A/HRC/54/31 34. Safeguarding policies for the private sector were developed by the International Finance Corporation in its performance standard 7 on Indigenous Peoples (2012) 43 and the guidelines for multinational enterprises on responsible business conduct of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).44 They both recall the right to free, prior and informed consent and/or human rights impact assessments, but still fall short of interpreting international human rights law. 35. The OECD guidelines include a national contact point for responsible business conduct grievance mechanism, which handles complaints against companies alleged to have failed to meet the guideline standards. To date, 51 countries, concentrated in Europe and the Americas, have established national contact points and grievance mechanisms. In 2022, facing a growing number of grievance cases involving Indigenous Peoples, OECD published a guide for national contact points on the rights of Indigenous Peoples when handling specific instances. 45 OECD parties can also find useful guidance on Indigenous Peoples in the decision of the Norwegian national contact point in 2011 related to the Intex nickel mine in the Philippines, as it considered free, prior and informed consent requirements in some detail as part of community and stakeholder engagement, as well as impact assessments, disclosure and transparency. 36. The Equator Principles are voluntary guidelines adopted by 97 financial institutions in 37 countries to ensure that the projects they finance and advise on are developed in a socially responsible manner that reflects sound environmental management practices. 46 They follow the International Finance Corporation performance standards, but only apply them to projects with a volume of over $100 million and only refer to free, prior and informed consent being applied in “non-designated” countries, namely non-OECD countries. There is no grievance mechanism or other independent compliance monitoring mechanism.47 37. The so-called Cancun safeguards address all levels of financial actors, in calling for “The full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders, in particular indigenous peoples and local communities”.48 The Convention on Biological Diversity also provides guidance through its Akwé: Kon Voluntary Guidelines (2004) and section C of the Global Biodiversity Framework recalls the human rights of Indigenous Peoples. 38. Seeking the free, prior and informed consent of Indigenous Peoples is recognized as an essential element of human rights due diligence, risk mitigation and human rights responsibilities.49 Safeguarding policies and guidelines have not elaborated on the scope and meaning of “consent”, which is sometimes wrongly understood as requiring only consultation, rather than as a substantive prerequisite to proceeding with a project. A study by the Expert Mechanism on the rights of Indigenous Peoples that points to the important role of the autonomous free, prior and informed consent protocols of Indigenous People as authoritative guidance should also act as a reference for the scope and meaning of “consent”.50 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 10 See https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/es/729401491377002155/pdf/113847-WP-ENGLISHPS7-Indigenous-peoples-2012-PUBLIC.pdf. See https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/finance-and-investment/oecd-guidelines-for-multinationalenterprises-on-responsible-business-conduct_81f92357-en. See http://mneguidelines.oecd.org/guide-for-national-contact-points-on-the-rights-of-indigenouspeoples-when-handling-specific-instances.pdf. See https://equator-principles.com/. See Jose Aylwin and Johannes Rohr, The UN Guiding Principles on Business & Human Rights and Indigenous Peoples: Progress Achieved, the Implementation Gap and Challenges for the Next Decade (International Work Group on Indigenous Affairs and Indigenous Peoples Rights International, 2021), pp. 35 and 36. FCCC/CP/2010/7/Add.1, appendix 1, para. 2 (d). A/71/291. A/HRC/39/62. GE.23-13366