Sustainable Sourcing,
Grievance Mechanisms,
and Human Rights at
Mega-Sporting Events
Meeting Report
Tokyo, Japan, 13 September 2017

Sustainable Sourcing,
Grievance Mechanisms,
and Human Rights at
Mega-Sporting Events
Meeting Report
Tokyo, Japan
13th September 2017

About the Institute for Human Rights and Business
Founded in 2009, IHRB is the leading international think tank on business and human rights.
IHRB’s mission is to shape policy, advance practice and strengthen accountability in order tomake respect for human rights part of everyday business.
About the Caux Round Table Japan
Caux Round Table (CRT) is a global network of business leaders working to realize a fair, free andtransparent society through sustainable and socially responsible business. As a founding memberof CRT, CRT Japan has been providing a unique service that helps companies implement CSR.
Cite as: Institute for Human Rights and Business and Caux Round Table Japan, “Sustainable
Sourcing, Greivance Mechanisms, and Human Rights at Mega-Sporting Events - Japan Meeting
Report” (March 2018).
Copyright: © Institute for Human Rights and Business (IHRB), March 2018. Published by IHRB.
All rights reserved. IHRB permits free reproduction of extracts from this publication provided that
due acknowledgment is given.

Contents
1. About this Report 

4

2. Welcoming Remarks

5

3. Perspectives from the Tokyo 2020 Organisers

8

4. Perspectives from London 2012

10

5. Theme 1: Human Rights Risks in Preparing
and Delivering MSEs

13

6. Theme 2: Good Examples of Implementing
Sustainable Strategies

18

7. Theme 3: Operational Grievance Mechanisms
and Tokyo 2020

24

8. Conclusion

31About this Report

1

On September 13 (Wed.), 2017, IHRB on behalf of the Mega-Sporting Events Platform
for Human Rights (MSE Platform) organised, with the support of the Swiss Government
and together with Caux Round Table Japan, its first workshop in Japan, towards
making respect for human rights a reality in the Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic
Games. The workshop was attended by 76 persons from 41 organisations, including
the International Olympic Committee (IOC), the Tokyo Organising Committee of the
Olympic and Paralympic Games (TOCOG), the Olympics headquarters in the Cabinet
Secretariat, and other related organisations of the Tokyo 2020 Olympic and Paralympic
Games, sponsor companies, NGOs from Japan and abroad, athletes’ organisations,Japanese Government organisations (the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry ofJustice, and Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare), and embassies in Japan (the U.S.
Embassy and Embassy of Switzerland).
Towards the goal of making respect for human rights a reality in the Tokyo 2020
Olympic and Paralympic Games, the workshop aimed to identify, and share among
the participants, key points and issues surrounding the implementation of sustainablesourcing policies and grievance mechanisms. The programme consisted of threeparts: welcome and introduction by the organisers, lectures by persons from relatedorganisations for London 2012 and Tokyo 2020 (TOCOG and the Cabinet Secretariat),
and workshops on the three themes of “Mega-Sporting Events and Human Rights
Risks”, “Sustainable Sourcing Code”, and “Grievance Mechanisms”. The speakers anda summary of their lectures and comments in each of the sessions are shown below.

4

www.ihrb.org | Institute for Human Rights and Business2

Welcoming Remarks
John Morrison, Chief Executive of IHRB;Secretariat of the MSE Platform

Today is an important step internationally for Tokyo 2020, and we hope it will be
the beginning of something of lasting value. The power of sport is more important
than ever before in this world of many uncertainties. Sport has the power to unite theworld’s people, fight discrimination, and maintain a common view of humanity. It
unites us, rather than divides us. Within the MSE Platform, sports bodies, governments,
hosts, sponsors, broadcasters, trade unions, and NGOs come together to discuss andcollaborate to make respect for human rights in mega-sporting events (MSEs) a
reality. The four sports bodies within the MSE Platform (the IOC, FIFA, UEFA, and theCommonwealth Games Federation) have all made human rights commitments, and weare sure others will soon follow. We hope to discuss how collective action might support
the implementation of TOCOG’s sustainable sourcing code and grievance mechanism.
There is a tremendous opportunity for Japan to lead on human rights. Many Japanesecompanies have business management principles based on the value of corporate
responsibility and international standards, including human rights. Such leadership ofJapanese companies to implement such value in the Olympics would send an importantmessage across Asia and the rest of the world that human rights in sport are both
concrete and achievable. We hope that today is the start of an ongoing dialogue andpartnership. Whilst 2020, which is three years from now, seems a long way off, it isnot. Action now will prevent and mitigate possible negative impacts on human rights.

“

Whilst 2020 seems a long way off, it is not; and implementation now will
prevent and mitigate possible negative impacts to make the legacy of Tokyo
2020 as strong in human rights terms as it will be in sporting achievement.

Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights | www.megasportingevents.org

5Michelle Lemaître, Head of Sustainability,
International Olympic Committee (IOC)Olympism is based on a vision of human rights. This is reflected in the Olympic
Charter’s fundamental principles, our Code of Ethics, and mission of the IOC. Humanrights values are part of the Olympic values, and human rights promotion is part of the
IOC’s DNA. In December last year, our Executive Board approved the IOC sustainability
strategy, which clearly stated the IOC’s three spheres of responsibility (IOC as anorganisation, as the owner of the Olympic Games, and as the leader of the Olympic
Movement) in five focus areas (infrastructure and natural sites, sourcing and resource
management, mobility, workforce, and climate).
The focus areas that are most pertinent to today’s discussion are “sourcing and resource
management” and “workforce”. “Workforce” addresses important aspects, such as theworking conditions of employees, volunteers and contractors are safe and healthy, andthat working conditions across supply chains comply with applicable local, regional,
and national legislation and international agreements and protocols. “Sourcing andresource management” highlights the importance of managing valuable resources
within their lifecycles and that the sourcing of products and services addresses not
only the economic aspects, but also their environmental and social impacts.
The development and implementation of sustainable sourcing procedures by the
local Organising Committees of Olympic Games (OCOG) and their delivery partners(sponsors, sourcing companies and countries, and all of the suppliers) is essential instaging successful Olympic Games. The IOC commends Tokyo 2020 for the work it
has done in this area to date and fully supports today’s dialogue to make respect forhuman rights a reality at Tokyo 2020.

