RISK MITIGATION
While independent third-party verification can support the implementation of due diligence requirements , it does not absolve companies of liability .
• Supporting compliance , not transferring responsibility Companies opting to use third-party verification must ensure that their direct and indirect business partners comply with contractual assurances related to due diligence . Despite this , Article 29 , paragraph 4 of the directive explicitly states that companies remain liable for adverse impacts even if a third-party verification is employed .
While the CSDDD does not explicitly address provider biases , it emphasises companies retaining ultimate responsibility for due diligence and suggests that they should critically evaluate third-party verifications rather than blindly relying on them . The directive ’ s approach aims to prevent companies from hiding behind certifications or verifications without conducting their own thorough due diligence .
The CSDDD highlights the EU ’ s commitment to sustainable development and corporate responsibility . By enforcing stricter human rights and environmental standards across value chains , the directive aims to foster a greener , fairer economy . Procurement teams play a pivotal role in achieving these objectives , with their actions directly influencing compliance and creating sustainable supply chains .
While the CSDDD does shift significant responsibility to contracting companies , it doesn ’ t create sole liability for supplier non-compliance . Instead , it establishes a framework for shared responsibility and risk-based due diligence throughout the value chain .
Risks of relying solely on third-party certifications Depending exclusively on third-party certifications for compliance can introduce several potential risks that organisations must be mindful of :
104 February 2025