Project-affected people may raise their concerns regarding the environmental and social aspects of an AIIB-financed Project with the Client and AIIB during the preparation and implementation of the Project.

The Project-affected People’s Mechanism (PPM) was established by AIIB to provide an opportunity for an independent and impartial review of submissions from Project-affected people who believe they have been or are likely to be adversely affected by AIIB’s failure to implement its Environmental and Social Policy (ESP) when their concerns cannot be addressed satisfactorily through Project-level grievance redress mechanisms or AIIB Management’s processes. The PPM entered into effect on March 31, 2019. The PPM is guided by the Policy on the PPM (PPM Policy) and Rules of Procedure of the PPM (PPM Rules of Procedure).

The Complaints-resolution, Evaluation and Integrity Unit (CEIU) is responsible for the functioning of the PPM. Further details on the CEIU are set out in the FAQ question “How are we Organized?” and the PPM Rules of Procedure Attachment 1.

The PPM’s three submission-handling functions are summarized below.

A Project Processing Query (PPQ) is designed to enable Project-affected people to obtain rapid resolution of their concerns about simple matters that arise during AIIB’s environmental and social due diligence of a Project and do not require dispute resolution (see below). The due diligence includes screening, categorization and assessment of the environmental or social impacts of the Project. Examples of concerns that may be suitable for a PPQ include inquiries about the consultation process related to a Project or requests to address environmental nuisances such as dust, noise or mobility restrictions experienced during Project preparation. For further details on when a PPQ may be appropriate and how the process is conducted, please see Sections 3 through 6 (especially 6.5) of the PPM Rules of Procedure.

Requests for Dispute Resolution (RDR) allow the PPM to seek to facilitate and coordinate the resolution of a dispute that has arisen over measures required to mitigate known and quantifiable, potential or actual material adverse environment and social impacts that arise during AIIB’s due diligence of a Project or during Project implementation. The parties to the dispute typically include the Client and the Requestors, but they may also involve Management and/or contractors or other parties involved in the Project processing or implementation. The aim of this process is to reach a time-bound and monitorable dispute resolution agreement between the parties concerned on actions to mitigate these impacts. Under this process, the PPM explores with the concerned parties mutually acceptable dispute resolution methods. This process may include consultative dialogue, information sharing, joint-fact finding, creation of a mediation mechanism or other methods. For further details on when an RDR may be appropriate and how the process is conducted, please see Sections 3 through 6 (especially 6.6) of the PPM Rules of Procedure.

The process under a Request for Compliance Review (RCR) involves an investigation by the PPM of allegations by Project-affected people that AIIB has failed to comply with its obligations under the ESP in its environmental and social due diligence of a Project during Project preparation or its oversight of the Project during implementation, thereby causing or being likely to cause material adverse environmental or social impacts on the Project-affected people. If the allegations are substantiated, the process includes a review of any action plan proposed by Management to address these impacts.

Unlike the PPQ and RDR processes, an RCR requires that the PPM assess whether AIIB is in compliance with its ESP. The PPM reviews whether:

• The facts alleged in the RCR are substantiated.
• A direct causal link exists between the adverse impact and alleged AIIB noncompliance with the ESP.
• The alleged adverse impact is material.
• Management has adequately explained its actions pursuant to the ESP.
• The actions proposed by Management to resolve the issues raised in the submission are appropriate.

If the PPM determines that there has been noncompliance with the ESP, AIIB Management prepares a Management Action Plan (MAP) to address the PPM’s findings of noncompliance. The PPM submits its findings to AIIB’s Board of Directors. The MAP is subject to approval by AIIB’s Board of Directors. The PPM also submits to AIIB’s Board of Directors its review of monitoring reports prepared by AIIB’s Management on implementation of the MAP.

For further details on when an RCR may be appropriate and how the process is conducted, please see Sections 3 through 6 (especially 6.7) of the PPM Rules of Procedure.

Requestors may ask for confidentiality. The request for confidentiality and the reasons for the request can be provided with the Requestors' submission.

The PPM considers any request for confidentiality and makes all reasonable efforts to grant the confidentiality requested.

In reviewing any request for confidentiality, the PPM assesses the risk of retaliation in connection with the submission. If the review identifies a risk of retaliation, the PPM notifies AIIB’s Management and discusses actions Management may take to avoid increasing the risk to the safety of the Requestors, their families, in-country Authorized Representative and other relevant persons.

If confidentiality becomes an impediment to submission eligibility assessment or effective resolution of issues raised, the PPM advises the Requestors of these concerns and seeks to agree with the Requestors on how to proceed. Failing such agreement, the PPM may terminate review of the submission.

For further details on how the PPM handles confidentiality and retaliation, please see PPM Rules of Procedure, Sections 6.4.3 and 9, and Attachment 4.

For further details on submission processing, please see PPM Rules of Procedure Attachment 3: Indicative Timeframes for Submission Processing.