“
6

We truly believe that the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games are an opportunity
to create change and a strong and lasting legacy in this important area
for many organisations in Tokyo and Japan.

www.ihrb.org | Institute for Human Rights and BusinessHironori Yano, Chairman, Caux Round
Table Japan

Through my experience as a corporate executive director, I have learned that “a goodcompany”, one that is ethical and that respects each individual and serves society, is aprerequisite to being “a strong company”, capable of continuously posting appropriate
levels of profit. Through the Olympics, I hope that companies will recognise theneed to take human rights into account and aim to become “good companies” byunderstanding the relation their businesses have with the Olympics and Paralympics
and human rights within the context of their entire supply chains.

“

I hope that Japanese companies will make Tokyo 2020 an opportunity totake leadership positions in the world and set a trend to ensure that humanrights are respected in business.

Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights | www.megasportingevents.org

7Perspectives
from
the
3
Tokyo 2020 Organisers
Keiji Inoue, Executive Director of Games
Operation, TOCOG

With slightly more than 1,000 days remaining until the opening, we are drawing evercloser to Tokyo 2020. Reflecting the Games Vision in every aspect of managementof the Games, we hope to make Tokyo 2020 the most innovative in history that willbring positive reform to the world. The “Legacy” contained in the Games Vision relates
not only to sports, but also to many other fields. TOCOG has drawn up the Action &Legacy Plan to promote action in building this Legacy, and one of the pillars of the
Action & Legacy Plan is “Sustainability”. Based on the Olympic Agenda 2020, which
recommends “inclusion of sustainability”, TOCOG is developing the second version of
our sustainability plan, which will contain concrete numerical targets.1
The Olympic and Paralympic Games have the “power to communicate”. The “Personal
Best” in the Games Vision pertains not only to the athletes, but means that everyone,
including the organisers, will aim to do their best in the landmark year of 2020. The
Olympic and Paralympic Games are not only for the IOC, International Paralympic
Committee (IPC), the Tokyo Metropolitan Government (TMG), and TOCOG to promote,but also require the participation of partner firms, related organisations, and thenation as a whole. We ask for your support, cooperation, and guidance.

“
1

8

We believe that sustainable sourcing, built around human rights
considerations, is an important challenge. We hope to ingrain humanrights considerations through the formulation and implementation of
our Sustainable Sourcing Code and achieve our sustainability goals withsponsor companies and sourcing companies. We hope that the Legacy will
include the concept of sustainability taking root in the host country Japan.

See further, TOCOG, Sustainability (last accessed Mar. 2018) at: https://tokyo2020.org/en/games/sustainability/
www.ihrb.org | Institute for Human Rights and BusinessMie Katsuno, Director, Secretariat of the
Headquarters for the Tokyo 2020 Olympic
and Paralympic Games, Cabinet Secretariat

The Organising Committee of Olympic Games (OCOG) is a non-permanent organisation
for the management of the Games. To support TOCOG and other related organs, thenational government has established a Special Measures Act for Tokyo 2020, instituted
a headquarters with the Prime Minister as its head, and appointed a dedicated Minister.
Related Ministries and Agencies are represented in the headquarters. The role of theGovernment includes general support as well as transportation, immigration control,and security. The Government also provides personnel to TOCOG. Our Secretariat is
also a non-permanent organ and will exist until March 31, 2021 (the end of the 2020
fiscal year). As part of the Government’s Basic Policy, the Government has establishedcomprehensive national guidelines to accelerate efforts towards Tokyo 2020, monitors
progress, and has made related national policies public. The Basic Policy contains
statements related to human rights.
As for the Sustainable Sourcing Code, the Government participates as an observer in
TOCOG’s sourcing working group and gives advice. The information obtained fromthe working group is also shared with related ministries and agencies. After the firstversion of the Sustainable Sourcing Code was established, the Government hosted anumber of briefing sessions on the Code in Tokyo and Hokkaido. The Code includes
standards for specific products, and the Government is supporting efforts to obtaincertification (GAP, etc.) required by the Code.

“As part of the Government’s Basic Policy, the Government has establishedcomprehensive national guidelines to accelerate efforts towards Tokyo
2020, monitors progress, and has made related national policies public.
The Basic Policy contains statements related to human rights.

Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights | www.megasportingevents.org

9Perspectives
from4
London 2012
Shaun McCarthy,
Former Chief Commissioner,
Commission for Sustainable London 2012The Organising Committee for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games’(LOCOG) sustainable supply chain standard was ground breaking at the time and used
as a benchmark by Rio 2016 and Tokyo 2020 Olympics to set out clear requirements
for the supply chain to comply with.2 LOCOG made a great effort to assure their supply
chain by requiring all suppliers to sign up to SEDEX and to require all suppliers toundertake an audit before commencing manufacture and supply. Despite these efforts,
a report by the Playfair Alliance highlighted human rights abuses in toy factories that
had been assured by LOCOG.3 It was also found that an audit on the factories of a
supplier of metal for the medals had not been performed when it should have been.
LOCOG’s complaints mechanism was also a “first” and recognised as best practice.
However, it was not well communicated to manufacturers or to the workforces. For
products with short manufacturing lead times, the manufacture had finished by thetime a complaint was investigated in some cases.

