Universal Periodic Review

This UPR tool reflects the global recommendations made to Austria by all countries world-wide during the Universial Priodic Review process (UPR) at the UN Human Rights Council and their current status of implementation. The League coordinates a significant part of Austrian civil society in the UPR process. 

The recommendations can be filtered in the menu below by human rights topics, SDGs, proponent states etc. also a search function is available. 

 

We welcome your comments and suggestions at upr@liga.or.at.


Search category
Filter options
Filter by tag…

Progress: No progress

Take effective measures to increase its official development assistance to achieve the internationally agreed target of 0.7% of its GDP, in order to realize economic, social and cultural rights

Proponent:

Bangladesh


People's Republic of Bangladesh

Bangladesh


People's Republic of Bangladesh

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Apr 1, 2025):

Although there has been selective progress in humanitarian aid and direct project aid, a substantial increase in the Austrian Office Development Assistance ODA ratio is not recognisable. The temporary increase to 0.39% in 2022 due to additional funds for Ukraine is considered a one-off effect (Austrian Development Agency website: ADA: Official Development Assistance: https://www.entwicklung.at/ada/oeffentliche-entwicklungshilfeleistungen). A binding step-by-step plan is required to achieve the target of 0.7% (see OECD website: preliminary figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development- OECD: https://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/official-development-assistance.htm ). However, civil society is expressing concerns about implementation. Although a gradual increase in development aid funding was agreed in the government programme, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not yet taken sufficient steps to pursue the goal.
  ; In the Government Plan 2025-2029, the Federal Government is focussing on joint improvements with all stakeholders on this point (see Government Plan 2025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).

Progress: No progress

Include in its ODA emergency aid packages specifically targeted to address the social and economic impacts of Covid-19

Proponent:

Bhutan


Kingdom of Bhutan

Bhutan


Kingdom of Bhutan

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

In terms of public development cooperation, the Austrian government has taken steps to mitigate the impact of the pandemic by providing financial support and initiating aid projects at home and abroad. Nevertheless, long-term strategies are needed to ensure sustainable recovery and to be prepared for future challenges. 

Progress: In progress

Take further measures to strengthen economic and social inclusion of victims of trafficking through provision of vocational training, language courses and job placement

Proponent:

Cambodia


Kingdom of Cambodia

Cambodia


Kingdom of Cambodia

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Apr 1, 2025):

Despite existing measures, the situation regarding the protection of victims of human trafficking in Austria remains critical. Although there are specialised aid organisations such as LEFÖ-IBF, many victims are often not identified in time, which makes access to protection and support more difficult. Co-operation with the authorities is a particular hurdle for victims, as residence permits are often dependent on their willingness to co-operate. This can put victims in an insecure situation, especially if they are afraid of reprisals or deportation. The fight against child trafficking and sexual exploitation is also problematic, as there is still a lack of sufficient data collection and targeted measures.
  As part of the Government Plan 2025-2029, the Federal Government intends to follow up on the recommendation to take effective measures against human trafficking and to sustainably strengthen victim protection for refugees (see Government Plan 2025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).

Progress: No progress

Better enforce human rights compliance by private economic actors with a view to reducing the gender pay gap and diversifying career options for all

Proponent:

Vietnam


Socialist Republic of Vietnam

Vietnam


Socialist Republic of Vietnam

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

There is still a significant pay gap between women and men in Austria. According to recent studies, women in Austria earn on average 18.8 per cent less than men, and this difference exists regardless of educational and professional qualifications (Statistik Austria, 2021: https://www.statistik.at/statistiken/bevoelkerung-und-soziales/gender-statistiken/einkommen). According to the Pay Transparency Directive, companies in the EU should in future exchange information on how much they pay women and men for work of equal value and take action if their gender pay gap exceeds 5 per cent. EU member states now have up to 3 years to transpose the directive into national law. This will include more comprehensive disclosure of starting salaries and pay levels, increased reporting obligations for companies and improved access to legal measures for employees (more information on this: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/themen/europa-aktuell/2023/04/gender-pay-gap-rat-der-eu-nimmt-neue-vorschriften-zur-lohntransparenz-an.html). In Austria, corresponding legislation has not yet been passed. The labour force participation rate for women is also still lower than for men (in 2022 70% compared to 78%, Statistics Austria: https://www.statistik.at/statistiken/arbeitsmarkt/erwerbstaetigkeit/erwerbstaetige-merkmale). 

Progress: No progress

Further strengthen measures to promote equality between women and men, in particular regarding equal pay and the participation of women on the boards and in the chief executive offices of companies

Proponent:

France


French Republic

France


French Republic

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

There is still a significant pay gap between women and men in Austria. According to recent studies, women in Austria earn on average 18.8 per cent less than men, and this difference exists regardless of educational and professional qualifications (Statistik Austria, 2021: https://www.statistik.at/statistiken/bevoelkerung-und-soziales/gender-statistiken/einkommen). According to the Pay Transparency Directive, companies in the EU should in future exchange information on how much they pay women and men for work of equal value and take action if their gender pay gap exceeds 5 per cent. EU member states now have up to 3 years to transpose the directive into national law. This will include more comprehensive disclosure of starting salaries and pay levels, increased reporting obligations for companies and improved access to legal measures for employees (more information on this: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/themen/europa-aktuell/2023/04/gender-pay-gap-rat-der-eu-nimmt-neue-vorschriften-zur-lohntransparenz-an.html). In Austria, corresponding legislation has not yet been passed. The labour force participation rate for women is also still lower than for men (in 2022 70% compared to 78%, Statistics Austria: https://www.statistik.at/statistiken/arbeitsmarkt/erwerbstaetigkeit/erwerbstaetige-merkmale). Women continue to be underrepresented not only in companies, but also in political decision-making positions at state and municipal level. Despite some progress, there are still considerable problems with regard to the pay gap and the number of women in decision-making positions. The pay gap between women and men remains high. Women are underrepresented not only in companies, but also in political decision-making positions at provincial and municipal level. According to the Pay Transparency Directive, companies in the EU should in future exchange information on how much they pay women and men for work of equal value and take action if their gender pay gap exceeds 5 per cent. EU member states now have until June 2026 to transpose the directive into national law. This will include more comprehensive disclosure of starting salaries and pay levels, increased reporting obligations for companies and improved access to legal measures for employees. The exact implementation of the directive is not yet known (further information on this: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/themen/europa-aktuell/2023/04/gender-pay-gap-rat-der-eu-nimmt-neue-vorschriften-zur-lohntransparenz-an.html). 

Progress: In progress

Make progress towards an economic and social recovery with a human rights approach to face the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, taking into account the special needs of vulnerable groups of society

Proponent:

Chile


Republic of Chile

Chile


Republic of Chile

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

The COVID-19 pandemic has also led to far-reaching restrictions on fundamental human and children’s rights in Austria (personal freedom, freedom of movement, education, health, etc.). However, there has been no review of the experiences to date; the federal government announced an analysis process led by the Academy of Sciences in May 2023; however, the involvement of civil society in the process remains unclear. In March 2023, the Austrian Children’s Rights Network, with the support of the Ministry of Social Affairs, published a „Corona Special Report“, which takes a detailed look at the many detrimental consequences of the fight against the pandemic for children (in the areas of civil liberties, information and participation, education, teaching, leisure, mental health, poverty, protection against violence and child rights monitoring) („Children’s Rights and Corona“ special report: here).   The LBI-GMR is running two projects in 2023 on crisis management and children’s rights, including a series of workshops with children and young people on their insights from the pandemic (available on the website: https://gmr.lbg.ac.at/forschung/menschenwuerde-und-oeffentliche-sicherheit/).   There has been an increase in domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the current state of affairs shows that Austria’s measures and resources to combat domestic violence are inadequate. The rising number of cases of domestic violence during the pandemic has been repeatedly addressed by non-governmental organisations. Other effects of the COVID-19 pandemic include an increased suicide rate, including among young people, and a greater need for psychosocial support. The federal government is currently not systematically analysing and investigating the causes. It would be desirable to advance research here, not only to counter the specific effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, but also to be able to design measures in a more human rights-compliant manner in a comparable crisis in the future;

Progress: No progress

Implement a national strategy for the prevention and reduction of poverty, which gives priority to the most vulnerable sectors and incorporates the response to the socio-economic impact of COVID-19 in the short, medium and long term

Proponent:

Cuba


Republic of Cuba

Cuba


Republic of Cuba

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

The picture of poverty in Austria is varied: 2.3% of the population are currently directly affected by poverty, while 17.3% are considered to be at risk of poverty or marginalisation. However, these estimates do not take into account recent developments such as high inflation and the rising cost of living in 2022/2023, which could place additional burdens on low-income households.   The concept of poverty reduction in Austria and globally is based not only on financial indicators, but also on a comprehensive approach that includes education, health and living standards. Goal 1 of the UN Sustainable Development Goals calls for the sustainable eradication of poverty in all its forms, which means that in addition to securing a living income, the focus is also on improving equal opportunities and participation. For Austria, this specifically means ensuring access to basic services such as healthcare and education in addition to material support. Overcoming the current economic challenges therefore requires both short-term measures and long-term strategies in order to reduce social exclusion and sustainably improve the quality of life for all population groups. Children, elderly women, single parents, the long-term unemployed and people without citizenship are particularly at risk. People with chronic illnesses also face considerable challenges, and high housing costs are pushing many people to the brink.   More than a fifth of all people at risk of poverty and marginalisation are children (22%, or 353,000 children aged 0-17). More than half of children living in single-parent households are at risk of poverty or exclusion (52%), and 30% of families with at least three children are affected. Among pension recipients, women living alone in particular are affected by poverty at an above-average rate of 28% (see Current poverty figures in Austria: https://www.armutskonferenz.at/armut-in-oesterreich/aktuelle-armuts-und-verteilungszahlen.html). Civil society, including the Poverty Conference, urgently appeals to the need for the following measures to advance the fight against poverty: There is a need for a minimum income that is actually sufficient to lead a decent life; a quality, well-developed social infrastructure that is accessible to all is crucial to improve the quality of life of those affected; a new and innovative labour market and working time policy is needed to create long-term solutions to the problem of poverty; and more and comprehensive political participation opportunities must be created for people affected by poverty and social exclusion. This is crucial if their interests and needs are to be adequately taken into account. These measures are the first and decisive steps in the fight against poverty and social exclusion in Austria (see FAQ on the Poverty Conference website: https://www.armutskonferenz.at/armut-in-oesterreich/faqs-zum-thema-armut.html). The COVID-19 pandemic has also led to far-reaching restrictions on fundamental human and children’s rights in Austria (personal freedom, freedom of movement, education, health, etc.). However, there has been no review of the experiences to date; the federal government announced an analysis process led by the Academy of Sciences in May 2023; however, the involvement of civil society in the process remains unclear. In March 2023, the Austrian Children’s Rights Network, with the support of the Ministry of Social Affairs, published a „Corona Special Report“, which takes a detailed look at the many detrimental consequences of the fight against the pandemic for children (in the areas of civil liberties, information and participation, education, teaching, leisure, mental health, poverty, protection against violence and child rights monitoring) („Children’s Rights and Corona“ special report: here).   The LBI-GMR is running two projects in 2023 on crisis management and children’s rights, including a series of workshops with children and young people on their insights from the pandemic (available on the website: https://gmr.lbg.ac.at/forschung/menschenwuerde-und-oeffentliche-sicherheit/).   There has been an increase in domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the current state of affairs shows that Austria’s measures and resources to combat domestic violence are inadequate. The rising number of cases of domestic violence during the pandemic has been repeatedly addressed by non-governmental organisations. Other effects of the COVID-19 pandemic include an increased suicide rate, including among young people, and a greater need for psychosocial support. The federal government is currently not systematically analysing and investigating the causes. It would be desirable to advance research here, not only to counter the specific effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, but also to be able to design measures in a more human rights-compliant manner in a comparable crisis in the future;

