Skip to content
OPINION (COM(2025)0081 – C100037/2025 – 2025/0045(COD))

On the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2006/43/EC, 2013/34/EU, (EU) 2022/2464 and (EU) 2024/1760 as regards certain corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements

AFET-AD-773286

Committee on Foreign Affairs · Rapporteur: Barry Andrews

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX
✦ In shortFull textProcedure & committee votes
✦ In short · AI summary of this text, generated 4 Sept 2026

Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.

The Committee on Foreign Affairs opinion on the proposal to amend EU sustainability reporting and due diligence directives stresses that simplification must not weaken human rights protections. It proposes amendments to keep stakeholder definitions broad, ensure risk-based due diligence beyond direct partners, and preserve liability and access to justice. The opinion also calls for a digital reporting portal, temporary suspension of business relationships as a last resort, and consultation with stakeholders before suspension.

Committee position. The Committee on Foreign Affairs proposes amendments to the proposal to ensure that simplification does not weaken human rights protections, including keeping broad stakeholder definitions, risk-based due diligence, and liability for violations.

Key points

  1. The opinion welcomes the aim to reduce burdens but insists this must not undermine EU responsibilities to defend human rights, including human rights defenders.
  2. It argues that the CSDDD should not be reviewed so soon after adoption, as it punishes companies already working towards implementation; any review should be limited and based on extensive consultation.
  3. The opinion calls for keeping the definition of stakeholders wide to ensure all relevant voices are heard in due diligence.
  4. It asks that due diligence not be limited to direct business partners but be based on risk of adverse impacts from sector and context.
  5. It requires meaningful stakeholder engagement and protection from retaliation for stakeholders.
  6. It supports an option for companies to suspend business relationships for a defined period, and insists on liability and access to justice for victims.
  7. Amendment 1 aligns the proposal with the Draghi and Letta Reports and EU human rights obligations.
  8. Amendment 2 ensures due diligence is based on relevant, factual, and reliable information, including geographical and sectoral risk factors, and allows further assessment of relevant business partners.
  9. Amendment 3 requires stakeholder engagement with those affected by adverse impacts, including indigenous peoples, and removes the limitation to only certain parts of the process.
  10. Amendment 4 keeps the requirement for effective access to justice and remedy for victims, without the specific EU-wide liability regime.
  11. Amendment 5 asks the Commission to establish a free digital reporting portal as a one-stop shop for companies, promoting interoperability and assessing AI use.
  12. Amendments 6-17 adjust definitions, scoping, suspension rules, and monitoring to balance burden reduction with human rights and stakeholder involvement.

Who is affected

  • Companies subject to the CSRD and CSDDD, including their business partners and stakeholders, will be affected by changes to due diligence and reporting requirements.
  • Victims of adverse impacts linked to due diligence violations are affected by provisions on liability and access to justice.
  • Member States are affected by requirements to provide options for suspension and ensure access to justice.
  • The European Commission is affected by the call to establish a digital reporting portal.