Most African companies have traditionally seen business and human rights as a compliance issue—primarily relevant to extractive industries, multinationals with Western investors, or other entities. However, this perspective is swiftly evolving, and companies that have not yet acknowledged its importance are now facing increasing pressure.
The EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, effective from 2024, mandates that large European firms proactively identify and manage human rights and environmental impacts throughout their global supply chains. This requirement is about due diligence, not just disclosure, meaning European companies must thoroughly investigate their suppliers and partners, including those in Africa. For African companies working with European clients, investors, or traders, the key issue is no longer whether human rights due diligence is relevant. Instead, it’s whether they are ready for the increased scrutiny they will face.
Since its implementation in 2023, the German Supply Chain Act has begun to influence real-world practices. Supply chains for cotton, cocoa, and copper in sub-Saharan Africa are among the most impacted. A smallholder farmer providing a Ugandan exporter, who in turn supplies a German retailer, now finds themselves part of a compliance chain governed by European law. The farmer might be unaware of this, and the exporter may not have been queried about it yet. However, an audit is inevitable.
What challenges most African companies face is not the idea of respecting human rights, which is familiar to many. Instead, it is implementing this principle practically. Human rights due diligence, as outlined by the UN Guiding Principles, requires companies to identify actual and potential human rights impacts related to their operations, products, and business relationships; incorporate these findings into governance and decision-making processes; and monitor and report on how they are addressed. Many African companies lack a systematic framework for this. Their social impact efforts, where they exist, are often philanthropic rather than operational, focusing on community investments instead of understanding and addressing the human rights risks inherent in their business practices.
Companies effectively navigating this challenge are those that view business and human rights as core governance issues rather than just communication topics. The requirement isn’t limited to creating policy documents or issuing press releases about community investment. Instead, it involves having a true operational comprehension of who is part of the value chain, the working conditions they face, and how the company addresses the risks it pinpoints. This understanding must be integrated into procurement, supplier relationships, and board-level risk management, rather than confined to the sustainability report.
For companies working in African settings, this issue adds an extra layer. The communities most impacted by business activities, such as workers in informal supply chains, smallholder farmers, and residents near resource extraction sites, are often the least likely to have formal grievance mechanisms. Developing these channels and proving their effectiveness are becoming essential demands from serious investors and trading partners.
This work cannot be finished in a single effort and then stored away. It demands continual oversight, honest evaluation, and a readiness to act on what is discovered, even if it is inconvenient.