NCP Norway
This page provides information related to NCP Norway. Directly underneath, you find the scores of the NCP on the NCP Evaluation Project. The NCP is evaluated on the indicators with Yes, No or Partial/Not Applicable. The indicators are ordered per category. Only a few indicators per category are shown on this page. To see them all, click on “more…. indicators To see what indicator scores best among all NCPs go to the NCP Evaluation Overview. At the bottom, there is news related to the NCP.
Related complaints
In the OECD Watch Complaint Database you can find all the related complaints with NCP Norway
NCP considers only the six admissibility criteria set out in the Guidelines and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP considers the six admissibility criteria set out in the Guidelines, but includes an additional criteria on whether the NCP is the correct entity to handle the complaint. This should not be considered as an admissibility criteria. In practice, the NCP considers only the six admissibility criteria set out in the Guidelines as part of its initial assessments.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 5 – 6: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
Eight civil society organisations from South Sudan, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands vs. Aker BP ASA and Aker ASA: https://www.oecdwatch.org/complaint/eight-civil-society-organisations-from-south-sudan-norway-sweden-and-the-netherlands-vs-aker-bp-asa-and-aker-asa/
SOMO representing 474 Myanmar CSOs vs. Telenor ASA: https://www.oecdwatch.org/complaint/somo-representing-474-myanmar-csos-vs-telenor-asa/
NCP assesses the issues raised even if mediation is declined by a party and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that it examines a complaint if mediation is rejected or fails to reach an agreement, and it has done so in practice.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 9 – 10: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
KTNC Watch and Samsung Heavy Industries Martin Linge Project Crane Accident Workers Support Team vs. TECHNIP et al.: https://www.oecdwatch.org/complaint/ktnc-watch-and-samsung-heavy-industries-martin-linge-project-crane-accident-workers-support-team-vs-technip-et-al/
Committee Seeking Justice for Alethankyaw vs. Telenor: https://www.oecdwatch.org/complaint/committee-seeking-justice-for-alethankyaw-vs-telenor/
NCP website shows case-handling procedures for complaint handling in national language(s) and English.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP has published its case-handling procedures in Norwegian and English. NB: The NCP has not published its case-handling procedures in S�mi, which is an official language of Norway. OECD Watch encourages the NCP to consider translating its resources into this additional language.
NCP does not allow companies to remain anonymous when a complaint is filed and/or has a commitment not to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that before the initial assessment it will not make any part of the complaint public. Upon publication of the initial assessment, the NCP will normally make the complaint and any response from the company public. However, the NCP can consider not naming the parties if it rejects the complaint in its assessment.
Source
Case-handling procedures, pages 3, 6: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
NCP allows complainants to withhold their identity from the company for security reasons, and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that if the complainant fears serious consequences if their identity is revealed, they should appoint a representative (for example, an NGO) to represent them in the complaint.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 5 – 6: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
NCP offers guidance in both national language(s) and English on how to file complaints.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP provides a fill-in form for complaints in Norwegian and English. NB: The NCP has not published complaint filing guidance in S�mi, which is an official language of Norway. OECD Watch encourages the NCP to consider translating its resources into this additional language.
Source
Fill-in form (English): https://www.responsiblebusiness.no/dialogue-and-mediation/how-to-submit-a-complaint/
Fill-in form (Norweigan): https://www.responsiblebusiness.no/dialog-og-mekling/levere-klage/
NCP follows the expected timeline for each stage of the complaint-handling procedure and communicates punctually with all complaint parties over the status of the complaint, including any reasonable delays, and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that it will follow the expected timeline and report any delays to the parties, explaining the reasons and providing a revised timeline.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 3 – 4: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
NCP website contains a permanent record of every complaint received by the NCP, including parties to the complaint, the issue(s) addressed, and the status of the complaint.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP's website containes a list of every complaint received, including all of the listed items. In addition, the NCP publishes the complaint text.
