Legal developments in the European Union as of September 15, 2026 include the Directive (EU) 2026/470, which modifies the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). This directive restricts the scope of companies subject to its requirements and removes harmonized conditions for engaging civil liability. Member states will apply the due diligence measures outlined in the directive starting July 26, 2029. This reform updates the legal framework before the obligations become fully applicable, aligning with broader European efforts to address corporate responsibility in human rights. This includes the non-binding Recommendation CM/Rec(2016)3 by the Council of Europe, which encourages the implementation of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. This recommendation emphasizes the due diligence of companies in human rights matters, alongside the actions of states in their economic relationships with companies and access to remedies. A practical concern is how the due diligence of companies, the actions of public authorities, and access to remedies interact in protecting workers. A hypothetical scenario involves a supplier with dangerous working conditions benefiting from public support, where the workplace is located in a state bound by the Revised European Social Charter of the Council of Europe. This situation raises questions about the conditions attached to the public support and the responsibilities of the state in protecting workers’ rights. The Rationale of the Council of Europe Recommendation explains that the responsibility of companies to respect human rights is addressed through the actions of states, as the Committee of Ministers issues recommendations to member states, not to private entities. The distinction between paragraphs 20 and 22 of the Recommendation highlights the measures recommended to states. Paragraph 20 encourages or requires due diligence when appropriate, while paragraph 22 recommends additional measures to ensure human rights are respected in specific state-company relationships. In the case of the supplier, an assessment carried out during due diligence could inform a decision regarding public support, and the conditions attached to this support could relate to how the company addresses reported risks. These provisions establish a link between the impact assessment process and measures targeting company behavior. In the future CSDDD framework, Article 31 provides that due diligence obligations may be taken into account in the criteria for awarding public contracts and concessions, in terms of environmental or social aspects. Principle 4 relates to the ownership of companies by the state and public support. The state shareholder acts through company governance and management control mechanisms. Export credit and investment guarantee institutions determine the conditions under which their support is granted. Authorities responsible for export licenses intervene through authorization procedures. When services affecting the enjoyment of human rights are entrusted to private providers, Principle 5 recommends that the state exercise adequate control. An inspection, a condition attached to a financing, and the exercise of the powers of the state shareholder do not necessarily concern the same aspect of the problem, even when they concern the same company. The Recommendation also deals with the control of decisions made by public authorities. Paragraph 47 recommends measures to ensure that decisions regarding public support, services, and export licenses take into account human rights risks, "if applicable," and can be subject to administrative or judicial review. Paragraph 48 concerns, on the other hand, the responses to credible allegations of human rights violations related to the activities on which these decisions are based.