Progress: No progress

Continue to respect economic, social and cultural rights including social protection without discrimination

Proponent:

Slovakia


Slovak Republic

Slovakia


Slovak Republic

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

The status of economic, social and cultural human rights remains precarious. Fundamental social rights in particular are not enshrined in the constitution. The lack of implementation in this area was also criticised by the Austrian League of Human Rights in the Human Rights Report 2022. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (BGBl. No. 590/1978) is also not enshrined in constitutional law. It is subject to fulfilment within the meaning of Article 50 para. 2 of the Federal Constitution, meaning that a supreme court review of relevant laws and measures on the basis of this instrument is not possible. Austria has also not ratified the Optional Protocol on the individual complaints procedure.   The implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child through the Federal Constitutional Act on the Rights of Children (BGBl. I No. 4/2011) also largely omitted the economic, social and cultural rights of children. On the contrary, many welfare state regulations, including access to affordable social housing, have been tightened for migrants and refugees in recent years. Social protection and social participation are thus being withheld from immigrants in a discriminatory manner. This matter is partly a matter for the federal states, meaning that there are major differences across Austria.   There is a lack of harmonisation in line with human rights. The Basic Social Assistance Act (Federal Law Gazette I 2019/41) was also repealed by the Constitutional Court in March 2023 in key points (including qualified knowledge of German as a prerequisite for receiving social assistance) due to a violation of the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) (see the Constitutional Court’s website: https://www.vfgh.gv.at/medien/Sozialhilfe.php).  However, numerous other regulations at federal and provincial level contain explicit disadvantages for asylum seekers and persons entitled to asylum, persons entitled to subsidiary protection, as well as non-EU citizens (third-country nationals), some of whom have been living legally in Austria for a long time. This also applies, for example, to the Upper Austrian Housing Subsidies Act, which contains special obstacles to accessing housing subsidies for third-country nationals and refugees who are long-term residents, or the Federal Housing Non-Profit Act, according to which subsidised housing may only be allocated to foreign citizens after 5 years of residence and a successful integration test (Upper Austrian Housing Subsidies Act: https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=LROO&Gesetzesnummer=10000366). 

Progress: No progress

Ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families and the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Proponent:

Chile


Republic of Chile

Chile


Republic of Chile

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

The International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families is an agreement supported by the United Nations that aims to improve the legal status of migrants with worker status, seasonal and casual workers and their family members. Despite its international commitment, Austria has not yet ratified this convention (see resolution on ratification ICMW: https://www.parlament.gv.at/gegenstand/XXII/A/763). The discrepancy between the signing of international agreements and their actual implementation in national law raises questions and could give rise to a review and possible reassessment of these decisions. This could be an opportunity for Austria to strengthen its commitment to the protection and promotion of the rights of migrant workers and their family members. The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and enables individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations if their rights have been violated. Austria ratified this protocol in 1978. The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and allows individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations when their rights have been violated. Austria, however, ratified this protocol in 1978 (see State Report, Concluding Observations of the Committee on wsk Rights: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/dam/jcr:40fa2699-4b9e-450e-a246-fdf4a7dcc164/CESCR_WSK_4_de.pdf). 

Progress: No progress

Ratify the International Covenant on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, the Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189) of the International Labour Organization, the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and sign the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration

Proponent:

Venezuela


Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela

Venezuela


Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

The International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families is an agreement supported by the United Nations that aims to improve the legal status of migrants with worker status, seasonal and casual workers and their family members. Despite its international commitment, Austria has not yet ratified this convention (see resolution on ratification ICMW: https://www.parlament.gv.at/gegenstand/XXII/A/763). The discrepancy between the signing of international agreements and their actual implementation in national law raises questions and could give rise to a review and possible reassessment of these decisions. This could be an opportunity for Austria to strengthen its commitment to the protection and promotion of the rights of migrant workers and their family members. The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and enables individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations if their rights have been violated. Austria ratified this protocol in 1978. The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and allows individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations when their rights have been violated. Austria, however, ratified this protocol in 1978 (see State Report, Concluding Observations of the Committee on wsk Rights: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/dam/jcr:40fa2699-4b9e-450e-a246-fdf4a7dcc164/CESCR_WSK_4_de.pdf). In June 2011, Austria adopted Convention No. 189 of the International Labour Organization (ILO) regarding domestic workers. This agreement sets out an ambitious level of protection for domestic workers under labour law. However, it has not yet been fully implemented at national level. Domestic workers contribute significantly to the global economy by improving employment opportunities for workers with family responsibilities. They provide care for the elderly, children and people with disabilities and create significant income shifts within and between countries. It is crucial that Austria continues to take measures to strengthen the protection of workers, including the ratification of ILO Convention No. 189 on Domestic Workers (see RIS Convention No.189: https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokumente/RegV/REGV_COO_2026_100_2_651606/COO_2026_100_2_653149.html). In 2018, the Austrian government decided to withdraw from the UN migration pact. The official vote declaration to the United Nations lists a total of 17 reasons for rejecting the agreement. At the same time, the „Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration“ was adopted, an international agreement of the United Nations that aims to improve international cooperation on migration and strengthen the contribution of migrants to sustainable development. Although this pact is not legally binding, it acts as a co-operative guide to better coordinate migration at different levels – local, national, regional and global. The Austrian government could consider rejoining the United Nations Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. This would not only promote international cooperation but also support a collaborative approach to more effective migration policies (see Outcome Document of the Intergovernmental Conference on the Adoption of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration:https://www.un.org/depts/german/migration/A.CONF.231.3.pdf). 

Progress: No progress

Sign and ratify the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Proponent:

Honduras


Republic of Honduras

Honduras


Republic of Honduras

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and enables individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations if their rights have been violated. Austria ratified this protocol in 1978. The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and allows individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations when their rights have been violated. Austria, however, ratified this protocol in 1978 (see State Report, Concluding Observations of the Committee on wsk Rights: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/dam/jcr:40fa2699-4b9e-450e-a246-fdf4a7dcc164/CESCR_WSK_4_de.pdf). 

Progress: No progress

Sign and ratify the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Proponent:

Italy


Italian Republic

Italy


Italian Republic

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and enables individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations if their rights have been violated. Austria ratified this protocol in 1978. The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and allows individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations when their rights have been violated. Austria, however, ratified this protocol in 1978 (see State Report, Concluding Observations of the Committee on wsk Rights: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/dam/jcr:40fa2699-4b9e-450e-a246-fdf4a7dcc164/CESCR_WSK_4_de.pdf). 

Progress: No progress

Ratify the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure

Proponent:

Albania


Republic of Albania

Albania


Republic of Albania

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and enables individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations if their rights have been violated. Austria ratified this protocol in 1978. The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and allows individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations when their rights have been violated. Austria, however, ratified this protocol in 1978 (see State Report, Concluding Observations of the Committee on wsk Rights: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/dam/jcr:40fa2699-4b9e-450e-a246-fdf4a7dcc164/CESCR_WSK_4_de.pdf). 

Progress: No progress

Accept the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure

Proponent:

Finland


Republic of Finland

Finland


Republic of Finland

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and enables individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations if their rights have been violated. Austria ratified this protocol in 1978. The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and allows individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations when their rights have been violated. Austria, however, ratified this protocol in 1978 (see State Report, Concluding Observations of the Committee on wsk Rights: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/dam/jcr:40fa2699-4b9e-450e-a246-fdf4a7dcc164/CESCR_WSK_4_de.pdf). 

Progress: No progress

Ratify the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Proponent:

France


French Republic

France


French Republic

Gabon


Gabonese Republic

Gabon


Gabonese Republic

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and enables individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations if their rights have been violated. Austria ratified this protocol in 1978. The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and allows individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations when their rights have been violated. Austria, however, ratified this protocol in 1978 (see State Report, Concluding Observations of the Committee on wsk Rights: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/dam/jcr:40fa2699-4b9e-450e-a246-fdf4a7dcc164/CESCR_WSK_4_de.pdf). 

Progress: No progress

Consider ratifying the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Proponent:

El Salvador


Republic of El Salvador

El Salvador


Republic of El Salvador

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and enables individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations if their rights have been violated. Austria ratified this protocol in 1978. The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and allows individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations when their rights have been violated. Austria, however, ratified this protocol in 1978 (see State Report, Concluding Observations of the Committee on wsk Rights: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/dam/jcr:40fa2699-4b9e-450e-a246-fdf4a7dcc164/CESCR_WSK_4_de.pdf). 

Progress: No progress

Consolidate and strengthen existing anti-discrimination legislation to provide comprehensive equal protection, particularly in access to goods and services, on all prohibited grounds of discrimination

Proponent:

Ireland


Ireland

Ireland


Ireland

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

Austria has still not implemented standardised and comprehensive legal protection against discrimination. Austrian equality law is still characterised by a discriminatory hierarchy of grounds for discrimination with large gaps in protection outside the world of work. When it comes to access to goods and services, federal law (which is applicable in the majority of all cases) only provides protection against discrimination on the basis of disability, ethnicity and gender – but not on the basis of age, religion and belief or sexual orientation, and therefore not in the case of multiple discrimination. Furthermore, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination based on all grounds of discrimination in the area of education and there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination in a number of areas of social protection. There is no explicit legal protection against intersectional discrimination and discrimination based on gender identity, expression or characteristics. The anti-discrimination laws and the respective equality bodies at federal and state level are organised very differently, which makes access to justice more difficult. Those affected by discrimination usually have to take legal action individually. The amounts of damages awarded in practice are low and there is a lack of effective statutory minimum compensation and injunctive relief. A collective action as a collective legal protection instrument only exists in cases of discrimination on the basis of disability.    The current government programme 2025-2029 does not provide for the elimination of these inequalities in discrimination protection (see government programme 2025-2029 as a PDF on the website of the Federal Chancellery: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html available).  

