UK Government: Why do Human Rights Laws Need to Change?
Forced labour continues to infiltrate global supply chains and the UK is failing to prevent goods made under exploitative conditions from entering its market.
A report by the Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) finds the UK Government’s efforts to remove forced labour from supply chains have not lived up to its public commitment that “no company operating in the UK should have any forced labour whatsoever in its supply chain.”
The International Labour Organisation (ILO) defines forced labour as “all work or service which is exacted from any person under the threat of a penalty and for which the person has not offered himself or herself voluntarily.”
This type of exploitation, which includes forms of modern slavery like forced marriage, affected 27.6 million people globally in 2021.
Around two-thirds of these cases, the ILO states, are linked to global supply chains.
The JCHR’s findings raise serious concerns about how sustainability goals intersect with ethical sourcing, revealing that existing laws in the UK fall far short of ensuring supply chains are free from forced labour.
Transparency law lacks teeth
The UK’s main legal instrument to tackle modern slavery is the Modern Slavery Act 2015.
Section 54 of the Act, titled Transparency in Supply Chains (TISC), requires commercial organisations with a turnover of £36m (US$48m) or more to publish an annual statement detailing steps taken to prevent slavery and human trafficking in their supply chains.
However, the legislation also allows companies to report that they have taken no action at all.
The Committee concludes that this voluntary system has not achieved its intended purpose.
As stated in the report: “The shortfalls in the UK’s voluntary reporting regime have led to calls for reform.”
It finds that “transparency has not worked” and argues the Modern Slavery Act is “not fit for purpose because it focuses purely on reporting.”
Katherine Bryant, Director of Operations at anti-slavery organisation Walk Free, supports this view.
Giving evidence to the Committee, she says: “So far we have seen that transparency has not worked.”
Even Theresa May, who introduced the legislation as Prime Minister, acknowledges its shortcomings.
Writing in support of reform, Baroness May of Maidenhead says: “When the Act was introduced, there were those who were concerned about the impact on business.
"It is now clear that in order to have an impact on modern slavery and human trafficking we need to go further.”
The Committee criticises the quality of statements produced by businesses and notes that weak enforcement and the option to comply without taking any action has rendered the legislation ineffective.
International trade partners move ahead
The JCHR warns that other trading blocs are now outpacing the UK when it comes to removing forced labour from supply chains.
The United States has implemented the Uyghur Forced Labour Prevention Act, which blocks imports linked to China’s Xinjiang region unless companies can prove that no forced labour is involved.
The European Union is progressing with its own regulatory framework that will impose due diligence obligations on firms and empower authorities to stop goods tainted by forced labour at the border.
The UK, however, has no similar import ban system in place.
The Committee describes this as an “outdated” approach, which leaves the country vulnerable to becoming a dumping ground for unethical products.
The report states: “Import bans for goods linked to forced labour can send a strong message that forced labour in supply chains will not be tolerated.”
John Morrison, Chief Executive of the Institute for Human Rights and Business, acknowledges the scale of the issue, telling the Committee that British companies with international supply chains are likely to encounter forced labour risks at some point.
The green transition adds complexity
With the shift towards net zero targets, the UK’s green energy sector may also face heightened risks.
Many low-carbon technologies rely on components and minerals sourced from regions where forced labour is reported.
Polysilicon, a key material in solar panels, is one such example.
The report identifies gaps in the Government’s existing strategy to mitigate these risks.
While the Procurement Act 2023 and Great British Energy Act 2025 make some progress, the JCHR finds the Solar Roadmap “not sufficient to tackle the supply chain risks.”
Without robust oversight, the sustainability push could lead to fresh dependencies on exploitative labour practices abroad, undermining the ethical basis of the energy transition.
The Committee calls for new legislation to be introduced within the next year.
This would make it illegal to import or sell goods made using forced labour, and introduce mandatory human rights due diligence responsibilities for companies.
A dedicated civil legal route would also allow survivors of forced labour to bring claims against businesses that fail to prevent abuse in their supply chains.
Currently, survivors may seek justice through tort law, but the report explains that these cases are “protracted, complex and expensive.”
By placing the burden of proof on companies, a new civil route would make it easier for victims to access justice and for courts to hold firms accountable.
The Committee also urges the Government to establish clear regulatory systems and ensure adequate resources for enforcement.
Without this, it warns, companies will continue to operate without the clarity or confidence needed to shift practices in a more sustainable and ethical direction.
As the Government’s 2025 Trade Strategy acknowledges the importance of responsible business conduct, the report insists this promise must now be backed by enforceable measures that match international expectations and protect vulnerable workers.
