21.1.2016

Soft or Hard Law? – Battling Human Rights Abuses in the Corporate World

Human rights abuses in multinational businesses draw immediate public attention and cause the reputation of the company to take a deep dive. Remember how many years it took for Nike to regain its reputation after their child labor scandal started back in the 1990s?

Regaining lost reputation requires actions in many different fields, the legal arena being one of them. So, what judicial tools are available to battle human rights abuses?

International and National Legislation

As discussed in my previous blog post, international human rights conventions oblige countries to comply with their standards and implement corresponding national legislation. However, this national legislation often only reaches the companies established in that state.

Severe human rights abuses usually occur farther from home in the subsidiaries or supply chains of multinational companies, as was the case with Nike. Given that national legislation doesn’t reach that far, the respect for human rights has traditionally relied on companies’ voluntary commitment to soft law mechanisms, such as international standards and guidelines.

However, now things seem to be changing. Europe is taking steps to introduce hard law measures to spread the corporate veil to cover operations further down multinational supply chains.

The United Kingdom on the Front Line

The UK introduced the Modern Slavery Act last October. The act obliges companies exceeding a turnover threshold (£36 million) and doing business in the UK to prepare an annual public statement. This statement should cover the actions the company has taken to ensure that slavery and human trafficking are not taking place in its operations. The act requires that the statement is published on the company website with a link in a prominent place on the homepage. The act increases transparency of supply chains regarding possible abuses.

 

 

One notable feature of this act is the wide scope of application: all corporations doing a certain amount of business in the UK are obligated to prepare this public statement. Thus, it not only applies to companies incorporated in the UK, but also to those incorporated, for example, elsewhere in Europe, but operating in the UK.

France Tried to Take Things One Step Further

The French parliament introduced the so called Rana Plaza Bill, which aimed to hold French parent companies legally accountable for human rights abuses conducted by their foreign subsidiaries. Multinationals opposed this proposal heavily, saying it would harm their competitiveness. The chosen legislative path was deemed to be too aggressive in the current economic climate, and the proposal was overruled in the Senate. However, the French legislative procedure allows for the reopening of this issue. Thus, this case may not yet be closed.

EU-wide Obligations Upcoming Up

Despite France’s retreat, there is already something more wide-spread on the horizon. The EU Parliament has accepted a directive that obliges large public-interest companies to disclose relevant information on non-financial matters, such as respect for human rights and anticorruption issues. National legislation is to be in place by the end of 2016, and the first obligatory non-financial reports covering the financial year 2017 should see daylight in 2018.

What Should Corporate Executives Make of All This?

My first recommendation is that, if you’re involved in the management of a multinational, you should keep a close eye on this issue, as it is clearly gaining increased attention on the agendas of legislators. The media and various NGOs have worked hard to raise awareness of human rights issues for several years.

The bottom line, however, is this: companies are obliged to obey and respect human rights globally, as these matters should be implemented in respective national constitutions. Thus, it doesn’t really matter whether a specific hard law measure is in use in any given country. Companies simply cannot opt out of human rights in their operations.

Anne Vanhala

Latest references

We advised Aurevia Oy, a portfolio company of French private equity sponsor Mérieux Equity Partners, in a strategic reorganisation that involved splitting Aurevia and its parent companies into two independent groups of companies and reorganisation of its existing debt-financing arrangements. Following the reorganisation, the newly formed Aurevia continues as a leading provider of Contract Research Organization (CRO) and Quality Assurance and Regulatory Affairs (QARA) services, while the newly formed Labquality focuses on delivering External Quality Assessment (EQA) services. Aurevia serves operators in the medical devices, in vitro diagnostics and pharmaceutical sectors. Labquality’s customers include clinical laboratories and social and healthcare organisations. The reorganisation positions Aurevia and Labquality to allocate investments more effectively, accelerate growth within their respective customer segments, and respond to evolving market and client needs. The transaction was implemented through multiple parallel demergers and required comprehensive legal and tax structuring across several jurisdictions. Our team supported Aurevia throughout the planning and implementation phases, covering corporate, tax, employment law, and regulatory matters, as well as the optimisation of each group’s financing structure.
Case published 7.4.2026
We advise Fingrid Oyj in a transaction in which Ilmarinen Mutual Pension Insurance Company is selling its holding of approximately 20 per cent of the shares in Fingrid to the Finnish State and OP Pohjola Kantaverkko Holding Ky. Fingrid owns Finland’s main electricity transmission grid and all significant cross-border transmission connections. The main grid is the backbone of the electricity transmission network, to which major power plants, industrial plants and regional electricity distribution networks are connected. 
Case published 11.2.2026
We acted as legal adviser to EcoUp Oyj in a directed share issue, through which EcoUp raised a total of approximately EUR 3 million in gross proceeds to strengthen the company’s capital structure and finance its growth. The share issue was directed to a limited group of domestic investors, deviating from the shareholders’ pre-emptive subscription right. EcoUp’s shares are traded on the First North Growth Market Finland marketplace maintained by Nasdaq Helsinki.  EcoUp promotes the green transition of the construction industry by producing carbon-neutral, energy-efficient and circular economy-based materials, services and technologies that help construction industry players reduce their environmental impact. The company has over 40 years of experience in developing and delivering circular economy solutions to customers.
Case published 29.1.2026
We acted as the legal counsel to Enersize Plc, in its rights issue, where the company raised gross proceeds of approximately MSEK 8.3 in order to promote continued growth and be able to meet increased demand from its customers. The proceeds were allocated to market expansion and sales efforts as well as product, licence and technical validation and development, amongst other things. In connection with the rights issue, warrants were issued free of charge and the subscription period for new shares pursuant to the warrants will run from 1 October 2025 up to and including 15 October 2025. Enersize is a Finnish public limited company having its shares listed on Nasdaq Stockholm First North Growth Market. The company’s shares are traded only in Sweden. Enersize develops and provides software, tools, and services to improve the energy efficiency of industrial compressed air systems, serving industrial companies for whom energy efficiency is both an economic and environmental consideration. With the aim of reducing energy consumption, detecting leaks, and improving performance, its technology enables detailed monitoring, analysis, and real-time optimisation of compressed air systems. 
Case published 21.11.2025