Progress: No progress

Enact legislations specific to conflict-affected areas and to provide conflict-specific guidance and advice for business enterprises on ensuring respect for human rights to prevent and address the heightened risk of corporate involvement in gross human right violations in conflict affected areas including situations of foreign occupation

Proponent:

Palestine


State of Palestine

Palestine


State of Palestine

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

In Austria, there is currently no specific legislation to guide companies in conflict areas to respect human rights. The focus is on general human rights issues in Austria. According to Amnesty International, there are insufficient measures to systematically prevent human rights violations and there are no specific regulations for companies in conflict zones. So far, efforts have tended to focus on general human rights obligations and domestic human rights issues. 

Progress: No progress

Adopt a national action plan on business and human rights in accordance with the UN Guiding Principles on that issue

Proponent:

Switzerland


Swiss Confederation

Switzerland


Swiss Confederation

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

Regrettably, however, there is no National Action Plan for Business and Human Rights in line with the UN Guiding Principles. The implementation of such a plan has so far failed to materialise.   In 2016, the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights published the final Guidelines for National Action Plans, which are the result of an open, global consultation process involving states, businesses, civil society, national human rights institutions and academia. These guidelines build on the Working Group’s 2014 report to the UN General Assembly on National Action Plans (see Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, 2014: https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/blob/266624/b51c16faf1b3424d7efa060e8aaa8130/un-leitprinzipien-de-data.pdf). The Working Group has engaged intensively with governments on this topic, both through a survey in 2014 and through an online consultation on the content elements of a National Action Plan.   The UN Working Group encourages all states to develop, adopt and regularly update a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights. This plan is central to the dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The responsibility to introduce such plans lies within the scope of states‘ obligations in relation to the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.   Unfortunately, such initiatives have not yet taken place in Austria and implementation remains outstanding. This raises important questions about the prioritisation and implementation of these fundamental measures aimed at protecting and promoting human rights in the context of business activities;

Progress: No progress

Adopt a national action plan on business and human rights

Proponent:

Luxembourg


Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

Luxembourg


Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

Regrettably, however, there is no National Action Plan for Business and Human Rights in line with the UN Guiding Principles. The implementation of such a plan has so far failed to materialise.   In 2016, the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights published the final Guidelines for National Action Plans, which are the result of an open, global consultation process involving states, businesses, civil society, national human rights institutions and academia. These guidelines build on the Working Group’s 2014 report to the UN General Assembly on National Action Plans (see Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, 2014: https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/blob/266624/b51c16faf1b3424d7efa060e8aaa8130/un-leitprinzipien-de-data.pdf). The Working Group has engaged intensively with governments on this topic, both through a survey in 2014 and through an online consultation on the content elements of a National Action Plan.   The UN Working Group encourages all states to develop, adopt and regularly update a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights. This plan is central to the dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The responsibility to introduce such plans lies within the scope of states‘ obligations in relation to the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.   Unfortunately, such initiatives have not yet taken place in Austria and implementation remains outstanding. This raises important questions about the prioritisation and implementation of these fundamental measures aimed at protecting and promoting human rights in the context of business activities;

Progress: No progress

Develop a national plan on business and human rights, in line with national and international human rights standards in the business sector

Proponent:

Chile


Republic of Chile

Chile


Republic of Chile

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

Regrettably, however, there is no National Action Plan for Business and Human Rights in line with the UN Guiding Principles. The implementation of such a plan has so far failed to materialise.   In 2016, the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights published the final Guidelines for National Action Plans, which are the result of an open, global consultation process involving states, businesses, civil society, national human rights institutions and academia. These guidelines build on the Working Group’s 2014 report to the UN General Assembly on National Action Plans (see Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, 2014: https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/blob/266624/b51c16faf1b3424d7efa060e8aaa8130/un-leitprinzipien-de-data.pdf). The Working Group has engaged intensively with governments on this topic, both through a survey in 2014 and through an online consultation on the content elements of a National Action Plan.   The UN Working Group encourages all states to develop, adopt and regularly update a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights. This plan is central to the dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The responsibility to introduce such plans lies within the scope of states‘ obligations in relation to the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.   Unfortunately, such initiatives have not yet taken place in Austria and implementation remains outstanding. This raises important questions about the prioritisation and implementation of these fundamental measures aimed at protecting and promoting human rights in the context of business activities;

Progress: No progress

Develop and adopt a National Action Plan for Business and Human Rights

Proponent:

Germany


Federal Republic of Germany

Germany


Federal Republic of Germany

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

Regrettably, however, there is no National Action Plan for Business and Human Rights in line with the UN Guiding Principles. The implementation of such a plan has so far failed to materialise.   In 2016, the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights published the final Guidelines for National Action Plans, which are the result of an open, global consultation process involving states, businesses, civil society, national human rights institutions and academia. These guidelines build on the Working Group’s 2014 report to the UN General Assembly on National Action Plans (see Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, 2014: https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/blob/266624/b51c16faf1b3424d7efa060e8aaa8130/un-leitprinzipien-de-data.pdf). The Working Group has engaged intensively with governments on this topic, both through a survey in 2014 and through an online consultation on the content elements of a National Action Plan.   The UN Working Group encourages all states to develop, adopt and regularly update a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights. This plan is central to the dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The responsibility to introduce such plans lies within the scope of states‘ obligations in relation to the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.   Unfortunately, such initiatives have not yet taken place in Austria and implementation remains outstanding. This raises important questions about the prioritisation and implementation of these fundamental measures aimed at protecting and promoting human rights in the context of business activities;