Source
Specific Instances: https://www.responsiblebusiness.no/dialogue-and-mediation/specific-instances/
NCP prevents or addresses potential or perceived conflicts of interest of any person playing a role for the NCP in the complaint and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that at the start of the initial assessment stage it will determine whether any members of the expert panel or secretariat should be disqualified from participating in the complaint due to conflicts of interest.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 5: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
NCP recommends consequences from its government for companies that engage in bad faith in the proceedings or fail to implement agreements reached, and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP does not recommend consequences from its government. It does hold regular information meetings with relevant government ministries at the initial assessment and final statement stages.
NCP clarifies how it will engage with other NCPs in relation to the handling of complaints, including explaining when complaints may be jointly handled or transferred to other NCPs.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that it will assess in its initial assessment if it is the correct entity to handle the complaint. If the complaint concerns other countries' NCPs, the concerned NCPs will consult with each other to agree on which one should lead the work to assist the parties.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 5: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
NCP makes determinations in its final statements when no agreement is reached explaining how the company has (not) observed specific provisions of the Guidelines, and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that it makes determinations where no agreement is reached, and it has done so in practice.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 11: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
KTNC Watch and Samsung Heavy Industries Martin Linge Project Crane Accident Workers Support Team vs. TECHNIP et al.: https://www.oecdwatch.org/complaint/ktnc-watch-and-samsung-heavy-industries-martin-linge-project-crane-accident-workers-support-team-vs-technip-et-al/
Committee Seeking Justice for Alethankyaw vs. Telenor: https://www.oecdwatch.org/complaint/committee-seeking-justice-for-alethankyaw-vs-telenor/
NCP ensures a low threshold to assess whether the issue is material and substantiated and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that an issue is material if it concerns an issue covered by the Guidelines and substantiated with facts as far as possible, further stating that it is preferable to include copies of original documents or first-hand accounts rather than describing such documentation.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 6: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
NCP ensures it has access to and, where relevant, uses investigative resources and broad external subject-matter expertise to support its complaint handling functions, and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that during the examination stage it may seek advice from other relevant government agencies, foreign service missions, the United Nations, the OECD Secretariat, all three core stakeholder groups, and independent experts.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 10: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
NCP always engages in follow-up and publishes follow-up statements where relevant, and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that it follows-up on recommendations made and/or agreements reached. The NCP "announces" that follow-up has been conducted, but it does not state whether it publishes follow-up statements. The NCP has published follow-up statements for a recent complaint on its website.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 11: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
Complaints database: https://www.responsiblebusiness.no/dialogue-and-mediation/specific-instances/ktnc-watch-samsung-heavy-industries-total-total-ep-norge-equinor-and-technipfmc/
NCP plays a guiding role in mediation, ensuring agreements reached further the implementation of the Guidelines and address past harms.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that mediators, either external or NCP members, are responsible for ensuring that any agreements reached are compatible with the Guidelines. It does not specify that this should include a commitment by the company to further the implementation of the Guidelines in the future and, where relevant and as appropriate, address past harms.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 8: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
NCP accepts complaints in national language(s) and English and covers the cost of translation of key filings and statements and interpretation during mediation, and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that it accepts complaints in Norwegian and English, but can support translations in cases where submissions cannot be made in either language. NB: The NCP does not address whether it accepts complaints in Sami, which is an official language of Norway. OECD Watch encourages the NCP to consider translating its resources and offering assistance in this additional language.
Source
How to submit a complaint: https://www.responsiblebusiness.no/dialogue-and-mediation/how-to-submit-a-complaint/
NCP holds mediation in the most accessible manner for complainants and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP does not state that it holds mediation in the most accessible manner for complainants. However, in practice the NCP has supported complainants to attend mediation in the most accessible manner, including by facilitating in-person meetings in another location (including other countries and online).
