The National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights (Plan Nacional de Accion sobre Empresas y Derechos Humanos) was approved on 9 June and published in the official gazette El Peruano. The Plan has been two years in preparation and formally led from the ministries of energy and mines (Minem) and of justice and human rights (Minjus). The list of members of the so-called National Multi-actor Round Table (Mesa Multiactor Nacional) formally supporting the plan comes to 132, and includes a wide range of grass roots groups as well as business representatives.

The Plan’s objective is “to promote confidence, good reputation and competitiveness, strengthen sustainable development and prevent social conflict” according to the cabinet press conference statement.

The coordinator of the civil society platform involved was Abel Gilvonio of the NGO Cooperacción. He has strong criticisms of the government’s commitment to the process while expressing admiration for the depth and breadth of grassroots participation. He thinks that the latter (which includes human rights groups, organised labour and indigenous organisations) has made the whole process worthwhile. He comments that the state dragged its heels when it came to encouraging wider participation.

The issues discussed covered environmental impacts on indigenous groups and the rights of workers and women. But, Gilvonio comments, there was scant coverage of prior consultation or the role of the police in security issues. The Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF), Minem and some business representatives sought to limit the range of the Plan.

However, Gilvonio sees it as opening up and pushing forward on an important agenda, inviting a formal commitment on business and human rights, and for Congress to engage in oversight in sectors such as mining, export agriculture, construction and fishing. Success will also require the strengthening of social organisation in those places where companies are present.

The Plan makes many recommendations on presentation of data and monitoring but stops short at recommendations on penalties in the absence of fuller company transparency.