Corporate Responsibility for Human Rights

2014 ◽  
pp. 129-146
Author(s):  
Otto Lerbinger
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Corporate Responsibility

Establishing a Corporate Responsibility Ombudsman: Enhancing remedy through state-based non-judicial mechanisms?

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-122
Author(s):  
Juho Saloranta
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
Export Credit ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Credit Financing ◽  
Human Rights Due Diligence

This article assesses the efficiency of non-judicial grievance mechanisms in providing victims of corporate human rights violations with improved access to remedy. As no such mechanism is currently available, this article formulates a proposal for a new mechanism in the form of a corporate responsibility ombudsman, which would offer a great deal of flexibility as well as being an inexpensive, expeditious and informal manner of dealing with such issues. The article argues in favour of utilizing states’ regulatory arsenal to improve victims’ access to remedy extraterritorially. Based on recent international developments, I elaborate approaches to human rights due diligence regulation and export credit financing by means of two corporate responsibility ombudsman proposals. In relation to these proposals, I divide the effectiveness criteria of Principle 31 of the United Nations Guiding Principles into three main categories: empowerment, investigation and enforcement. Since obtaining sufficient evidence is of paramount to those seeking remedies for violations of corporate responsibility, states should bestow quasi-judicial powers on corporate responsibility ombudsmen to achieve efficiency, which could also create legitimacy. This article provides decision-makers and scholars with insights into how access to remedy could be synchronized with the momentum of human rights due diligence legislation in the European Union and beyond.

Corporate Responsibility and the Law

2015 ◽  
pp. 97-112
Author(s):  
Anne Eyre ◽  
Pam Dix
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Safety Climate ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Corporate Accountability ◽  
House Of Commons ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Not For Profit ◽  
Corporate Manslaughter

This chapter describes how a significant part of Disaster Action's mission has been to help create a health and safety climate in which disasters are less likely to occur. The focus on corporate responsibility has underpinned this intention. The degree to which Maurice de Rohan personally, and Disaster Action as a whole, succeeded in influencing government thinking is reflected in the remarks made by the then Home Secretary John Reid when he introduced the second reading of the Corporate Manslaughter Bill in the House of Commons on October 10, 2006. Getting to that point in 2006 had been a long, committed, and hard road for Disaster Action. The chapter then looks at Disaster Action's proposal for radical changes in the criminal justice system concerning the treatment of possible corporate crimes of violence. It also considers the establishment of the Centre for Corporate Accountability (CCA), which is a not-for-profit human rights organisation concerned with the promotion of worker and public safety.

Toward a Corporate Duty for Lead Companies to Respect Human Rights in Their Global Value Chains?

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 667-697 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Bright ◽  
Axel Marx ◽  
Nina Pineau ◽  
Jan Wouters
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Global Value Chains ◽  
Value Chains ◽  
Business Partners ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Social License To Operate ◽  
Social License ◽  
High Level

AbstractThe corporate responsibility to respect human rights was formally introduced in 2011 with the unanimous endorsement of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) by the UN Human Rights Council. It is grounded in social expectations and forms part of the companies' “social license to operate.” This paper argues that this responsibility is progressively turning into a legal duty for lead companies to respect human rights in those types of value chains which are characterized by a high level of control by a lead company over its business partners. Our argument rests on two recent legal developments. Firstly, the article analyzes the judicialization of the corporate responsibility to respect in the case law on parent company liability in various jurisdictions, which, we argue, is highly likely to have some implications in relation to certain types of value chains so as to trigger the liability of lead companies for the human rights harms arising out of the activities of entities over which they exercise sufficient control. Secondly, the article delves into the legislative developments which increasingly require lead companies to exercise due diligence so as to prevent and address adverse human rights impacts in their own activities and global value chains.

scholarly journals On Corporate Responsibility, Human Rights, and Transitional Justice: Quo Vadis?

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 324-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruti Teitel
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Quo Vadis

The 2018 ASIL panel on the question of corporate responsibility and human rights, and in particular, my remarks on corporate responsibility and transitional justice, preceded a long-awaited United States Supreme Court decision on the question of whether foreign corporate responsibility for human rights abuses belonged in United States courts ending in a closely decided vote—dividing sharply along political lines, with the Court conservatives in splintered opinions deciding against such liability. A forceful dissent by the four liberals on the Court would have allowed the Alien Tort Claims Act (ACTA) claim to go forward.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document