Compiled by Nyaradzo Mutonhori

Introduction

Mandatory Human Rights and Environmental Due Diligence (mHREDD) laws, like the recently passed European Union Corporate Sustainability and Due Diligence Directive (EUCSDDD), are urgent. mHREDD refers to a legal obligation placed on companies to assess and address their actual and potential impacts on human rights and the environment. The global applicability and adoption of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) and other Business and Human Rights frameworks like the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises to make business practices more transparent and accountable laid the foundation for mHREDD laws. Implementing these global business and human rights standards through mHREDD laws compels companies to establish credible measures to address supply chain risks, amplifying the demand for human rights due diligence.  In addition, MHREDD laws present an opportunity to enhance the protection of women’s resource rights and their livelihoods in the context of business and human rights. The prevailing massive land acquisitions by large-scale mono-crop agriculture and mining businesses such as sugarcane production for ethanol in Chisumbanje or lithium mining in Buhera, Insiza, Mutoko, and other areas,  threaten not only gender justice and women’s land rights, but global climate, food security, and health goals. Water is another critical resource highly sought after by both agribusinesses and mining companies. In Bikita, communities lament how Bikita Minerals lithium mine draws unsustainably large quantities of water from Matezva Dam.  Women and girls largely feel the disproportionate impacts of land acquisitions and water grabbing by corporations as primary food producers and collectors of water. Women who make up the bulk of smallholder irrigation farmers lament the high cost of water and how water distribution authorities seem to prioritize large-scale agribusiness in rising incidents of water scarcity due to climate change.   Women and girls at the intersection of economic crises due to lost livelihoods and environmental degradation face increased exposure to Gender-Based Violence. This vulnerability of women is further exacerbated by the backlash against gender justice, an adverse human rights trend identified by Amnesty International in their recent publication, ‘The State of the World’s Human Rights Report’, threatening to strip women of their rights. MHREDD laws may help to protect women’s rights if they ensure that Human Rights Due Diligence obligations for corporations to fulfill their responsibility to respect human rights cover the dynamic gendered human rights, especially women’s rights.

Barriers faced by women to access remedy

Women and other marginalized groups face additional barriers to accessing remedies for environmental, land, or water rights injustices. Even when women know of their rights, economic, geographic, social, and language obstacles, including the lack of trust in the justice system inhibit women’s access to justice. The draft Legally Binding Instrument on Business and Human Rights recognizes the risk of vulnerability or marginalization that hinders the ability of women and other marginalized groups to access adequate, timely, and effective remedies. The draft LBI mandates all states to progressively reduce the legal, practical, and other relevant obstacles that hinder access to remedies for women and other marginalized groups. In addition, states must develop and implement effective policies to promote the accessibility of justice mechanisms. Furthermore, states are mandated to monitor a company’s implementation of remedies in cases of human rights abuse and take appropriate steps to rectify any non-compliance. By preventing environmental, land, or water rights violations before they occur, and obligating businesses to mitigate against risks of violations mHREDD laws go a step further in implementing global business and human rights standards and advancing the protection of women’s resource rights and livelihoods.

The prospect of multiple lithium mining-induced displacements and relocations

Zimbabwe has the African continent’s largest lithium reserves and a series of relocations have resumed to pave the way for lithium mining in districts like Insiza, Mutoko, Buhera, among others.   Although international guidelines on business and human rights establish clear expectations to ensure that the relocation of communities is carried out fairly and transparently, the lack of clarity within the domestic legal framework in Zimbabwe results in displacements and relocations mired in human rights violations.   The UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement guide governments by restating states’ obligations under international human rights and humanitarian law. They ‘identify rights and guarantees relevant to the protection of persons from forced displacement and to their protection and assistance during displacement as well as during return or resettlement and reintegration’. The African Union Convention on the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa people make it the primary obligation of states to “refrain from, prohibit, and prevent arbitrary displacement of populations”.

