Introduction: Business and Human Rights Asia—Examining the Duty of the State to Protect

Author(s):  
James Gomez ◽  
Robin Ramcharan
Author(s):  
Matti Kohonen ◽  
Radhika Sarin ◽  
Troels Boerrild ◽  
Ewan Livingston

This chapter identifies several areas of convergence between the fields of tax policy and human rights. These include the concept of the corporation as a unitary entity; the notion of extraterritorial impacts and obligations of states and corporations; and the risks of corporate personhood. These principles are all highly relevant to corporations’ human rights due diligence and risk assessment of their tax policies. Applying a business and human rights perspective to international tax law can clarify responsibilities of companies toward their other stakeholders as well as their relationship with subsidiaries and business partners in terms of responsible tax conduct. The chapter then explores two dimensions of the human rights impacts of tax-related corporate decisions: impacts mediated by the state and impacts not mediated by the state.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beate SJÅFJELL

AbstractThis article discusses three questions. First, what drives business to ignore human rights, or even worse, consciously undermine the achievement of human rights? Second, given the state of affairs of business and human rights, why is there not a quick regulatory fix to the problems that we see? Third, in light of the failure of business and of regulation so far, what can be done? The article posits that reform of company law is key to ensuring business respect for human rights, as an intrinsic element of the transition to sustainability. The article outlines how company law can facilitate sustainable business. It concludes with some reflections on the drivers for change that make it possible to envisage that the necessary reform of company law will be enacted.


Author(s):  
Nika Arevadze

Public procurement represents a significant part of the global economy and influencesthe nature and quality of public goods and services. Consequently, it has substantial direct and indirectlinks with the human rights of a wide array of rightsholders. However, public procurement systemsrarely reflect these links and remain resistant to calls on human rights integration from internationalorganizations and academic scholarship. While this divergence is often discussed, the root governance issues that create the gap between public procurement and human rights and contribute to the lackof progress remain relatively unexplored. This paper investigates a prevalent governance issue inpublic procurement – political favouritist corruption schemes – and their role in the paradoxical lackof progress in aligning public procurement systems with human rights requirements. Through theanalysis of primary and secondary sources, the paper demonstrates the links between such corruptpractices and prevalent human rights issues in public procurement. It argues that by underminingpublic procurement systems, political favouritism jeopardizes primary economic and secondarysocial objectives of procurement and brings about adverse human rights impacts. These impactsharm civil and political, as well as economic, social and cultural human rights in national contextsand obstruct the development at large. Moreover, this corrupt arrangement represents a roadblockfor promoting human rights integration in public procurement and, hence, hampers the progressfor the novel approach of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in general, andits provisions concerning the state-business nexus in particular. The paper concludes by outliningthe need for further interdisciplinary and empirical research which will explore this issue throughthe lens of business and human rights, and offer a systemic analysis of root causes, the state of playand potential solutions.


2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara L Seck

This paper will consider whether the polycentric governance approach of the 2011 United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights has the potential to achieve the goal of transnational corporate compliance with human rights responsibilities including, importantly, the goal of access to remedy and justice for those who have been harmed. The paper was initially written as a contribution to a conference at the University of Windsor entitled Justice Beyond the State: Transnationalism and Law. First, the paper examines understandings of “citizenship” and “non-citizenship” in relation to transnational corporate [TNC] accountability in the human rights context. Two distinct perspectives are explored: first, TNC citizenship and non-citizenship and the rights and responsibilities that flow from these; and second, citizenship and non-citizenship of victims of human rights violations in relation to rights of access to remedy. Together, these insights inform an understanding of the role that transnational law and legal pluralism beyond the state could serve in facilitating remedy for human rights violations. Specifically, the paper will conclude with reflections on what might be required for implementation of the UN Guiding Principles to achieve the goal of transnational corporate compliance and access to remedy for victims of rights violations. Le présent document examinera si l’approche polycentrique en matière de gouvernance adoptée par les Principes directeurs relatifs aux entreprises et aux droits de l’homme, publiés par les Nations Unies en 2011, peut permettre de réaliser l’objectif de la conformité transnationale des entreprises aux responsabilités en matière de droits de la personne, notamment et surtout l’objectif de l’accès aux recours et à la justice pour les parties lésées. Au départ, le document avait été rédigé à titre de contribution à une conférence à l’Université de Windsor intitulée Justice Beyond the State: Transnationalism and Law. Le document se penche tout d’abord sur la compréhension des termes « citoyenneté » et « non-citoyenneté » en ce qui concerne la responsabilité transnationale des entreprises dans le contexte des droits de la personne. Deux perspectives distinctes sont étudiées : premièrement, la citoyenneté et la non-citoyenneté transnationales des entreprises et les droits et responsabilités qui en découlent; deuxièmement, la citoyenneté et la non-citoyenneté des victimes de violations des droits de la personne par rapport aux droits d’accès aux recours. Ensemble, ces perspectives éclairent une compréhension du rôle que le droit transnational et le pluralisme juridique au-delà de l’État pourraient jouer pour faciliter les recours en cas de violation des droits de la personne. En particulier, le document présentera en conclusion des réflexions sur ce qui pourrait être requis pour mettre en œuvre les Principes directeurs des Nations Unies de manière à réaliser l’objectif de la conformité transnationale des entreprises et de l’accès aux recours pour les personnes dont les droits ont été violés


Author(s):  
Olena Uvarova

Just like the fight against discrimination or other injustice in its time, the sphere ofbusiness and human rights goes through the same stages: the experience of injustice is accumulated –a demand for release from the problem is formed, a demand for a more perfect reality – a requestfor new regulation arises.The article discusses the key issues for the theory of law, conditioned by the formation of thisnew reality. The starting point for consideration is the question of business as a direct addressee ofhuman rights requirements, that is, the operation of human rights without mediation by the state,since one of the defining reasons for the emergence of public expectations, embodied in the conceptof business and human rights, was the inability or in some cases of deliberate unwillingness of thestate to ensure corporate respect for human rights. This, in turn, raises the question of the powerinfluence of business on human rights and the need to revise the concept according to which privateactors in their relations are equal. The imperious nature of the influence of business also means thatthere is a revision of the social contract, the parties to which were previously considered society andthe state, and therefore the need to legitimize such power of business, substantive and procedural. Even in a situation where the state exercises effective control over the business operations, therequirement of legitimation is relevant, since there is a space free from state legal regulation. Objectively,the state cannot (and should not) regulate all aspects of the functioning of economic entities; thespace for self-regulation always remains. Business, by understanding its internal processes, is betterable to identify risks to human rights and minimize them. The state can only react to the violationof human rights that has occurred.The demand for business to fulfill its human rights obligations is particularly heightened ina situation where government control over its activities is absent or ineffective. Such situations arepossible in the case of a weak nature of state power or its inconsistent policy in the field of humanrights (in particular, investment projects may not be assessed by the state in terms of their impacton human rights) or in a situation of an undemocratic political regime, when the state itself violateshuman rights. and business is directly or indirectly involved in such violations. It is also possible thatthe state does not have sufficient leverage over business. Transnational corporations are a classicexample of this situation. The lack of effective state control can also be explained by the oligarchicstructure of the economy.Accordingly, the concept of business and human rights, being a response to modern challenges of“unfair social experience”, forces us to reconsider the classical views on the addressees of human rightsdemands, the mechanism of operation of the rule of law, the requirements of which should applyto private actors and, in general, to reconsider the social contract taking into account the significantimpact that business has on the organization of life in modern society.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document