Introduction

Human rights due diligence in energy projects refers to the systematic process through which governments, project developers, investors, lenders and energy companies identify, prevent, mitigate and address actual or potential human-rights impacts associated with an energy project. Energy projects can include oil and gas developments, refineries, pipelines, electricity-generation facilities, renewable-energy projects, transmission lines, mining operations associated with energy technologies and large infrastructure developments.

Energy projects can produce significant economic and developmental benefits, including employment, infrastructure development, energy security and public revenue. At the same time, poorly designed projects may create risks involving land acquisition, displacement, occupational safety, environmental pollution, community health, labour rights, privacy, indigenous or community interests and access to effective remedies.

Human rights due diligence therefore provides a governance mechanism through which economic development and energy security can be balanced with protection of human dignity and fundamental rights.

Meaning and scope of human rights due diligence

Human rights due diligence is broader than ordinary legal compliance. A company may comply formally with an environmental permit while still failing to identify significant effects on nearby communities or workers.

A comprehensive due-diligence process generally involves:

Identifying actual and potential human-rights impacts.

Assessing the seriousness and likelihood of those impacts.

Integrating preventive and mitigating measures into project design.

Monitoring implementation.

Communicating relevant information.

Providing or cooperating in remediation where harm occurs.

The process should continue throughout the project lifecycle rather than being completed only before construction.

International legal framework

Human rights due diligence is influenced by international human-rights instruments and responsible-business standards. Important sources include the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and relevant International Labour Organization standards.

The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights are particularly significant. They organize responsibility around three broad pillars: the State duty to protect human rights, the corporate responsibility to respect human rights and access to remedy.

These principles are not themselves a universally binding treaty, but they have become an important reference point for responsible investment and energy-project governance.

State responsibility and energy projects

States have a primary responsibility to protect people from human-rights abuses connected with business activities.

In energy projects, this can require governments to establish appropriate rules concerning environmental protection, labour safety, land acquisition, community consultation and corporate accountability.

A State should not assume that the involvement of a private company removes governmental responsibility. Public authorities remain responsible for creating and enforcing an appropriate regulatory framework.

Corporate responsibility

Energy companies have a responsibility to respect internationally recognized human rights. This responsibility exists independently of whether a particular right is expressly mentioned in an energy contract.

Companies should therefore examine the potential human-rights consequences of their activities and business relationships.

Due diligence should extend, where appropriate, to contractors, suppliers, construction companies, security providers and other business partners.

Land acquisition and displacement

Large energy projects frequently require substantial areas of land. Pipelines, transmission corridors, refineries, solar parks and power plants can therefore create land-use conflicts.

Human rights due diligence should examine:

Ownership and lawful occupation of land.

Potential displacement.

Compensation arrangements.

Livelihood impacts.

Access to housing.

Effects on agricultural or community activities.

Availability of grievance mechanisms.

Where displacement is unavoidable, legal safeguards should ensure lawful procedures, fair treatment and appropriate remedies.

Community participation

Meaningful community engagement is an important component of human-rights due diligence.

Affected communities should receive understandable information about significant project impacts and should have reasonable opportunities to express concerns.

Consultation should not be reduced to a formal meeting conducted after major project decisions have already been made.

For projects with potentially significant community impacts, participation should begin at the planning stage and continue throughout construction and operation.

Environmental protection and human rights

Environmental harm can directly affect human rights, including health, livelihood, water access and quality of life.

Consequently, environmental impact assessment and human-rights due diligence should operate together.

The comparative case Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India, (1996) 5 SCC 647 recognized sustainable development, the precautionary principle and the polluter-pays principle. Although the decision is not binding in Kuwait, it is relevant by analogy to the proposition that environmental protection should be integrated into development decisions.

Similarly, M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak), (1987) 1 SCC 395 developed the principle of absolute liability for hazardous industries under Indian law. It is not binding in other jurisdictions but provides comparative guidance concerning the heightened responsibility associated with dangerous industrial operations.

Occupational health and safety

Energy projects can involve significant workplace hazards. Oil and gas facilities, refineries, power plants, construction sites and transmission projects may expose workers to chemicals, machinery, electrical hazards, heat, pressure and other risks.

Human-rights due diligence should therefore assess:

Workplace safety.

Protective equipment.

Worker training.

Emergency procedures.

Contractor safety.

Working hours and conditions.

Incident reporting.

Access to medical assistance.

Safety should apply equally to permanent workers and contractors performing comparable hazardous activities.

Labour rights and supply chains

Large energy projects commonly involve complex supply chains. Human-rights risks can therefore occur outside the principal project company.

Due diligence may need to examine labour conditions involving:

Construction contractors.

Equipment suppliers.

Security providers.

Maintenance companies.

Logistics operators.

Relevant issues can include forced labour, child labour, discrimination, unsafe working conditions, wage practices and freedom of association, subject to applicable domestic law.

Migrant and contract workers

Large infrastructure projects frequently rely upon temporary or migrant labour. This can increase the importance of recruitment practices, accommodation, payment arrangements, document retention, health and safety and access to grievance procedures.

Energy companies should assess whether contractors are respecting applicable labour and human-rights standards.

Contractual clauses alone may be insufficient if the project company does not monitor actual implementation.

Security and human rights

Energy infrastructure may require private or public security personnel, particularly around oil fields, pipelines, refineries, ports and power infrastructure.

Security arrangements should respect lawful limitations on the use of force and should include appropriate training and accountability mechanisms.

Human-rights due diligence should assess the risks associated with security providers and establish procedures for reporting and investigating serious incidents.

