providing public services or interacting with public authorities, there may be cases where the Ombudsman can facilitate a process for addressing issues of corporate responsibility or human rights violations.

The Ombudsman can help individuals file complaints related to mismanagement, discrimination, or failure to adhere to regulations in the context of businesses interacting with public authorities, especially in sectors that impact human rights (eg, labour law, environmental law, and anti-discrimination).

The Ombudsman may mediate between the complainant and the relevant business or public authority to find a solution that aligns with Belgian law and human rights principles. The Ombudsman does not have the authority to impose legal sanctions, but it can issue recommendations to public authorities or companies involved, encouraging changes in practice.

Belgian Labour Inspectorate

Moreover, under the Federal Public Service Employment, the Belgian Labour Inspectorate is responsible for ensuring compliance with labour laws, including those related to forced labour, child labour, and other labour rights abuses.

The inspectorate can investigate complaints related to labour exploitation, health and safety violations, and discrimination in the workplace. This includes businesses operating in Belgium or Belgian companies abroad if they are subject to Belgian labour laws.

Workers or third parties can file complaints with the Labour Inspectorate about breaches of labour laws. The inspectorate can conduct inspections, investigate allegations, and take enforcement actions if violations are found. It can impose fines or sanctions on businesses. In cases of serious violations, it may refer cases to the Public Prosecutor’s Office for criminal prosecution.

Flemish Human Rights Institute

Moreover, in October 2022, the Flemish legislator established the Flemish Human Rights Institute (VMRI) as a unique point of contact for all reports of human rights violations within the Flemish jurisdiction. Since its inception in March 2023, the VMRI has been the only human rights institution in Belgium to offer a general first-line assistance mechanism, including information provision and recommendations, for all human rights matters. Every citizen who has been a victim or witness of, or has objective evidence of, human rights violations can submit a report to the VMRI, even anonymously.

When a report is filed, there are several options. If the VMRI is not competent, the reporter can be referred to another institution. It can also provide primary legal assistance and information or initiate a mediation process. If this mediation is unsuccessful, the VMRI can refer the case to the Litigation Chamber. The latter will investigate the case, assess whether there has been discrimination or another violation, and make recommendations that are closely monitored. After the intervention of the VMRI, the complainant still has the option of going to court.

State-Based Judicial Mechanisms

In addition to the state-based non-judicial mechanisms, state-based judicial mechanisms are also in effect in Belgium. These can include civil lawsuits, class actions, or criminal proceedings.

Civil tort litigation

First, there is civil tort litigation. This mechanism is considered the main state-based judicial mechanism used to claim an effective remedy. In Belgium, however, as in many other countries, the possibility of effectively obtaining remedy by triggering civil courts is rather low, especially for transnational litigation. The challenges refer to the proof of the business’s liability.

Labour courts have jurisdiction in employment cases (disputes between employer and employee) – for example, if the employee believes that he is being discriminated against by the employer, for disputes concerning work-related accidents and occupational diseases, etc.

Public interest actions

The Act of 21 December 2018 amended Article 17 of the Belgian Judicial Code and related special laws to expand the admissibility of public interest actions. It enables legal persons whose statutory purpose includes the protection of human rights or fundamental freedoms – enshrined in the Belgian Constitution or binding international instruments – to bring legal proceedings. These legal persons must pursue a specific corporate object that is distinct from a general interest mandate and may only assert the protection of a collective interest. While this reform marks a significant step forward in access to justice, it does not allow for the pursuit of individual remedies on behalf of victims.

Class action

Another state-based judicial mechanism in Belgium is class action. Until 2017, class actions were limited to consumer claims. Consumers can initiate these actions in court to seek compensation for damages caused by businesses, provided they can show that this collective approach is more efficient than individual civil proceedings.

Consumers can participate in collective action in two ways: by “opting in,” which requires their active consent, or by “opting out,” which implies inclusion unless an individual explicitly requests to be excluded. However, it is important to note that the opt-out mechanism is not available for claims seeking compensation for physical or moral damages.

The Act of 30 March 2018 extended the scope of class actions to include micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) that have suffered harm from a common cause. These businesses may now initiate collective actions to seek redress for individual damages resulting from breaches of contractual obligations or consumer protection rules.

The Code of Economic Law requires parties to attempt a settlement negotiation regarding collective harm before initiating litigation. Any resulting agreement must be submitted to the commercial court for approval.

In 2024, Belgium revised its class action rules to align with the EU Collective Redress Directive. The key changes introduced by the new law are:

• an expanded scope of application, allowing class actions for a broader range of legal violations;
• a clearer definition of the types of organisations – including foreign entities – that are authorised to initiate class actions in Belgium; and
• the introduction of an opt-in mechanism as the default, which applies only after a court has established the defendant’s liability.

The updated rules apply to all class actions initiated on or after 10 June 2024.