102

London 2012 Learning Legacy, “LOCOG Sustainable Sourcing Code” (Dec 2012) at: http://learninglegacy.
independent.gov.uk/documents/pdfs/sustainability/cp-locog-sustainable-sourcing-code.pdf; and “Managing compliance with labour Standards: findings and recommendations from an independent assessment of LOCOG’s labour risk management systems” (Dec. 2012) at: http://learninglegacy.independent.
gov.uk/documents/pdfs/sustainability/rs-managing-compliance-with-labour-standards-final.pdf

3Playfair Alliance, “Toying with Workers’ Rights: A Report on Producing Merchandise for the London
2012 Olympic Games” (Jan 2012) at: https://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/play_fair_en_final.pdf
www.ihrb.org | Institute for Human Rights and BusinessThere are three key points that serve as lessons learned from the London 2012 Games:(1) LOCOG refused to require their suppliers to disclose manufacturing locations,claiming it was not in their commercial interest to do so and citing commercial
confidentiality. Disclosure in practice was limited to the adidas Group, which
voluntarily disclosed, though some other suppliers subsequently followed adidas’s
example; (2) Although there was an element of due diligence over suppliers, the same
standards did not apply to major sponsors; and (3) The appointment of “sustainability
partners” by LOCOG emerged as a commercial exercise. All sponsors had to do to be a“sustainability partner” was pay more money. Their credentials or their sustainability
offering was not taken into consideration.

“

Sydney was the “green Games”,
London claimed to be “the most sustainable Games ever”,
Tokyo has the opportunity to be remembered as the Games that
advanced the cause of human rights.

Steve Gibbons, Director, Ergon Associates

London, as a host city to the Olympic and Paralympic Games, had drawn up asustainable sourcing code, but there was significant external pressure to do something
more. Active stakeholder engagement was started in 2010, two years ahead of theGames, which led to the design of the complaints mechanism and a stakeholder review
panel, allowing the complaints mechanism to be established ahead of the Games.4
There was a structured and quick response to all complaints, which went through theprocess of mediation, agreement on outcomes, and closing off of agreed outcomes.
After the Games, we reviewed and published reflections on our experience of setting

4

London 2012 Learning Legacy “Establishing a Stakeholder Oversight Group to support a supply chain
grievance mechanism” (Dec. 2012) at: http://learninglegacy.independent.gov.uk/documents/pdfs/sustainability/cs-establishing-a-stakeholder-oversight-group.pdf

Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights | www.megasportingevents.org

11up and managing the complaints mechanism at the London 2012 Games in the hopethat our experience would be useful in other events.5

“

5

12

There was significant work to “sell” the benefits of the complaints
mechanism to key staff members of LOCOG to promote understanding
about the mechanism within the organisation. The key staff members
ranged from procurement to communications and legal departments andthe leadership.

London 2012 Learning Legacy, “Complaint and dispute resolution process to deal with breaches of the
Sustainable Sourcing Code” (2013) at: http://learninglegacy.independent.gov.uk/documents/pdfs/
sustainability/cs-sustainable-sourcing-code-complaints-mechanism.pdfvhttp://learninglegacy.independent.gov.uk/publications/complaint-and-dispute-resolution-process-to-deal-with-br.php
www.ihrb.org | Institute for Human Rights and Business

Theme1:
Human
Rights5
Risks in Preparing and
Delivering MSEs
In the first panel discussion, the human rights risks in the delivery of MSEs were thetopic of discussion. Rémy Friedmann, Deputy Head of the Human Rights Policy Sectionof the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, served as the facilitator. Speakers
included: Hiromasa Nakai, Chief of Information and Public Affairs of Japan Committee
for UNICEF; Apolinar Tolentino of Building & Woodworkers International (BWI); Haley St.
Dennis, Communications Manager for IHRB; Minky Worden, Director of Global Initiativesof Human Rights Watch; and Kanae Doi, Japan Director at Human Rights Watch.

Minky Worden, Director of Global
Initiatives, Human Rights Watch

Ms Worden quoted a press release from the IOC as she explained that the new Host
City Contract that will be applicable to the 2024 and 2028 Games reflects the IOC’s
strengthened stance in favour of human rights and against corruption.6 This change isin response to human rights abuses that undermined the heart of the Olympic Charter:
human dignity. It came about through a process of discussion with NGOs and humanrights advocates over more than 10 years.

6

IOC, “IOC Strengthens Its Stance In Favour Of Human Rights And Against Corruption In New Host City
Contract” (Feb 2017) at: https://www.olympic.org/news/ioc-strengthens-its-stance-in-favour-of-human-rights-and-against-corruption-in-new-host-city-contract

Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights | www.megasportingevents.org

13

Before 2024, there will be three major Asian Games: PyeongChang 2018, Tokyo 2020,
and Beijing 2022. The Tokyo 2020 Games have no obligation to comply with the newstandards but have the opportunity to do so. It will be good for TOCOG, the Japanese
Government, and all partner companies to aim towards complying with the newstandards. In particular, Worden encouraged putting in place a grievance mechanismthat is usable and visible. It is not a loss of face when human rights abuses are exposedand dealt with, but rather a show of strength.

“

We already know human rights abuses in China are bad and worsening,
especially for workers’ rights, press freedom, and supply chain. Even
monitors cannot work. So the challenge for Tokyo is this: to raise thebar. Raise it, and keep it high for human rights, workers’ rights, nondiscrimination, and press freedom.

Kanae Doi, Japan Director, Human Rights Watch

Ms Doi raised the issue of migrant workers, and particularly of the technical intern training
programme (TITP) in Japan, as a human rights issue that the world will be watchingas Tokyo hosts the 2020 Games. The existence of recruiting agencies and the systemthat prohibits trainees from changing employers have resulted in human rights abuses,
including low or unpaid wages, illegal overtime, dangerous working conditions, forced
return, prohibitions on having cell phones, staying elsewhere overnight, and having
romantic relationships, sexual abuses, confiscation of passports, payment of exorbitantfees to sending agencies, and forced payments of surety or penalties to sending agencies
in case the training period does not finish successfully. There are also risks of humantrafficking and forced labour. The pressure of having to pay large sums of fees to thesending agencies, the fear of deportation, and the system that generally prohibits
trainees from changing employers are deterring trainees from making complaints.7

7

14

See further, IHRB, “Learning Experience? Japan’s TITP and the Challenge of Protecting the Rights ofMigrant Workers” (Oct. 2017) at: https://www.ihrb.org/focus-areas/mega-sporting-events/japan-titpmigrant-workers-rights
www.ihrb.org | Institute for Human Rights and BusinessTOCOG’s Sustainable Sourcing Code, although detailed and high level, has to address
the challenge of how to guarantee effectiveness. As for the grievance mechanism
currently under consideration, it will be good for TOCOG to accept recommendations
from a wide range of people. Japan could show leadership by building a grievancemechanism that can address cases that are not necessarily related to sourcing, suchas repression of civil society demonstrations (which was a challenge around the 2008
Beijing Olympics) and discrimination against LGBTI+ people (which was a challenge
around the 2014 Sochi Olympics).

