WASHINGTON, July 16, 2024–Tomorrow, the Committee on Development Effectiveness (CODE) of the World Bank Board of Executive Directors will discuss the IFC’s draft Remedy and Responsible Exit Framework, which is intended to outline how the institution will deliver remedy to communities harmed by projects it finances.
This would be the first policy to focus specifically on remedy since the Bank’s founding 80 years ago. In that time, countless communities around the world have been negatively impacted by Bank-funded development projects, yet denied access to remedy for the harm they suffer. Many are still awaiting remedy.
It is long past time for the Bank to acknowledge its duties and responsibilities under international law to remedy harm that it causes or contributes to.
We expect the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation (IFC) to make the framework publicly available before it is finalized so that the Bank’s most important stakeholders — affected communities and the public — can see the results of last year’s consultation process and understand how it will be implemented. If the IFC has done its job, this framework should center project-affected communities and acknowledge that remedy must respond to their needs. Publication of the framework has been delayed repeatedly by the IFC; it must not delay any longer.
Full transparency is essential to getting remedy right and rebuilding trust. Once the framework is publicly disclosed, we expect the IFC to implement it transparently. The IFC must not repeat its approach to piloting the Responsible Exit Principles, which lacked disclosure of whether, or how, the Principles were being applied to IFC projects. Similarly, without transparency, implementation of the remedy framework will be entirely unpredictable, impossible to monitor or evaluate, and devoid of credibility with IFC’s stakeholders.
We call on the IFC to report publicly on the implementation of the remedy pilot, including, at minimum:
- Regular reporting on how the framework has been implemented, including a list of every project considered under the pilot, the decisions made regarding remedial actions, impact of the decision, and lessons learned;
- Regular reporting on every project where exit was decided, or where exit occurred, and how the IFC evaluated environmental and social impacts of each exit; and
- Publicly providing any evidence that harm to communities has in fact been remediated over the course of the pilot period, and whether affected communities are satisfied with that remedy.
In addition, for the remedy framework to be most effective, the IFC should also publish all loan agreements so that all stakeholders know the terms of the investment, extent of leverage of all parties, and commitments made. There should also be a board-governed external review of the pilot period halfway through its implementation and at the conclusion of the pilot phase.
Endorsing Organizations:
- Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL)
- Arab Watch Coalition
- Recourse
- Oxfam International
- CEE Bankwatch Network
- Environment in Development (FED)
- Green Advocates International (Liberia)
- Asociación Interamericana para la Defensa del Ambiente (AIDA)
- Bank Information Center (BIC)
- Accountability Counsel (AC)
- Gender Action
- Plataforma Internacional Contra la Impunidad
- Fundación Víctimas Vulnerables Mujeres Afro Independientes (FUNVIMUFROIN)
- Inclusive Development International (IDI)
- Global Labor Justice
- Cohesión Comunitaria e Innovación Social A.C. (CCIS) – México
- Protection International Guatemala
- Asociación Unión de Talleres 11 de Septiembre—Bolivia
- Urgewald
- Centre for Financial Accountability
- Jamaa Resource Initiative
- Foro Boliviano sobre Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo (FOBOMADE)
Este comunicado está disponible en español aquí.
Media Contact
Lani Furbank, Communications Specialist, press@ciel.org