Human rights officer
The human rights officer is the internally designated person required by Section 4 (3) of the German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) to monitor human rights risk management and to report to senior management at least once a year.
Section 4 (3) LkSG requires companies to establish who inside the organisation is responsible for monitoring risk management – for example by appointing a human rights officer. The wording is deliberately open: what the law mandates is an unambiguous allocation of responsibility, not a particular job title. The role may sit with one person, a committee or several individuals, often combined with compliance, procurement, sustainability or HR duties. Unlike the data protection officer under Article 37 GDPR, the LkSG provides neither a formal appointment procedure with notification to a supervisory authority nor special protection against dismissal or removal. Ultimate accountability for meeting the due diligence obligations always remains with senior management; the appointment delegates tasks, never corporate responsibility.
In substance, the designated person oversees the entire due diligence cycle: the annual and event-driven risk analysis under Section 5, the policy statement and preventive measures under Section 6, remedial action under Section 7, the complaints procedure under Section 8 including its annual effectiveness review, the obligations triggered by substantiated knowledge about indirect suppliers under Section 9, and continuous documentation under Section 10 (1) LkSG. The Act does not grant formal independence in the sense of freedom from instructions. The legislative materials and the guidance issued by BAFA, the competent authority, nevertheless derive practical minimum conditions from the monitoring mandate: a direct reporting line to senior management, adequate resources, access to all relevant information, and the avoidance of conflicts of interest. Combining the role with procurement or sales responsibility is particularly critical, because cost and delivery targets can collide with human rights requirements – the function must not end up auditing itself.
The only explicit reporting duty in the Act points inwards: under Section 4 (3) sentence 2 LkSG, senior management must inform itself regularly, and at least once a year, about the work of the responsible person or persons. In practice this becomes an annual human rights report to the management board – typically covering the risk landscape, the status of measures, complaints statistics and conclusions drawn – supplemented by ad hoc briefings in the event of serious incidents or substantiated knowledge. All reports, resolutions and decisions on measures must be documented on an ongoing basis under Section 10 (1) LkSG and retained for seven years; BAFA may request them when exercising its supervisory powers under Sections 14 et seq. LkSG. The legal framework is in flux: the external LkSG reporting obligation towards BAFA has been politically rolled back and is not being enforced, and the timetable for replacing the LkSG with the German transposition of the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) has been postponed by the Omnibus package and remains contested. The internal duty to allocate responsibility and to inform management under Section 4 (3) LkSG is unaffected, and the CSDDD likewise presupposes clearly assigned accountability for due diligence.
Legal Basis
Section 4 (3) LkSG (allocation of responsibility and at least annual briefing of senior management), read with Sections 5 to 10 LkSG (risk analysis, prevention, remediation, complaints procedure, documentation); Sections 14 et seq. and Section 24 LkSG (supervision by BAFA, administrative fines); UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights; OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises
Practical Example
A retail group with 1,800 employees in Germany initially assigned LkSG responsibility to its head of procurement. An internal audit reveals that two critical audit findings at a textile supplier were never escalated, for reasons of price and delivery reliability – a textbook conflict of interest. Management therefore appoints a human rights officer by board resolution, positions the role within the compliance function, grants a standing right to address the management meeting and allocates a budget for external audits. The role description sets out duties, information and access rights, the direct reporting line and the demarcation from procurement. She introduces quarterly reporting with metrics on risk analysis, preventive measures, incoming complaints and open remedial actions, and submits a consolidated human rights report to the board every February, which is minuted and archived in audit-proof form. When media coverage alleges forced labour at an indirect supplier, she briefs management ad hoc within a week, triggers an event-driven risk analysis and documents the decision paths and their rationale – records that can be handed over immediately if BAFA enquires later on.