“

Japan could show leadership by building a grievance mechanism that canaddress cases that are not necessarily related to sourcing, such as repressionof civil society demonstrations and discrimination against LGBTI+ people.

Hiromasa Nakai, Chief of Information &Public Affairs, Japan Committee, UNICEF

Mr Nakai noted that TOCOG’s Sustainable Sourcing Code has made reference to theUnited Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and to the Children’s
Rights and Business Principles (CRBP). The risks of adverse impacts on childrens’
rights at MSEs include (1) disruption of work-life balance and its effect on families andchildren, (2) child prostitution that uses social media and text messages as “meeting
points”, and (3) abuses of teenage athletes and Olympians and of children aspiring
to become like them, including abuse by coaches (including sexual abuse), pressure
to meet expectations (and doping to meet expectations), and overexposure to media.

“

Perhaps because of the word “child rights”, in Japan there is a tendency
to see them as different from “human rights”, and maybe because of this,children’s rights are by far still undervalued vis-à-vis the rights of adults.

Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights | www.megasportingevents.org

15

Apolinar Tolentino, Regional
Representative, Asia Pacific, Building &Woodworkers International

Mr Tolentino described BWI’s campaign to promote and protect the rights of migrant
workers employed to build FIFA World Cup facilities in Qatar and the lessons it offers
for the Tokyo 2020 Games. The campaign, which is based on a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) with the Supreme Committee for Delivery & Legacy (SCLD),
involves (1) joint inspection of the construction sites and accommodation, (2) reviewof the occupational safety and health (OSH) policy standards for migrant workers,and (3) review of occupational safety and health (OSH) training. The objective of thejoint inspection is to ensure compliance with standards through participation of BWI
as a third party and to enhance the effectiveness of the grievance mechanism (Worker
Welfare Programme). The inspection has shown that the grievance mechanism is being
managed effectively, and it is recommended that such inspection be expanded tonon-FIFA projects in Qatar.
In the context of the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, there are already reported cases ofviolation of workers’ rights and trade union rights in contravention of the Sustainable
Sourcing Code and the Sourcing Code for Timber. Specifically, there have been reportsof violation of the rights to organise, a suicide of a construction worker employed forthe construction of the new national Olympic stadium for Tokyo 2020 due to overwork
from long working hours, and migrant workers subjected to occupational safety andhealth risks and other risks at the construction sites.

“
16

The importance of third party monitoring, joint inspection, andmultiparty agreements cannot be underestimated in order to set up an
efficient grievance mechanism.

www.ihrb.org | Institute for Human Rights and BusinessHaley St. Dennis, Communications Manager, IHRB

Ms St Dennis explained that sponsor companies and broadcasters have shared roles
as major financiers of MSEs, and through that involvement, they can be linked to thehuman rights impacts of the MSE. Additional human rights risks face broadcasters, whoplay a functional role in MSEs, including the working conditions of the local staff aswell as risks associated with broadcasting, such as the balance between “freedom of
expression and censorship” and “privacy and the right to information”. Broadcasters arealso often in a unique position of being able to tell the story of the context surrounding
the MSE, but where there are restrictions on free press covering the event, it can mean
they face pressure to comply with such restrictions.
Two task forces have been established with the MSE Platform to look at these issues. One
is on sponsors composed of the AB InBev, adidas Group, The Coca-Cola Company, theInternational Organisation of Employers (IOE), and P&G. The other is on broadcasters
composed of BT, Discovery, ITV, and Sky. The task forces have been working together toproduce due diligence tools to help other sponsors and broadcasters of MSEs identify
and address their human rights risks. Drafts of these new industry tools will be launched
for consultation at the Sporting Chance Forum in Geneva in November 2017.

“

Sporting values of harmony among nations, solidarity, and fair play
are what make MSEs so commercially attractive to sponsors andbroadcasters, but also underline the importance of corporate partners
managing the human rights risks of MSEs proactively.

Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights | www.megasportingevents.org

17

Theme2:
Good
Examples6of Implementing
Sustainable Strategies
The second panel discussion focused on examples of sustainable practices. Hiroshi
Ishida of Caux Round Table Japan served as the facilitator. Takeo Tanaka, SeniorDirector of Sustainability for TOCOG, gave an explanation of the Sustainable Sourcing
Code for the Tokyo 2020 Games, followed by a presentation by Shaun McCarthy, theFormer Chief Commissioner of the Oversight Commission for a Sustainable London
2012, on the Sourcing Code for the London 2012 Games. Chikako Miyata of ANA
Holding Inc. described the approach used by ANA Group to identify human rights
risks, and George Yoshimoto of ASICS Corporation gave a presentation on steps taken
to enforce sourcing policies on contractors.