Progress: No progress

Strengthen efforts towards respecting human rights in business activities, including the adoption of a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights

Proponent:

Japan


Japan

Japan


Japan

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

Regrettably, however, there is no National Action Plan for Business and Human Rights in line with the UN Guiding Principles. The implementation of such a plan has so far failed to materialise.   In 2016, the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights published the final Guidelines for National Action Plans, which are the result of an open, global consultation process involving states, businesses, civil society, national human rights institutions and academia. These guidelines build on the Working Group’s 2014 report to the UN General Assembly on National Action Plans (see Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, 2014: https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/blob/266624/b51c16faf1b3424d7efa060e8aaa8130/un-leitprinzipien-de-data.pdf). The Working Group has engaged intensively with governments on this topic, both through a survey in 2014 and through an online consultation on the content elements of a National Action Plan.   The UN Working Group encourages all states to develop, adopt and regularly update a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights. This plan is central to the dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The responsibility to introduce such plans lies within the scope of states‘ obligations in relation to the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.   Unfortunately, such initiatives have not yet taken place in Austria and implementation remains outstanding. This raises important questions about the prioritisation and implementation of these fundamental measures aimed at protecting and promoting human rights in the context of business activities;

Progress: No progress

Continue efforts towards the adoption of a national action plan on business and human rights

Proponent:

Mozambique


Republic of Mozambique

Mozambique


Republic of Mozambique

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

Regrettably, however, there is no National Action Plan for Business and Human Rights in line with the UN Guiding Principles. The implementation of such a plan has so far failed to materialise.   In 2016, the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights published the final Guidelines for National Action Plans, which are the result of an open, global consultation process involving states, businesses, civil society, national human rights institutions and academia. These guidelines build on the Working Group’s 2014 report to the UN General Assembly on National Action Plans (see Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, 2014: https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/blob/266624/b51c16faf1b3424d7efa060e8aaa8130/un-leitprinzipien-de-data.pdf). The Working Group has engaged intensively with governments on this topic, both through a survey in 2014 and through an online consultation on the content elements of a National Action Plan.   The UN Working Group encourages all states to develop, adopt and regularly update a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights. This plan is central to the dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The responsibility to introduce such plans lies within the scope of states‘ obligations in relation to the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.   Unfortunately, such initiatives have not yet taken place in Austria and implementation remains outstanding. This raises important questions about the prioritisation and implementation of these fundamental measures aimed at protecting and promoting human rights in the context of business activities;

Progress: No progress

Take measures to release an Action Plan on business and human rights

Proponent:

Poland


Republic of Poland

Poland


Republic of Poland

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

Regrettably, however, there is no National Action Plan for Business and Human Rights in line with the UN Guiding Principles. The implementation of such a plan has so far failed to materialise.   In 2016, the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights published the final Guidelines for National Action Plans, which are the result of an open, global consultation process involving states, businesses, civil society, national human rights institutions and academia. These guidelines build on the Working Group’s 2014 report to the UN General Assembly on National Action Plans (see Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, 2014: https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/blob/266624/b51c16faf1b3424d7efa060e8aaa8130/un-leitprinzipien-de-data.pdf). The Working Group has engaged intensively with governments on this topic, both through a survey in 2014 and through an online consultation on the content elements of a National Action Plan.   The UN Working Group encourages all states to develop, adopt and regularly update a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights. This plan is central to the dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The responsibility to introduce such plans lies within the scope of states‘ obligations in relation to the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.   Unfortunately, such initiatives have not yet taken place in Austria and implementation remains outstanding. This raises important questions about the prioritisation and implementation of these fundamental measures aimed at protecting and promoting human rights in the context of business activities;

Progress: No progress

Ratification Additional Protocol to the European Social Charter on Collective Complaints dated 09.11.1995 and the Declaration on Article D of the European Social Charter (revised) dated 03.05.1996 must be accepted in accordance with the procedure laid down in the said Protocol

Proponent:

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

Austria has not yet ratified the 1995 Additional Protocol to the European Social Charter on Collective Complaints. This protocol, which has been in force since 1998, allows organisations to submit collective complaints about violations of social rights and was adopted by some European countries in order to promote social justice. Austria has accepted parts of the revised European Social Charter, but without officially recognising the collective complaints procedure. Austria has signed the revised European Social Charter of 1996 and the Additional Protocol on Collective Complaints, but has not yet given its binding consent to the application of the collective complaints procedure. This means that collective complaints by trade unions and other organisations are not admissible before the European Committee of Social Rights. However, Austria is obliged to demonstrate compliance with the Charter through regular reports. Actual accession to the collective complaints procedure and a declaration of acceptance of Article D have not yet taken place. 

Progress: No progress

Ratification Articles 30 and 31 of the European Social Charta

Proponent:

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

Austria has not yet ratified Articles 30 and 31 of the revised European Social Charter (ESC). These articles deal with the right to protection against poverty and social exclusion (Article 30) and the right to adequate housing (Article 31). Although Austria has largely implemented the Social Charter and is subject to ongoing reporting obligations to fulfil certain social rights, there are reservations regarding these specific articles, as their implementation is considered complex and potentially costly for the state. Several states, including Germany, have expressed similar reservations about these two articles, as they guarantee comprehensive social rights that would often require extensive legal and financial adjustments (information on the BMAW website on the Council of Europe and ESC: https://www.bmaw.gv.at/Themen/Arbeitsrecht/Internationales-und-Europaeisches-Arbeitsrecht/Europarat-und-Europaeische-Sozialcharta.html). 

