While keeping to the rule of law, an organization should also respect the international norms of behaviour. Where the law, or how it is applied, gives inadequate environmental or social protection, it should aim to respect international norms as a floor. Where the law clashes with those norms, it should aim to respect them as far as it can. Where obeying the law would conflict with the norms in ways that have serious consequences, it should, as far as practicable and fitting, reconsider its relationships and activities in that jurisdiction. It should look for legitimate ways and channels to persuade the relevant bodies and authorities to resolve the conflict, and avoid complicity in other organizations' activities that are at odds with international norms. Complicity (Box 4) means helping with wrongful acts that the organization knew, or through due diligence ought to have known, would cause serious harm, or keeping quiet about such acts or profiting from them.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.