Source: Shutterstock
The German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG), implemented in January 2023– and its expansion in 2024 to cover companies with over 1,000 employees –marked a watershed moment in global corporate accountability. For the first time, robust mechanisms empowered NGOs and workers to hold multinational corporations responsible for human rights abuses and environmental risks throughout their supply chains. Central to this progress is the ability to file formal complaints with Germany's Federal Office for Economic Affairs and Export Control (BAFA).
Since 2024, China Labour Bulletin has actively leveraged the LkSG framework, demonstrating its tangible impact in the fight for workers’ rights. In August 2024, CLB released a report highlighting significant labour rights violations within the Chinese supply chains of major multinational corporations. This report not only brought urgent attention to these abuses including excessive overtime, but also underscored the transformative power of binding legal frameworks like LkSG in compelling companies to take meaningful action.
Building on this momentum, CLB filed four formal complaints in early 2025 against the Chinese suppliers of major automotive giants, including Tesla and Volkswagen. These complaints documented serious violations such as excessive overtime, unpaid wages, coerced resignations, retaliation against worker representatives, and the manipulation of trade unions by senior managers—including HR and operations managers—who chaired and operated the union structures. In addition, CLB submitted two further complaints in April against the Chinese supplier of two global computer giants. These cases involved allegations of illegal overtime that reportedly contributed to worker deaths. Both complaints were assigned case numbers by BAFA in mid-April 2025, even after the newly elected German coalition government announced its decision to roll back certain reporting obligations under the LkSG. This indicates that BAFA remains able to process cases, particularly those involving serious human rights violations, despite the changing political context.
Civil Society Organisations: Driving Accountability Through Legal Channels
CLB’s experience demonstrates the critical role NGOs play in exposing and addressing supply chain abuses.
For instance, CLB became involved in the Volkswagen case in June 2024, after learning that its Chinese supplier, Qiao Feng Technology, had allegedly retaliated against worker representatives. Volkswagen initially responded by acknowledging a possible violation of the LkSG and began an internal review. However, by February 2025, Volkswagen concluded that Qiao Feng was not a controlled entity and therefore closed the case.
CLB disagreed with this interpretation, maintaining that the LkSG applies to the entire supply chain—from raw material production to end sales—regardless of whether the entities involved are directly controlled. Based on this understanding, CLB submitted a formal complaint to BAFA in March 2025. BAFA accepted the case and informed CLB that it would launch an investigation.
Similar positive engagements occurred with the supplier of two global computer giants, in cases involving serious human rights violations, including worker deaths resulting from excessive overtime, reaffirming the effectiveness and necessity of BAFA’s complaint mechanism.
Suggestions for Improving BAFA’s Complaint Process
CLB’s hands-on engagement with the LkSG complaint system has revealed several key areas for improvement to ensure the mechanism is accessible, transparent, and effective:
1. Expand Eligibility for Complaint Submission
Currently, BAFA’s online form restricts formal complaints to directly affected individuals or their authorised representatives, relegating NGOs to submit informal "tips." This is a major barrier, as workers frequently face language barriers, fear retaliation, or lack the means to authorise NGOs. CLB urges BAFA to explicitly allow NGOs and credible third parties to submit formal complaints in cases of serious human rights violations, recognising their essential advocacy role.
2. Make the Complaint Process More User-Friendly
CLB encountered persistent technical issues when attempting to submit complaints through BAFA’s online form. On multiple occasions, error messages appeared at the final submission stage, preventing completion of the process. It is important to ensure that these recurring technical errors are resolved so that the online form remains reliable and accessible.
Thanks to BAFA’s email response to one of CLB’s complaints, further cases were able to be submitted via email. Making this email address publicly available on BAFA’s website would help complainants access a clear and effective alternative submission channel when technical issues arise.
Screenshot showing repeated 'Error' messages encountered by CLB when attempting to submit tips
3. Enhance Transparency in Case Handling
It would be better for BAFA to assign and publish case numbers for accepted complaints, and to disclose investigation outcomes and any penalties imposed for serious violations. To ensure transparency, brand names and company identities may remain undisclosed before a conclusion is reached. However, essential information—such as the assigned case number, the sector involved, and the nature of the alleged human rights violations (e.g., dismissal of worker representatives, deaths linked to working conditions)—can still be made public. This would allow affected workers, complainants, and the broader public to track key developments, build trust in the process, and reinforce corporate accountability.
Policy Recommendations Amid Regulatory Rollbacks
While some see the recent policy shift as a step backwards, compliance expert Daniel Schönfelder has pointed out in a LinkedIn post to his followers that this does not remove BAFA’s obligation to implement the applicable law or prevent it from taking action in cases of serious violations. At a time when the legal landscape remains unclear to many stakeholders, CLB calls on BAFA and German lawmakers to safeguard and strengthen supply chain accountability:
1. Maintain Policy-Level Transparency
Even as reporting requirements are relaxed, it remains important for BAFA to continue investigating serious human rights violations and to regularly publish case updates and investigation identifiers. Such transparency is vital to maintaining public trust and ensuring corporate accountability.
2. Strengthen Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration
Establish a structured dialogue platform involving BAFA and, in serious cases, the specific companies, trade unions, factories, and NGOs concerned. Such a platform would help translate policy commitments into concrete, practical changes in workplaces, and improve the transparency and effectiveness of supply chain due diligence practices.
Ways to Move Forward
As Germany’s regulatory landscape evolves, CLB remains committed to investigating numerous serious human rights violations and continuing its efforts to hold companies accountable. CLB also looks forward to working closely with BAFA and a wide range of stakeholders, to provide insights and collaborative support to enhance and sustain effective due diligence frameworks throughout this critical transition period.