Source
SOMO representing 474 Myanmar CSOs vs. Telenor ASA (mediation held in Sweden in order to facilitate the complainants’ accessibility): https://www.oecdwatch.org/complaint/somo-representing-474-myanmar-csos-vs-telenor-asa/
NCP works to accept complaints despite parallel proceedings and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP does not explicitly state that it works to accept complaints despite parallel proceedings. It states that it will consider the relevance of applicable law and procedures and how similar issues have been or are being handled in other proceedings. In practice, the NCP has accepted cases that are subject to parallel proceedings.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 6: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
Eight civil society organisations from South Sudan, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands vs. Aker BP ASA and Aker ASA: https://www.oecdwatch.org/complaint/eight-civil-society-organisations-from-south-sudan-norway-sweden-and-the-netherlands-vs-aker-bp-asa-and-aker-asa/
NCP provides an external review process for parties to pursue if they believe the NCP has not followed its internal procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP does not provide an external review process. It does invite parties to evaluate the NCP's handling of the case.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 11: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
NCP consults parties on and publishes a final statement that includes the basic information required after the case reaches that stage, and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that it consults parties on and publishes all final statements, which include the basic information required.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 10 – 11: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
NCP website shows the initial assessment for every complaint received which is published after the initial assessment stage is concluded, and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP publishes an initial assessment on its website for every complaint received.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 6 -7: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
Complaints database: https://www.responsiblebusiness.no/dialogue-and-mediation/specific-instances/
NCP makes recommendations in its final statements on specific company action needed to support remediation of past harm and/or observe the Guidelines in future, and/or the NCP has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that it makes recommendations where no agreement was reached, where relevant, and it has done so in practice.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 11: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
KTNC Watch and Samsung Heavy Industries Martin Linge Project Crane Accident Workers Support Team vs. TECHNIP et al.: https://www.oecdwatch.org/complaint/ktnc-watch-and-samsung-heavy-industries-martin-linge-project-crane-accident-workers-support-team-vs-technip-et-al/
Committee Seeking Justice for Alethankyaw vs. Telenor: https://www.oecdwatch.org/complaint/committee-seeking-justice-for-alethankyaw-vs-telenor/
NCP proclaims zero tolerance for reprisals against the NCP and implements measures to respond to (risks of) reprisals, and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP does not proclaim zero tolerance for reprisals against NCPs or how it addresses (risks of) reprisals. It does state that parties must cooperate in good faith that includes refraining from making threats or initiating reprisals against other parties to the process.
Source
Case handling procedures, pg.3: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
NCP proclaims zero tolerance for reprisals against complainants and assesses and implements measures to prevent and respond to (risks of) reprisals, and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP does not proclaim zero tolerance for reprisals against complainants or how it addresses (risks of) reprisals. It does state that parties must cooerating in good faith that includes refraining from making threats or initiating reprisals against other parties to the process.
Source
Case handling procedures, pg.3: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
NCP supports transparency between the parties in the complaint process generally, including by the sharing of all relevant facts and arguments brought forward by each party during the proceedings with other parties, requiring confidentiality only over the personal identities of parties for security/privacy reasons or legitimately sensitive business information, and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP does not state that it ensures transparency between the parties during the complaint. In relation to the examination stage only, the NCP states that all information and documentation received by the NCP will be shared with parties, unless a good case (undefined by the NCP) is made for information to be withheld. The NCP complies with the Norwegian Freedom of Information Act and considers the need to preserve the confidentiality of sensitive business information, the identity of the parties, and other information in accordance with the Act.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 10; footnote 4 and 15: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
NCP supports transparency during the complaint process by allowing complainants to publish their own complaint and communicate about the stages of the process. The NCP requires confidentiality only over the personal identities of parties for security/privacy reasons, legitimately sensitive business information, and documents shared and discussions had during the mediation stage, and/or has a commitment to do so in its case-handling procedures.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP states that after its conducts its initial assessment, it will make public the complaint and any response from the company. In practice, the NCP permits complainants to publish their own initial complaint and communicate about the stages of the process. The NCP states that it complies with the Norwegian Freedom of Information Act and considers the need to preserve the confidentiality of sensitive business information, the identity of the parties, and other information in accordance with the Act.