Takeo Tanaka, Senior Director of
Sustainability, TOCOGMr Tanaka outlined the process TOCOG used to develop its Sustainable Sourcing Code.
The Organising Committee procures large quantities of products and services, andthe supply chains of contractors extend to other parts of Asia and across the globe.
Recognising the need to promote sourcing activities that take into consideration
human rights and labour issues, TOCOG adopted the Sustainable Sourcing Code inMarch 2017.8 In developing the Code, TOCOG held discussions in working groups

8

18

TOCOG, “Tokyo 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games Sustainable Sourcing Code (1st edition)” (Mar.
2017) at: https://tokyo2020.org/en/games/sustainability/data/sus-procurement-code.pdf
www.ihrb.org | Institute for Human Rights and Businesscomposed of experts from various fields such as the environment, human rights, andCSR. TOCOG also listened to human rights organisations, environmental NGOs, related
ministries, business organisations, and public comments in revising the draft.
The Code sets the standards and operation methods to ensure that TOCOG’s procurement
activities take into consideration sustainability issues, including legal compliance,
environmental problems, human rights and labour issues, and fair business practices.
By conducting our procurement activities based on the Code, TOCOG fulfils its social
responsibilities as the organiser of the Games and encourages society at large toadopt an attitude that favours sustainability. The Code covers all products and services
procured by TOCOG as well as licensed products.
The Code is broadly divided into “Common Components” and “Individual Standards forCore Products/Services”. The Common Components set standards in five sustainabilityrelated fields based on international agreements and codes of conduct. Contractors
are required to comply with these standards throughout their supply chains. TOCOG
will also lay down verification procedures and set up a grievance mechanism. The
Individual Standards for Core Products/Services are standards for specific core products
and services particularly pertinent to sustainability. Standards have been set for
timber and agricultural, marine, and livestock products. TOCOG will further consider
standards for paper and palm oil. In addition, an instruction guide will be prepared toensure that the Code is implemented throughout the process of placement of orders,public announcement of tenders, bidding, and signing and execution of contracts.
The grievance mechanism will respond to reports of breach of the Code submitted to
TOCOG, which will ascertain the facts and take steps to resolve the issue.9 The aim is
not to impose penalties on the breaching party, but to promote constructive dialogue
among the parties and ameliorate the situation through agreement among the parties.
A large part of the operation of the grievance mechanism is to be outsourced toexternal organisations. To support resolution of cases while ensuring neutrality andfairness, TOCOG plans to establish an advisory board consisting of experts in suchfields as human rights, labour, and the environment.

“

9

We believe that sports can contribute to creating a society in which humanrights are respected, and we hope to pour our efforts towards this goal.

TOCOG publicly consulted on an outline of the proposed grievance mechanism in November 2017. See
further, TOCOG, “Outline of the Grievance Mechanism on the Sustainable Sourcing Code [provisionaltranslation]” (Nov 2017) at: https://tokyo2020.org/en/games/sustainability/data/grievance-mechanism-overview-EN.pdf

Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights | www.megasportingevents.org

19Shaun McCarthy, Former Chief
Commissioner, Commission for a
Sustainable London 2012

Mr McCarthy shared, in addition to his presentation in Part II, his experience at London
2012. For the London 2012 Games, the Oversight Commission was established as an
official independent body charged with assuring the promise to deliver “The mostsustainable Games ever”. It was established immediately after the bid was won in2005 and continued until 2013, the year following London 2012. Mr McCarthy chaired
the Commission throughout, reporting directly to the Olympic Board in London. The
Oversight Commission had three primary functions: (1) Provide strategic assurance
over all bodies responsible for venue construction, staging, transport, and legacy
commitments; (2) provide strategic advice, as a “critical friend”, to senior executivesof all delivery bodies; and (3) establish and maintain communication with stakeholders
and the media to be trusted by all stakeholders and delivery bodies.
LOCOG developed a comprehensive Sourcing Code early and engaged key industry
bodies to develop it. The level of commitment from companies to respect theCode varied. Many sponsors saw London 2012 as an opportunity to showcase theirsustainability credentials. On the other hand, other top sponsors contracting with
the IOC, and particularly those appointed by the IOC’s Olympic Broadcasting Service(OBS), did not feel they were obliged to comply with LOCOG requirements.
In terms of lessons learned with regard to communication, there was a general failure
to communicate beyond the key merchandisers (i.e. secondary suppliers and beyond),
resulting in most manufacturers (i.e. secondary suppliers and beyond) of merchandise
being unaware of the existence of the Code or the complaints mechanism. Intervention
by, and support from, trade unions was hampered by LOCOG’s refusal to require
disclosure of manufacturing locations.
There were no carrots or sticks other than the “court of public opinion”, which wasenhanced by the Oversight Commission’s role to actively promote communication withthe public. This is because the Games are a “one off” project, so it is not usuallypossible to terminate contracts (stick) and look for alternative suppliers due totight and immoveable deadlines. Moreover, there is no possibility for incentivising20

www.ihrb.org | Institute for Human Rights and Businesscontinuous improvement or offering to place repeat business (carrot).
Therefore, the key to success is (1) careful selection of suppliers, (2) providing
education to suppliers (communication and education of the sourcing code), (3)managing performance, and (4) setting up an independent complaints mechanism.
The Oversight Commission was key to building a culture of “transparency”. Being truly
independent, we were able to build trust with all stakeholders. Considering the timeremaining until the Tokyo 2020 Games, it is probably too late for Tokyo to establish
a similar organisation or carry out the same level of stakeholder engagement as inLondon. However, it is possible to (1) establish excellent due diligence procedures,(2) launch communication and education programmes for workforces, assurance,
performance management, and (3) set up an independent complaints mechanism.

“

The Games are a “one off” project, so it is not usually possible toterminate contracts (stick) and look for alternative suppliers due totight and immoveable deadlines. Moreover, there is no possibility
for incentivising continuous improvement or offering to place repeat
business (carrot).

Chikako Miyata, Vice President, Corporate
Brand and CSR, ANA Holding Inc.

