Corporate capture of policy: When big tech, energy, and defence lobbies blunt or reshape human rights safeguards in new laws

In 2025, concerns about corporate capture of policy are intensifying as big tech, energy, and defence companies expand their lobbying power. Governments are introducing new laws on data protection, climate transition, supply chains, and security, often promising stronger human rights safeguards. However, in the background, deep-pocket lobbies are busy watering down, delaying or diverting such regulations to ensure that the bottom line is met before other considerations. This corporate capture of policy does not always kill human rights legislation outright; instead, it reshapes definitions, narrows scope, and inserts loopholes. The outcome is an ever-increasing distance between the aspiration of the promises of the people and the implementation in the reality.

How big tech shapes digital rights laws

Big tech firms have become central players in debates over privacy, AI governance, and content regulation. While they publicly endorse “responsible innovation,” their lobbying often aims to weaken human rights safeguards in new laws.

Some examples are the insistence on sweeping exceptions to innovate, opposition to high limits on biometric surveillance, or self-regulation rather than external regulation. Corporate lawyers can also control the fine print and thus transparency and accountability due to technical complexity, i.e. reducing the definition of what is considered high-risk AI.

Energy and defence lobbies in climate and security policy

Fossil fuel firms in the energy industry frequently present themselves as collaborators in the green transition and lobby to extend subsidies or redesign phase-out programs or overrely use offset mechanisms. This can blunt climate‑related human rights safeguards meant to protect frontline communities from pollution, land grabs, and unsafe working conditions.

Defence and security contractors, meanwhile, influence export controls, surveillance regulations, and arms sales rules. This is because they advance their arguments using framing national security needs to undermine safeguards against abuse like illegal spying, suppressing dissent, or causing harm to civilians in conflict areas.

Reclaiming policy from corporate capture

Curbing corporate capture of policy requires stronger transparency rules, including mandatory lobbying registers, real‑time disclosure of meetings, and publication of draft amendments. The civil society, journalists, and the concerned communities require proper seats at the table, and not token consultations.

Robust conflict‑of‑interest rules, revolving‑door restrictions, and judicial review of weakened safeguards can help ensure that human rights remain central to new laws. Finally, democracies should choose which citizens or the strongest corporate players take the leading position in the policy writing.