Assessing States’ Obligations under the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights Post‐Brexit

Private economic actors wield unprecedented influence over the enjoyment of human rights, yet legal systems remain uneven in their regulation of corporate responsibility. Against this backdrop, this article examines a largely underexplored post‐Brexit trajectory, the regulatory divergence in the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). While the broader effects of the withdrawal of the UK from the EU have been extensively scrutinised, little attention has been paid to how each jurisdiction has sought to prevent and mitigate corporate human rights abuses. Situating its analysis within the UNGP framework, the article offers a comparative examination of the EU emphasis on preventative regulation and the UK reliance on a largely minimalist adjudicative framework. It argues that the UK risks being shaped by external legal pressures while lacking a coherent domestic agenda. Northern Ireland, partially aligned with EU law, is presented both as an example of this fragmented approach to business and human rights regulation and as a hybrid space where the effects of ongoing regulatory developments might be traced and assessed. Ultimately, the analysis situates this divergence within a wider contest over the legitimacy of transnational human rights governance, where state apathy remains a critical but neglected factor in addressing corporate accountability.