Progress: No progress

Ratification Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 10.12.2008

Proponent:

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and enables individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations if their rights have been violated. Austria ratified this protocol in 1978. The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an additional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and allows individuals and groups to submit complaints to the United Nations when their rights have been violated. Austria, however, ratified this protocol in 1978 (see State Report, Concluding Observations of the Committee on wsk Rights: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/dam/jcr:40fa2699-4b9e-450e-a246-fdf4a7dcc164/CESCR_WSK_4_de.pdf). 

Progress: No progress

Give a mandate to the European Commission to draw up a legally binding international treaty to bind transnational corporations and companies to human rights (Resolution A/HRC/RES/26/9)

Proponent:

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

Austria has been involved in the UN negotiations on a binding international treaty to regulate transnational corporations with regard to human rights (Resolution A/HRC/RES/26/9). This treaty has been under discussion within the UN Human Rights Council since 2014, with the EU participating in the negotiations as a single entity. However, the European Commission has not yet received its own negotiating mandate for this process, which makes Europe’s negotiating position complicated in some cases. 

Progress: No progress

Ensure the constructive cooperation by Austria in the relevant Open Ended Inter-Governmental Work Group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights

Proponent:

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

Austria has been involved in the UN negotiations on a binding international treaty to regulate transnational corporations with regard to human rights (Resolution A/HRC/RES/26/9). This treaty has been under discussion within the UN Human Rights Council since 2014, with the EU participating in the negotiations as a single entity. However, the European Commission has not yet received its own negotiating mandate for this process, which makes Europe’s negotiating position complicated in some cases. 

Progress: No progress

Create legal regulations that impose binding and enforceable due diligence obligations to respect human rights and the environment on all Austrian companies and groups of companies domestically and abroad (mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence) and commit to the creation of a general cross-sectoral regulation at EU level

Proponent:

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Apr 1, 2025):

In Austria, the introduction of binding due diligence obligations to respect human rights and environmental standards for companies is being actively pursued, particularly in connection with the new EU Supply Chain Directive (Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive). This directive obliges large companies in the EU and those with a significant business volume in the EU to identify, minimise or prevent and document negative impacts of their business activities along their entire supply chain. Under the directive, Austria is obliged to transpose the corresponding EU requirements into national law by 26 July 2026. The measures are aimed at companies that have to ensure human rights and environmental standards in their global activities by taking their „activity chain“ into account, and could also indirectly affect smaller companies, for example through contractual requirements from larger trading partners. The directive provides options and forms of support for these companies.
   Austrian companies will be obliged to integrate civil liability issues and compliance requirements into their business strategies and to develop transition plans in line with the climate goals of the Paris Agreement in order to minimise or prevent potential negative impacts of their business activities. In future, an official supervisory authority will also be able to impose sanctions if companies fail to fulfil their due diligence obligations. For the Austrian economy, this represents an adjustment to the now mandatory EU-wide standards. (More information on the EU Supply Chain Act on HRW: https://www.hrw.org/de/news/2024/05/24/neues-eu-lieferkettengesetz-fuer-unternehmen-fragen-und-antworten). 
A § 8 BMG Commission for dialogue processes between the administration and civil society was newly established in the BMK. This commission promotes the exchange between the administration (represented by the) and organised civil society (represented by the managing directors of Ökobüro and Umweltdachverband). However, a climate protection law and other tangible legal progress are still lacking, which is also clearly criticised by civil society (see e.g. on the website of the climate referendum: https://klimavolksbegehren.at/). On 23 February 2022, the European Commission published a draft directive on „Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence“ (CDSDD, see draft on the European Union website: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/DE/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52022 PC 0071 from=EN). On 1 December 2022, the European Council agreed on its position and on 1 June 2023, the European Parliament will adopt its position, which will be followed by trilogue negotiations between the three institutions (Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the European Council on corporate due diligence in relation to sustainability and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937 as PDF: https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-15024-2022-REV-1/en/pdf). The Federal Ministry of Justice and the Federal Ministry of Labour and Economic Affairs have initiated a good consultation process following the publication of the Commission’s draft directive. The government should again fully involve stakeholders in the future implementation of the directive in Austria.
  It is to be welcomed that the Directive that has been adopted and entered into force includes civil liability and sanctions by public authorities. However, in order for the directive to effectively protect human rights and the environment along global supply chains, access to justice for those affected by rights violations needs to be improved. An important civil society initiative on this topic is „Human rights need laws“ (campaign by the organisation Netzwerk Soziale Verantwortung for a supply chain law in Austria and the EU: https://www.nesove.at/menschenrechte-brauchen-gesetze/).
  On 26 February 2025, the EU Commission presented a package which, according to the Commission, is intended to simplify sustainability rules. Proposed amendments concern the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the EU Taxonomy and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). Although a mere simplification and reduction of redundant and overlapping reporting points was announced, a massive watering down of the CSDDD in important points is now proposed: The erosion of the risk-based approach, as the due diligence obligations would only extend to direct business partners* with a few exceptions; monitoring of due diligence measures would only be carried out every 5 years instead of annually as previously envisaged; deletion of an EU-wide harmonised regulation on civil liability; deletion of the turnover-related minimum maximum penalties for violations; deletion of the obligation to implement climate transition plans, deletion of the possibility of representative actions, etc. (see: here). As part of the Government Plan 2025-2029, the Federal Government is pursuing this goal through close cooperation with all stakeholders (see Government Plan 2ß025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).

