Home Complaints database Justice For Myanmar vs. Nordic Aviation Capital
Complaint

Justice For Myanmar vs. Nordic Aviation Capital

Nordic Aviation Capital’s sale, leasing, and financing of aircrafts through subsidiaries to buyers in Myanmar

Date filed
5 June 2024
Keywords
Countries of harm
Current status
No resolution
Sector
NCP

Allegations

On 5 June 2024, Justice for Myanmar filed a complaint against Nordic Aviation Capital for its alleged failure to carry out adequate due diligence in relation to the sale, leasing, and financing of ATR-aircrafts through its subsidiaries to buyers in Myanmar, including Air KBZ (now Air Mingalar). Justice For Myanmar alleges that, in the ongoing armed conflict in Myanmar, the sale, leasing and financing of aircrafts have severe adverse impacts on human rights.

Relevant OECD Guidelines

Outcome

In June 2025, the Danish NCP published its initial assessment accepting the complaint and commenced its preliminary investigation of the issues raised.

In February 2026, the Danish NCP published its final statement. The NCP concluded that Nordic Aviation Capital (NAC) was expected to conduct risk-based due diligence on their downstream business relationships, including lessees and buyers in Myanmar such as Air KBZ. Although NAC conducted customer and transactional due diligence, the NCP determined that the company did not demonstrate in its policies or practices that it had identified and addressed actual and potential impacts on people, the environment and society associated with its own operations and business relationships. Furthermore, the NCP determined that the company did not sufficiently engage with local stakeholders in Myanmar, and that it did not sufficiently react to contextual developments when operating in an area of armed conflict such as Myanmar.

The NCP provided general recommendations for enterprises operating under similar circumstances to “consult the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct (2018) for support and practical advice to implement risk-based due diligence”. The NCP highlighted that in circumstances where a company is directly linked to adverse impacts, it should use its leverage to affect change, which is also “the case in leasing relationships, where the lessor is encouraged to carry out risk-based due diligence for RBC during the leasing period and use its leverage, which is higher prior to entering leasing agreements”. Finally, the NCP emphasised that enterprises operating in areas of armed conflict are expected to carry out enhanced due diligence, recommending “that enterprises operating in Myanmar pay special attention to adverse impacts on human rights in their risk-based due diligence for RBC”.

The NCP did not find the complainants claim that aircraft sold by NAC to buyers in Myanmar have come into possession of the Myanmar military and are used by the military for human rights violations sufficiently substantiated. Justice For Myanmar rejected that conclusion and raised concerns with the Danish NCP’s process, including on the five year statute of limitations applied by the NCP, which they argued resulted in the exclusion of evidence on the military’s possession of aircraft. They also criticised the selection of experts consulted as part of the NCP’s investigation, which they alleged did not include aviation experts.

More details

Defendant
Company in violation
Complainants
Affected people
Date rejected / concluded
2 February 2026

Documents