Indigenous peoples and traditional communities

Some energy projects can affect indigenous peoples or traditional communities whose cultural, economic or environmental interests are connected with particular lands or natural resources.

International standards concerning indigenous peoples emphasize consultation and, in appropriate circumstances, free, prior and informed consent.

The exact legal requirements depend upon the jurisdiction and applicable international obligations. Nevertheless, due diligence should identify whether particular communities possess legally protected collective interests before project development begins.

Human rights and renewable-energy projects

Human-rights due diligence applies to renewable-energy projects as well as conventional energy projects.

Large solar or wind developments can require significant land, transmission infrastructure, mineral inputs and construction labour. Battery projects can also involve supply-chain risks associated with minerals and manufacturing.

Therefore, the classification of a project as “clean energy” does not automatically eliminate human-rights risks.

Energy infrastructure and access to electricity

Energy projects can also promote human rights by expanding access to reliable electricity and other essential services.

Due diligence should therefore consider both negative and positive impacts.

A project may provide employment and electricity access while simultaneously creating environmental or displacement risks. A balanced assessment should identify both dimensions and seek to maximize benefits while preventing avoidable harm.

Human rights impact assessment

A human-rights impact assessment can be integrated into the project's broader due-diligence process.

It may evaluate:

Affected rights.

Affected groups.

Severity of impacts.

Likelihood of occurrence.

Project alternatives.

Mitigation measures.

Monitoring indicators.

Remediation mechanisms.

The assessment should be updated when project circumstances materially change.

Grievance mechanisms

An effective grievance mechanism allows affected workers and communities to raise concerns without immediately resorting to litigation.

A project-level mechanism should be:

Accessible.

Understandable.

Predictable.

Transparent.

Fair.

Independent to an appropriate degree.

Free from retaliation.

A grievance system should complement rather than replace access to courts or other legally established remedies.

Access to remedy

Due diligence is incomplete if affected persons have no meaningful way to obtain remedy.

Remedies may include:

Compensation.

Restoration.

Corrective action.

Medical support.

Environmental remediation.

Reinstatement of rights.

Formal acknowledgement of harm.

Where a company caused or contributed to harm, it should participate appropriately in remediation.

Judicial review and public authorities

Government decisions concerning energy projects may involve licensing, land acquisition, environmental approvals, procurement and public financing.

Comparative guidance can be drawn from Tata Cellular v. Union of India, (1994) 6 SCC 651, which considered judicial review of government decisions and procurement. The decision is not binding in Kuwait but is relevant by analogy to the principle that governmental discretion must remain within legal limits.

Regulatory authority in energy projects

Energy projects often involve multiple regulatory institutions. Clear allocation of authority is important for effective human-rights protection.

PTC India Ltd. v. CERC, (2010) 4 SCC 603 provides comparative guidance concerning statutory authority in specialized energy regulation.

Similarly, Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. v. Essar Power Ltd., (2008) 4 SCC 755 demonstrates the importance of specialized regulatory jurisdiction in energy matters.

These decisions are comparative and do not constitute binding Kuwaiti law.

Contractual requirements

Human-rights standards can be incorporated into project contracts, procurement documents and financing arrangements.

Contracts may require:

Compliance with labour and safety laws.

Environmental standards.

Worker grievance mechanisms.

Community engagement.

Supply-chain due diligence.

Incident reporting.

Audit rights.

Termination or corrective measures for serious violations.

However, contractual clauses should be supported by monitoring and enforcement.

Financing and investor due diligence

Banks, development institutions and investors increasingly consider environmental, social and human-rights risks when evaluating energy projects.

Human-rights due diligence can therefore affect:

Project financing.

Insurance.

Investment decisions.

Cost of capital.

Project approvals.

Failure to address serious human-rights risks can create litigation, reputational, operational and financial consequences.

Transparency and reporting

Effective due diligence requires reliable information. Companies should communicate relevant information concerning significant human-rights risks and measures taken to address them.

However, transparency must be balanced against legitimate confidentiality requirements involving personal data, commercial information and national security.

The objective should be meaningful disclosure rather than publication of sensitive information that could itself create risks.

Human rights and energy transition

The energy transition creates new human-rights considerations. Renewable projects may require land and minerals, while the closure or restructuring of fossil-fuel facilities can affect workers and communities.

A just-transition approach therefore considers:

Worker reskilling.

Employment impacts.

Community economic effects.

Access to affordable energy.

Regional development.

Social protection.

Human-rights due diligence can help identify these consequences before transition decisions are implemented.

Conclusion

Human rights due diligence is an important component of modern energy-project governance because energy development can create both substantial public benefits and significant risks to workers, communities and the environment. Due diligence provides a structured method for identifying those risks, preventing or mitigating harm, monitoring performance and facilitating access to remedy.

The framework should cover the complete project lifecycle, including feasibility, land acquisition, construction, operation, expansion and decommissioning. Particular attention should be given to environmental impacts, occupational safety, labour conditions, community participation, displacement, security arrangements and supply-chain risks.

International standards, particularly the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, provide an important framework for understanding State duties, corporate responsibilities and access to remedy. Comparative judicial decisions such as Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum, M.C. Mehta (Oleum Gas Leak), Tata Cellular, PTC India and Gujarat Urja provide useful principles concerning environmental protection, hazardous activities, administrative accountability and energy regulation. These Indian cases are not binding in Kuwait and are relevant only by analogy.

Ultimately, human-rights due diligence should not be treated as a separate compliance exercise. It should be integrated into energy-project planning, environmental assessment, procurement, financing, contractual governance, operational management and emergency preparedness. Such integration can help ensure that energy development contributes to economic growth and energy security while respecting human dignity, protecting workers and communities and providing effective remedies when harm occurs.