Criminal claims

The third state-based judicial mechanism implies criminal claims. Business-related human rights harm that constitutes a crime can be submitted to criminal courts. The EU has the competence to adopt criminal legislation regarding the minimum conditions to define criminal offences and sanctions for serious crimes with a cross-border dimension that is crucial for EU policy. This competence has been used to regulate trafficking in human beings or environmental crimes. In addition, criminal judgments in EU member states’ courts have the same legal effects as those of Belgian courts.

In transnational criminal law, Belgian courts’ jurisdiction is more limited than in civil or commercial matters. As a general rule, the Belgian Criminal Code provides that Belgian criminal courts have jurisdiction over offences committed on Belgian territory.

However, Belgian courts may also exercise jurisdiction in limited circumstances involving non-European businesses, particularly when there is a substantial connection to a Belgian company or when victims cannot reasonably bring their claim to another jurisdiction. This may include cases involving human rights violations committed by foreign subsidiaries or contractors of Belgian corporations or international crimes in accordance with the provisions of the Belgian Code of Criminal Procedure on extraterritorial jurisdiction.

For such extraterritorial jurisdiction to apply, the alleged conduct must constitute a criminal offence both in the country where it occurred and under Belgian law (the principle of double criminality). Additionally, where the victims are not Belgian nationals, criminal proceedings can only be initiated by the public prosecutor. This is typically subject to either a formal complaint by the state authorities where the offence occurred or the presence of the accused person in Belgium.

In Belgium, businesses – particularly large enterprises – are increasingly adopting best practices related to Business and Human Rights (BHR) as part of their broader commitments to corporate governance, sustainability, and regulatory compliance.

More and more companies are implementing formal human rights due diligence processes to assess, prevent, mitigate, and account for the human rights impacts of their operations. These typically involve:

• risk mapping – identifying and assessing potential human rights risks across business operations, supply chains, and other relationships (including through the use of risk assessment tools and frameworks);
• supply chain transparency – companies are mapping and monitoring their supply chains, especially to ensure that suppliers and contractors uphold labour rights, avoid child labour or forced labour, and comply with local environmental standards;
• stakeholder engagement – engaging with local communities, workers, and NGOs to understand the actual and potential human rights impacts of business activities; and
• internal policies and structures – many companies create specific human rights policies and appoint dedicated human rights officers or teams to ensure that human rights due diligence is implemented throughout the organisation.

Leading Belgian companies are also embedding human rights into their corporate governance structures. This means:

• board-level responsibility – the Board of Directors or senior management oversees the company’s human rights strategy and ensures it aligns with (inter)national norms and legal obligations. In many cases, this responsibility is explicitly outlined in the company’s corporate governance framework; and
• human rights committees – larger Belgian firms may set up dedicated human rights or sustainability committees at the board level to ensure accountability, particularly for human rights risks in operations or supply chains.

In compliance with relevant legal requirements, Belgian companies, particularly large ones, are publishing annual sustainability or CSR reports that disclose their efforts in addressing human rights issues, environmental impacts, and governance practices.

To ensure effective human rights practices, Belgian companies often provide training programs for employees at all levels of the organisation, especially those involved in procurement, human resources, and supply chain management. Training programs help employees recognise and address human rights risks such as discrimination, harassment, and forced labour. The training may also include guidance on implementing due diligence and reporting potential human rights violations.

Many Belgian companies adopt robust anti-corruption policies as part of their corporate sustainability and human rights frameworks. These policies are typically embedded within broader corporate governance structures that emphasise transparency, ethical business conduct, and respect for fundamental rights. In line with both EU directives and Belgian legal requirements – such as the transposition of the EU Whistleblower Directive – companies are increasingly implementing secure and confidential reporting mechanisms. These allow employees and external stakeholders to report suspected corruption or human rights violations without fear of retaliation, thereby reinforcing internal accountability and legal compliance.

In this respect, the EU Whistleblower Directive was transposed into Belgian law by the Act of 28 November 2022 for the protection of reporters from breaches of Union or national law within private legal entities. This legislation provides robust protection for individuals who report violations, including those related to human rights, environmental protection, and corporate governance. Under Belgian law, companies with 50 or more employees are required to establish secure and accessible internal reporting channels. These channels must guarantee the confidentiality of the whistle-blower’s identity and the content of the report, which is in line with strict data protection obligations. Furthermore, whistle-blowers must be protected against any form of retaliation, and companies are expected to implement clear procedures for follow-up and feedback to the reporter.

To ensure that suppliers and partners adhere to human rights standards, companies in Belgium frequently conduct third-party audits of their suppliers’ labour and environmental practices. These audits help to identify and address issues such as child labour, unsafe working conditions, or excessive working hours.

Finally, many businesses have adopted or are participating in supplier codes of conduct that clearly set out the human rights expectations for suppliers. These codes often include requirements for compliance with ethical labour practices, non-discrimination, worker safety, and freedom of association.