Experiences of unfulfilled promises by mining companies from past relocations in the mining sector make many women dread the prospect of mining-induced displacement and possible relocation.  Relocation prospects are stressful for women since most women rely on natural resources such as land and forests, for livelihoods. Mining-induced displacements cut out women’s access to these resources and jeopardize their livelihoods, forcing them to learn new forms of livelihoods and sometimes relegating them to illegal forms of survival like selling firewood or artisanal mining, where they face greater risks of sexual and gender-based violence.  Limited representation of women in decision-making positions inhibits the extent to which women’s rights issues are considered during decision-making and other processes relating to mining-induced displacement. This results in inadequate and unfair compensation. The poor land tenure security for communities reduces their rights to resist arbitrary evictions and forced relocations.

MHREDD laws present an opportunity for widespread stakeholder consultations and engagement on mining-induced displacement and relocation. The corporate responsibility to respect human rights requires active engagement by mining companies in providing redress, by itself or in cooperation with other actors, especially the government and the communities affected. When MhREDD laws go beyond obliging companies to identify human rights risks and provide redress but include prohibition from unlawfully taking lands and recognizing and protecting Indigenous land rights per international human rights laws and standards, including standards in the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women, then women’s land rights are secured across value chains.

The case of scarce water resources and agribusiness

The Ruti Irrigation Project in Zimbabwe contributes to sustainable livelihoods and resilience to climatic change among poor and vulnerable households in the Gutu district. Women make up the bulk of farmers who use the plots at Ruti.  Due to climate change, and more frequent droughts, smallholder farmers increasingly rely on irrigation schemes for livelihoods and household food security.    Extreme weather conditions in the semi-arid region continue to diminish the functionality of the existing irrigation technology due to diminishing water levels. Although the Nationally Determined Contributions prioritize revitalizing and climate-proofing irrigation schemes, the slow implementation of these initiatives is working against the small-holder farmers at Ruti Irrigation scheme. The irrigation scheme accesses diminishing water volumes, and this has created conflict among the farmers as they compete for water. The competition for water resources emanates from the fact that the Ruti irrigation scheme shares the water source along the Devure Sub-catchment Area with the large-scale sugarcane producers in Zimbabwe Tongaat Hullet and Greenfuel ethanol agribusinesses. Large-scale agribusinesses can update their irrigation technologies and have been able to continue drawing large volumes of water, without assessing the impact on water availability for smallholder farmers. The water management authorities have been accused of not protecting farmers’ rights to equitable access to freshwater sources and prioritizing agribusinesses. If the agribusinesses and communities could enter into water-sharing agreements, this would safeguard the community’s right to food and prevent human rights impacts on women. The women farmers spend more hours waiting for the water allocations for their plots, and sometimes they spend the night. In some instances, women farmers have been victims of human-wildlife conflict and sexual violence as they were attacked on their way back home from watering crops during the night. MHREDD laws would enable agribusinesses to properly assess relevant contributions to sustainable development to identify and mitigate adverse environmental and social risks and impacts, paying special attention to marginalized groups like women.

Conclusion and recommendations

MHREDD laws can help to advance the protection of women’s rights and corporate accountability, undoubtedly.  Currently, most mHREDD laws are being passed by consumer countries and not producer countries like Zimbabwe. The mHREDD laws can achieve greater effectiveness if both source/producer and consumer countries establish them. Civil Society Organizations should catalyze the development of an mHREDD law in Zimbabwe through private members’ bills working with identified champion parliamentarians. The Zimbabwe Gender Commission must create mHREDD law dialogue spaces for collaboration on women’s land and resource rights in the context of business. The ongoing amendments to the Mines and Minerals Act and the Water Act must integrate human rights due diligence obligations for mining companies and agribusinesses. Lastly, the mHREDD is not the silver bullet in addressing corporate accountability for impacts on women’s rights but is an addition to a smart mix. The Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission must continue advocating for the development of a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights in addition to the development of an MHREDD law.