Progress: No progress

Develop a NAP on economy and human rights

Proponent:

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

Regrettably, however, there is no National Action Plan for Business and Human Rights in line with the UN Guiding Principles. The implementation of such a plan has so far failed to materialise.   In 2016, the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights published the final Guidelines for National Action Plans, which are the result of an open, global consultation process involving states, businesses, civil society, national human rights institutions and academia. These guidelines build on the Working Group’s 2014 report to the UN General Assembly on National Action Plans (see Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, 2014: https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/blob/266624/b51c16faf1b3424d7efa060e8aaa8130/un-leitprinzipien-de-data.pdf). The Working Group has engaged intensively with governments on this topic, both through a survey in 2014 and through an online consultation on the content elements of a National Action Plan.   The UN Working Group encourages all states to develop, adopt and regularly update a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights. This plan is central to the dissemination and implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The responsibility to introduce such plans lies within the scope of states‘ obligations in relation to the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.   Unfortunately, such initiatives have not yet taken place in Austria and implementation remains outstanding. This raises important questions about the prioritisation and implementation of these fundamental measures aimed at protecting and promoting human rights in the context of business activities;

Progress: No progress

Introduce quota regulations in politics, business and on management levels to increase the proportion of women

Proponent:

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

There is still a significant pay gap between women and men in Austria. According to recent studies, women in Austria earn on average 18.8 per cent less than men, and this difference exists regardless of educational and professional qualifications (Statistik Austria, 2021: https://www.statistik.at/statistiken/bevoelkerung-und-soziales/gender-statistiken/einkommen). According to the Pay Transparency Directive, companies in the EU should in future exchange information on how much they pay women and men for work of equal value and take action if their gender pay gap exceeds 5 per cent. EU member states now have up to 3 years to transpose the directive into national law. This will include more comprehensive disclosure of starting salaries and pay levels, increased reporting obligations for companies and improved access to legal measures for employees (more information on this: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/themen/europa-aktuell/2023/04/gender-pay-gap-rat-der-eu-nimmt-neue-vorschriften-zur-lohntransparenz-an.html). In Austria, corresponding legislation has not yet been passed. The labour force participation rate for women is also still lower than for men (in 2022 70% compared to 78%, Statistics Austria: https://www.statistik.at/statistiken/arbeitsmarkt/erwerbstaetigkeit/erwerbstaetige-merkmale). Gender stereotypes and role expectations contribute to inequality, make it difficult for women to advance in their careers and reduce their opportunities. To tackle the gender pay gap in the EU, the Council of the European Union adopted new rules on 24 April 2023 to combat pay discrimination and reduce the gender pay gap. According to the Pay Transparency Directive, companies in the EU should in future exchange information on how much they pay women and men for work of equal value and take action if their gender pay gap exceeds 5 per cent. EU member states now have until June 2026 to transpose the directive into national law. This will include more comprehensive disclosure of starting salaries and pay levels, increased reporting obligations for companies and improved access to legal measures for employees. The exact implementation of the directive is not yet known (further information on this: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/themen/europa-aktuell/2023/04/gender-pay-gap-rat-der-eu-nimmt-neue-vorschriften-zur-lohntransparenz-an.html). Since the non-partisan expert government of 2019 with Austria’s first female Federal Chancellor, a largely balanced gender ratio of federal ministers and state secretaries has been established, although in recent years this has gradually tilted back towards a male majority. The proportion of women in parliament has also risen steadily in recent decades, most recently reaching around 40%. As there are no legal requirements for the creation of electoral lists or the allocation of mandates in this respect, there is a significant difference between the political parties. Gender parity of 50% is only reached or exceeded in the Green, Neos and SPÖ parties. The ÖVP and FPÖ are below parity, with the latter party only achieving a female quota of 17%. At provincial level, the gender ratio in both governments and provincial parliaments lags behind the federal level. There is an extreme imbalance at municipal level, where there are only around 10% female mayors. This ratio is roughly the same across all parties.   Measures taken by the federal government in 2022 include the establishment of an „Austrian Fund for the Empowerment and Advancement of Women and Girls“, which operates the „LEA – Let’s Empower Austria“ project (website https://letsempoweraustria.at/), as well as the „Girls in Politics“ project, which enables girls and young women to accompany mayors at work in individual municipalities (information on the BKA website: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/agenda/frauen-und-gleichstellung/gleichstellung-am-arbeitsmarkt/girls-in-politics.html. An evaluation of the projects is still pending. A report by the Women’s Section of the Federal Chancellery from 2022 provides a statistical basis for taking stock of the participation of women in political decision-making positions (as a PDF Further information is available at the following link: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/dam/jcr:c1f8eb6d-b56e-480a-9463-38273dc136d6/frauen_in_polit_entscheidungspositionen_2022.pdf). 

Redaktionelle Verantwortung UPR-Tool:

Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte, upr@liga.or.at

Lizenz CC-BY-SA 

Unterstützung durch:

Forschungskooperation mit der Volksanwaltschaft

Förderung des Zukunftsfonds der Republik Österreich

 

Receive the latest news

Abonnieren Sie unseren Newsletter