Ms Miyata gave a presentation on the efforts of the ANA group to respect humanrights, which were started in 2014 in recognition of the importance of human rights
in various social settings. Noting that such efforts should be based on internationalguidelines, the company began by basing its action on the United Nations Guiding
Principles on Business and Human Rights.
To gain internal understanding on how human rights are defined in accordance withinternationally recognised standards, e-learning was launched in 2015 and the ANA

Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights | www.megasportingevents.org

21

Group Policy on Human Rights was developed in 2016. The company’s human rights
due diligence process was set in place, which consists of procedures for Commit, Assess,
Act, and Report. Country risk and business risk are assessed based on information fromthird-party organisations, and the ANA group’s management systems are analysedfor potential human rights risks. Major risks are further identified in consultation
with external experts. The ANA group is currently addressing the identified risks anddisclosing information about its efforts as outlined below.
First, the ANA group briefs contractors about its policy to ensure that appropriate
working conditions are provided to non-Japanese workers employed by thecontractors, and particularly contractors of ANA group companies, and conducts
interviews, using third-party organisations, with non-Japanese workers. Second, the
ANA group is evaluating the supply chains of products used in in-flight services. Third,
the ANA group is promoting in-house education on bribery for the legal and otherdepartments. Fourth, the ANA group is considering undertaking efforts to eliminate
human trafficking through the use of air travel. The establishment of a grievancemechanism is a remaining challenge. The ANA group will continue to promote inhouse education and information disclosure of the Group’s policy and efforts andmeet as many requirements as possible set down in the UN Guiding Principles. The
Group will also implement TOCOG’s Sustainable Sourcing Code.

“The ANA group will continue to promote in-house education andinformation disclosure of the Group’s policy and efforts and meet as
many requirements as possible set down in the UN Guiding Principles.

George Yoshimoto, CSR Promotion TeamManager, Global Legal & Compliance
Division, ASICS Corporation

Mr Yoshimoto highlighted “audit”, “capacity building”, and “self-assessment” in its
approach to its suppliers.

22

www.ihrb.org | Institute for Human Rights and Business“Audit” is conducted prior to and after signing of a contract to avoid contractingwith factories that cannot meet our requirements. A business department consideringtransacting with a factory will provide information, as soon as possible, to the CSR
department, which, in response, provides input about the country and if the factoryhas contracts with other brands. The business department will then visit the factoryand submit to the CSR department three types of documents: a “factory visit checklist”,
a “factory profile”, and a “third-party audit report”. The CSR department will analyse
the reports and, if necessary, conduct a preliminary audit. If the risk is consideredsmall, the factory is contracted to begin transactions. Our policy is similar to TOCOG’s
Sustainable Sourcing Code but is more detailed. For instance, we prohibit employmentof children under the age of 15 and weekly working hours of more than 60 hours. We
also conduct annual audits after contracting. The audit results are assessed using acategory of A to E. Factories with a rank of C and above can maintain their contracts,
but must aim to attain the ranking of E as much as possible.
“Capacity building” is about education. In fiscal 2016, we provided education to 187
people from 111 companies. The purpose is to enable factories to make improvementson their own. Education is important in helping them understand what we require fromfactories.
“Self-assessment” is done on question sheets, which we send to the factories to fillout. Newly contracted factories tend to give themselves higher ratings than the actual
situation, and on-site audits often reveal these shortcomings. We fill this gap by
pointing out the differences between their response and audit results. The aim is toencourage factories to raise their standards.

“

We believe that by continuing to engage in these three areas of activity,
we can implement TOCOG’s Sustainable Sourcing Code.

Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights | www.megasportingevents.org

23

Theme3:
Operational
7
Grievance Mechanisms
and Tokyo 2020
The final panel discussion focused on key points and issues surrounding theimplementation of a grievance mechanism for the Tokyo 2020 Games. Speakers
included: Steve Gibbons of Ergon Associates; Shoya Yoshida, General Secretary of
the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) Asia Pacific; Kenichi Masamoto,Director of OECD Division of the Economic Affairs Bureau of the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs; Miho Okada, Director of Caux Round Table Japan; Takuya Yamazaki, Executive
Committee Member of the World Players Association; Michiko Kouno, Section Chiefof the Equal Employment Opportunity Division of the Employment Environment andEqual Employment Opportunity Bureau of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare
alongside Atsushi Yoshida, Section Chief of the Inspection Division of the Labour
Standards Bureau of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare William Rook of theInstitute for Human Rights and Business (IHRB) served as the facilitator.

Steve Gibbons, Director, Ergon Associates

Mr Gibbons described Ergon’s experience (contracted by LOCOG to set up a grievancemechanism) of managing the London 2012 grievance mechanism. LOCOG anticipatedthat there would be complaints about a range of rights issues arising in relation to the
preparation and management of the Games, and also knew the importance of having ameans to respond to those complaints in a way that was rights compatible. LOCOG had
direct contact with trade unions and NGOs from an early stage. There was openness
in the LOCOG and commercial partners to experiment with a grievance mechanism.

24

www.ihrb.org | Institute for Human Rights and BusinessIt was the first attempt to establish and manage a grievance mechanism at a MSE.
The work on developing the mechanism started before the UN Guiding Principles on
Business and Human Rights were adopted in 2011.
The types of complaints LOCOG received through the mechanism were wide-ranging
and included those related to working conditions in factories in Indonesia, freedom of
association in footwear factories in the Philippines, complaints from young workers in
toy factories in China, complaints related to trade union rights in metals manufacture
in Canada, and complaints from workers of souvenir production in China. Many
complaints came via international trade unions, NGOs, and the media.
As for lessons learned in London, I would like to point to the following: (1) Importanceof stakeholder engagement and oversight, (2) getting commercial partner buy-in fromsponsors, suppliers, and licensees, (3) anticipating likely complaints, (4) engaging withnational law and government, (5) speedy and appropriate response to complaints, (6)“stick” and enforcement is very difficult in mediating outcomes, (7) thinking beyond
the end of the event, (8) promoting transparency and openness, (9) working to support
mature industrial relations, (10) securing cultural appropriateness in the mechanism,(11) looking to work already happening and best practices in developing mechanisms,
and (12) seeing the positive reasons for developing the mechanism.

“

LOCOG anticipated that there would be complaints about a range ofrights issues arising in relation to the preparation and management of
the Games, and also knew the importance of having a means to respondto those complaints in a way that was rights compatible.