Source
Case-handling procedures, page 3, footnote 4 and 15: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/263/files/2014/01/FINAL_KPprosedyreregler_eng_godkj.pdf
SOMO representing 474 Myanmar CSOs vs. Telenor ASA: https://www.oecdwatch.org/complaint/somo-representing-474-myanmar-csos-vs-telenor-asa/
Eight civil society organisations from South Sudan, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands vs. Aker BP ASA and Aker ASA: https://www.oecdwatch.org/complaint/eight-civil-society-organisations-from-south-sudan-norway-sweden-and-the-netherlands-vs-aker-bp-asa-and-aker-asa/
NCP has a dedicated detailed budget that is published on its website.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP has a dedicated budget which is published (in retrospect) in its annual report that is available on the website.
Source
Annual Report 2023, pg. 27: https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/sites/263/2024/06/OECD_Annual-Report_2023-UU.pdf
NCP has an independent expert structure whereby complaints are handled strictly by non-governmental independent experts.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP has an independent expert structure whereby complaints are handled by a four-person expert panel.
NCP is not housed within a ministry focused on economics, trade, or investment to limit risk of real or perceived conflict of interest.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP is housed within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Source
Annual Report 2023, question 4
NCP is led or overseen by senior officials that are actively engaged with the NCP’s work.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP is led by a Policy Director / Head of Secretariat who is actively engaged with the NCP's work.
Source
Norway NCP Secretariat: https://www.responsiblebusiness.no/about-us/ncp-norway-secretariat/
NCP employs two or more full-time staff that hold permanent (non-rotating and not short-term) positions.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP employs three full-time staff that all hold permanent positions.
Source
Annual Report 2023, question 8 – 9
NCP has a multi-stakeholder advisory body involving all three core stakeholder groups (NGOs, labour unions/workers organisations, businesses). The advisory body is meaningfully consulted by the NCP on its promotional and complaint-handling activities at least 2 times a year.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP does not have an advisory body.
Source
Annual Report 2023, question 6
NCP structure ensures all three core stakeholder groups (NGOs, labour unions/workers organisations, businesses) at minimum advise on individual complaints.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP has a four-person expert panel made up of representatives from all three core stakeholder groups that handle complaints.
Source
NCP has a website that shows:
- Contact information for the NCP;
- Links to the Guidelines and translations of the Guidelines in national language(s) and English;
- Links to the OECD Due Diligence Guidance documents;
- A comprehensive description of the Guidelines, due diligence, and the dual mandate of the NCP in national language(s) and English; and
- The NCP’s most recent annual report to the OECD.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP has a website that includes all of the items listed. NB: The NCP's website is not available in S�mi, which is an official language of Norway. OECD Watch encourages the NCP to consider translating its resources into this additional language.
Source
NCP website: https://www.responsiblebusiness.no/en/
NCP annually promotes the Guidelines and due diligence guidance to civil society.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP promoted the Guidelines in 2023 to core stakeholder groups, but has not specifically targeted civil society.
Source
Annual report 2023, question 26 & Annex, Table 1 & 2
NCPs annually promotes the Guidelines and due diligence guidance to its government.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP has promoted the Guidelines to its government.
Source
Annual Report 2023, question 49 – 50 & Annex, Table 1 & 2
NCP supports its government in developing, implementing, and fostering policies, programmes, and/or laws on responsible business conduct that are coherent with the Guidelines.
Evaluation
The Norwegian NCP has provided input on the development of various regulations or pieces of legislation, including the EU forced labour regulation, the implementation of the CSRD in Norwegian law, and the Norwegian Transparecy Act. The NCP's public submissions are available on its website.
Source
Hearing input: https://www.responsiblebusiness.no/391716-2/