Piercing the Transnational Veil: A Comparative Analysis of Mandatory Human Rights Due Diligence and the Rule of Law in the EU, UK, and India

Abstract

The trajectory of international corporate law has shifted decisively from the era of voluntary Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) to a regime of Mandatory Human Rights Due Diligence (mHRDD). This article provides a comprehensive comparative analysis of this normative shift, contrasting the maximalist legislative approach of the European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) with the disclosure-based models of the United Kingdom and the emerging "business responsibility" frameworks in India. Central to this analysis is the Rule of Law (RoL) and the tension between legal certainty for corporations and access to remedy for victims of transboundary torts. By examining the legislative architecture of these three distinct jurisdictions, this article argues that while the EU model offers the most robust mechanism for closing the "governance gap," it risks creating a fragmented global legal order that conflicts with the principles of comity and sovereignty. The article proposes a harmonized model of "transnational tortious liability" to bridge the divide between Home State adjudication and Host State enforcement.