Shoya Yoshida, General Secretary,
International Trade Union Confederation
Asia Pacific

Mr Yoshida remarked on the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights andMega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights | www.megasportingevents.org

25the discussions on supply chains at the G7 Summit 2015 and G20, and observed that
there are growing moves to “monitor” corporate activities. There are two reasons for
this: (1) companies do not know what is happening in their supply chains (even thoughtechnological innovation has promoted division of business and accelerated the speedof business, incidents do not become visible) and (2) reliance solely on corporate
compliance increases risk for society. Chairman Yano spoke about good and strong
companies, but companies in the world are not all good companies. Some companies
and governments want to have lenient environmental and labour standards. All themore reason why we need a grievance mechanism.
I would encourage the use of industrial relations in the establishment and managementof a grievance mechanism for two reasons: (1) labour unions represent employees who
are working inside the companies and are independent from the management (i.e.
their independence is guaranteed) and (2) the use of industrial relations will reducethe cost of establishing and managing a grievance mechanism. Labour unions aregood at spotting shortcomings of companies and are always on the lookout. You canrely on labour unions to know what is happening in the supply chains. ITUC represents
180 million workers in 151 countries and regions. Through collaboration between ITUC
and BWI, it will be possible to set up an effective grievance mechanism at low cost. By
following the example set by London, I hope that TOCOG will establish its grievancemechanism through the participation of labour unions and other stakeholders.

“

By following the example set by London, I hope that TOCOG will
establish its grievance mechanism through the participation of labour
unions and other stakeholders.

Kenichi Masamoto, Director, OECD
Division, Economic Affairs Bureau,
Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Kenichi Masamoto provided an explanation on the OECD Guidelines for Multinational

26

www.ihrb.org | Institute for Human Rights and BusinessEnterprises and the Japanese National Contact Point (NCP). The OECD Guidelines forMultinational Enterprises are a set of recommendations for multinational enterprises
in 48 participating countries to voluntarily adopt responsible business conduct.
Multinational enterprises are responsible for “promoting positive contributions toeconomic, environmental and social progress” and “avoiding causing or contributing
to adverse impacts through their own activities, and addressing such impacts when theyoccur”. To further the implementation of the OECD Guidelines and provide assistancein resolving practical issues, each participating country establishes a National Contact
Point (NCP) as a liaison office.
The Guidelines set down recommendations for responsible business conduct in theareas of “disclosure”, “human rights”, “employment and industrial relations”, among
others. OECD Due Diligence Guidance has also been prepared for specific industries,
such as minerals from conflict-affected areas, the extractive sector, and the garment
sector, and for specific stakeholders, such as institutional investors. Due Diligence
Guidance applicable across all business sectors is currently being drafted. These
guidelines and guidance are available from the OECD website.
The Japanese NCP was established in 2000, consisting of the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, and Ministry of Economy, Trade andIndustry. In addition, an advisory board composed of members from the JapaneseTrade Union Confederation (RENGO) and Japan Business Federation (KEIDANREN) has
been set up to promote implementation of the OECD Guidelines. Specifically, theJapanese NCP is involved in publicity and education and in responding to specificcases. When an issue is raised against a Japanese company, the Japanese NCP collects
information from the multinational, offers mediation, and provides documentation. In
these instances, the information is collected through embassies. The Japanese NCP also
works with stakeholders and promotes information sharing and peer review throughits participation in OECD’s Working Party on Responsible Business Conduct. When an
issue arises in relation to the OECD Guidelines, the Japanese NCP accepts the case,listens to the parties, collects information, conducts a preliminary assessment, and,if necessary, provides mediation. Even if the process comes to a conclusion without
an agreement between the parties, the Japanese NCP, in principle, publishes a reportcontaining the name of the company involved.
Many of the cases filed are related to the issue of “employment and industrial
relations”. Cases related to “due diligence” and “human rights” are also increasing
in recent years. The largest number of cases raised has been in the manufacturingsector, followed by mining and quarrying, and finance. The Japanese NCP has dealt
with nine cases so far, of which four are still pending. Two of the cases are related tothe activities in Japan of third-country multinational firms, and seven are related tothe activities outside Japan of Japanese multinationals. Most of these cases are related
to “employment and industrial relations”.
In relation to Tokyo 2020, attention will be focused on the aspects of employment,
industrial relations, and human rights of multinationals involved with the Games.
Against the backdrop of a growing interest in the social aspects of corporations, theJapanese NCP will continue to work towards implementation of the OECD Guidelines
and, if a case is raised with the Japanese NCP, to assist in the resolution of the issue
through prescribed procedures.

Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights | www.megasportingevents.org

27

“In relation to Tokyo 2020, attention will be focused on the aspects of
employment, industrial relations, and human rights of multinationals
involved with the Games.

Miho Okada, Director, Caux Round Table JapanMs Okada expressed concern that even if TOCOG sends the received complaint tothe company involved, the situation could deteriorate further unless that company
decides to respond and take action promptly. TOCOG as well as companies need togain knowledge about effective remedy and establish the grievance mechanism.
The establishment and effective operation of such a mechanism should take into
consideration the following five points: (1) Understanding human rights considerations:
TOCOG and companies need to know that human rights issues are not just limited
to sexual and power harassment and discrimination against outcast communities
in Japan and that they should comply with internationally recognised human rights
standards; (2) Resources: resources should be provided to set up policies, systems,
and processes to enable response to complaints; (3) Scope: complaints from a wide
range of stakeholders should be covered, including employed workers as well as all
workers in the supply chains and members of local communities; (4) Information
Disclosure/Transparency: Efforts should be made to develop a positive attitude towards
disclosure (it is difficult to conceal information in this age); and (5) Open to utilise
external systems: TOCOG and companies should consider combining existing in-housemechanisms, external mechanisms, and judicial mechanisms. Grievance mechanisms
need not be seen in a negative light. If used effectively, it offers the advantage ofidentifying complaints (human rights risks) early and the opportunity to nip them inthe bud with minimal resources before they develop into a major issue.
As for TOCOG specifically, it is a transient organisation with a life of seven years, andthere are only three years remaining until the opening of the Games. They will urgently
need to conduct gap analysis of what is and what is not possible by studying existing28

www.ihrb.org | Institute for Human Rights and Businesssystems outside of their organisation and consolidating existing wisdom. They could
seek cooperation with existing systems and resources, including the Japanese NCP, theMinistry of Health, Labour and Welfare’s labour dispute resolution mechanism, theInternational Trade Union Confederation (ITUC)’s mechanism for protecting the rights
of workers, consultation by public consultants on social and labour insurance (available
on Sundays and outside business hours), multilingual mediators and arbitrators
affiliated with overseas organisations, and publicity activities on grievance mechanisms
and the Sustainable Sourcing Code, targeted at subsidiaries and suppliers particularlyof Japanese companies operating abroad, working in partnership with the Ministry ofForeign Affairs and Japanese embassies abroad. A wide variety of organisations fromJapan and abroad are participating in this workshop. If TOCOG takes leadership bymaking clear its requirements and expectations, it is very likely that others will offer
their wisdom and networks and that an effective grievance mechanism can be set up.

“

While the UK is good at “innovation” to create new frameworks, Japanis good at “kaizen” of making continuous improvement of the contentsof existing frameworks. It will be good if the grievance mechanism
borne from the London 2012 Games can be further improved inJapan, particularly around human rights, leaving a legacy throughcollaboration between the two countries.

Takuya Yamazaki, Executive Committee
Member, World Players Association

Mr Yamazaki explained the meaning of concretising the value of business and humanrights on the platform of sports and how the system of enforcement on the platformof sports can enhance corporate branding and promotion efforts. It is important thatthe grievance mechanism not only covers the human rights issues included in the
Sustainable Sourcing Code, but also set high standards for other types of human rights
issued not covered by the Code. TOCOG should include in its grievance mechanism
opportunities to address complaints that are not necessarily related to the Sustainable
Sourcing Code.

Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights | www.megasportingevents.org

29

Sports have a strong system of enforcement. For example, decisions of FIFA’s Dispute
Resolution Chamber (DRC) are enforceable around the world. FIFA has the power
to execute their rules around the world. Violations face powerful sanctions such as
deduction of points and deregistration. Such a strong system of enforcement, not seen
in other industries, is probably only possible in the context of sports.
It will be substantially more effective for a company to work on ensuring respectfor human rights within the context of sports, which have significant promotional
value, than for a company to work on the same issue outside such a context. Thereis a considerable difference between working on business and human rights because“we might be censured if we didn’t” and working on such issues because “it has
sponsorship value and helps to increase our commercial value”. What is essentiallyrequired of companies is their commitment to work on human rights issues and notnecessarily a expectation to completely eliminate human rights issues altogether.
In May this year, FIFA published its Human Rights Policy, which covers the rights
of athletes. It is an important achievement for us. The Policy contains concretecommitments to human rights and also mentions remedies. More importantly, it isclearly stated that “FIFA will commit to high standards” and that its commitments are“binding on all FIFA bodies” (meaning that it will protect human rights not only in theWorld Cup but also in every aspect of FIFA and football). These commitments have apositive impact on the FIFA brand and allow us stakeholders to put trust in FIFA.
The scope of the TOCOG grievance mechanism should obviously include human rights
issues related to the Sustainable Sourcing Code. One of the challenges will be todecide how to deal with complaints that are not directly related to the Sustainable
Sourcing Code.

“30

What is important is not to delineate the scope of activities but to show
the Olympics as a “trusted brand”. I think that announcing that thegrievance mechanism will deal with complaints that are not necessarily
related to the Sustainable Sourcing Code is a decision that will haveclose bearing on the very nature of TOCOG’s activities.

www.ihrb.org | Institute for Human Rights and Business8

Conclusion

John Morrison of the Institute for Human Rights and Business (IHRB) closed the day’s
discussions by emphasising the following three points: (i) The need for routes toremedy: although some means exist, there is a need for a wider range of remedies; (ii)
The need to view remedy as a means for dialogue and wider stakeholder engagement;and (iii) Disclosure and the challenge of creating a culture of transparency.
Hiroshi Ishida of Caux Round Table Japan concluded the workshop by noting thegreat progress made in recent years in terms of the growing social interest andunderstanding on “business and human rights” and on the relation between “MSE andhuman rights”, and called upon the participants for continued collaboration, support,
and engagement.

A Note of Thanks
We would like to thank all of you who participated in the workshop. We would also like to takethis opportunity to thank the Embassy of Switzerland for supporting this event and Keidanren’s
All Japan Business Committee for cooperating with us in the publicity of the event.
The organisers believe that your wisdom and the network created through theworkshop are indispensable for making respect for human rights a reality at the Tokyo
2020 Games. The workshop is but the first step in our discussions. Although the timeremaining until 2020 is short, we sincerely hope that our forum for discussion willcontinue in the future and that through such a forum, the initiative and leadership of
the organisers towards making respect for human rights a reality in Tokyo 2020 will
be further strengthened and the network of supporting organisations and sponsor
companies will also be reinforced.

John Morrison
Chief Executive, IHRBSecretariat, MSE Platform
Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights | www.megasportingevents.org

Hiroshi Ishida
Executive Director
Caux Round Table Japan31

On September 13, 2017, IHRB on behalf of the Mega-Sporting Events Platform for
Human Rights organised, with the support of the Swiss Government and together with
Caux Round Table Japan, its first workshop in Japan, towards making respect for humanrights a reality in the Tokyo 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games. The workshop wasattended by 76 persons from 41 organisations, including the International Olympic
Committee, the Tokyo 2020 Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic
Games, the Olympics headquarters in the Cabinet Secretariat, and other relatedorganisations of the Tokyo 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games, sponsor companies,
NGOs from Japan and abroad, athletes’ organisations, the Japanese Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, Ministry of Justice, and Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, as well as U.S.
and Swiss Embassies in Japan.
The workshop aimed to identify, and share among the participants, key points andissues surrounding the implementation of sustainable sourcing policies and grievancemechanisms in relation to mega-sporting events.