Operationalising the UN Business and Human Rights Framework: The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights and Due Diligence

2015 ◽  
pp. 325-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Muchlinski
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Business And Human Rights

scholarly journals Business, Human Rights and Climate Due Diligence: Understanding the Responsibility of Banks

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (15) ◽  
pp. 8391
Author(s):  
Chiara Macchi ◽  
Nadia Bernaz
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Climate Change Impacts ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Form Part ◽  
Normative Standard ◽  
Human Rights Due Diligence

Under the 2011 UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), banks, like all businesses, have a responsibility to respect human rights and to carry out human rights due diligence. Although climate due diligence is not explicitly included in the UNGPs, tackling an enterprise’s direct and indirect climate change impacts is arguably a dimension of the corporate responsibility to respect human rights and should form part of the human rights due diligence process. At present, it is unclear how such responsibility applies to banks, whose contribution to climate change is mostly indirect. This article addresses the research question: how should the law be interpreted to form a coherent climate due diligence standard for banks? To address it, the article first maps out the climate responsibility of banks under international soft law standards and assesses privately developed guidance. It then elucidates the emerging concept of climate due diligence, reading climate change responsibilities into the now well-established corporate responsibility to respect human rights as authoritatively elaborated in the UNGPs. Finally, it explains how such normative standard applies to banks and unpacks the key elements that a bank’s climate due diligence process should include.

scholarly journals POLYCENTRICITY AND POLYPHONY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: INTERPRETING THE CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY TO RESPECT HUMAN RIGHTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 133-164
Author(s):  
Enrico Partiti
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Polycentric Governance ◽  
Additional Layer ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Management Processes ◽  
Interpretive Authority

AbstractComplex multi-actors and multi-level governance structures have emerged in areas that were traditionally exclusively the preserve of the State and treaty-making. The adoption of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGP) affirmed a corporate responsibility to respect human rights to be implemented through human rights due diligence (HRDD), ie via management processes. The open-ended character of the UNGP generated the emergence of other soft instruments offering guidance to corporations in structuring HRDD. This contribution conceptualises the UNGP from the perspective of regulation as a principles-based exercise in polycentric governance reliant on regulatory intermediaries for interpretation. It then assesses the role of various sui generis normative instruments in providing interpretation to the UNGP and, how the presence of an additional layer of interpretative material contributes to the institutionalisation of responsible corporate conduct. The analysis of instruments drafted by international, non-governmental and business organisations reveals both a decentralising tension between different intermediaries due to disagreements and divergence concerning the precise extent of corporate human rights responsibilities, as well as attempts to centralise the interpretation of the UNGP. The article concludes by recommending some caution towards the employment of polycentric governance regimes and their lack of centralised interpretive authority in this domain of international law and suggests possible ways to formally establish centralised interpretation.

Can Multinational Corporations be responsible for human rights violation of its outsourcee company? Response of national or international law?

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-179
Author(s):  
Alessandro Suppa ◽  
Pavel Bureš
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Multinational Corporations ◽  
Corporate Law ◽  
International Economy ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Original Question ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Human Rights Violation

SummaryNowadays, an important role in the world is played by Multinational Corporations (MNCs). They hire, produce, and influence the international economy, but also, they exploit, pollute. Their business activities might have a worldwide effect on human lives. The question of the responsibility of MNCs has drawn the attention of many scholars, mainly from the study field labelled “Business and Human Rights”. The present paper does not examine the topic under the same approach. The authors aim at presenting the issue in a broader perspective, exploring the concept of due diligence both in international and corporate law. In this paper, authors strategically use the uniformity of national legislations as a possible and alternative solution to the issue. They are aware of three fundamental factors: 1) the definition of MNCs needs to be as clear as possible, so to avoid any degree of uncertainty; 2) the outsourcing phenomenon interacts with that definition; 3) in case of no possibility to include outsourcing in the definition of MNC, the original question arises in a significant way.

scholarly journals When Rights Enter the CSR Field: British Firms’ Engagement with Human Rights and the UN Guiding Principles

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alvise Favotto ◽  
Kelly Kollman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Global Markets ◽  
Business Practices ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Market Competitiveness ◽  
Guiding Principles ◽  
Corporate Social

AbstractThe adoption of the Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights by the United Nations (UNGPs) in 2011 created a new governance instrument aimed at improving the promotion of human rights by business enterprises. While reaffirming states duties to uphold human rights in law, the UNGPs called on firms to promote the realization of human rights within global markets. The UNGPs thus have sought to embed human rights more firmly within the field of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and to use CSR practices to improve corporate human rights accountability. In this paper, we explore how this incorporation of human rights into the CSR field has affected the business practices and public commitments British firms have made to promote human rights. We analyse the CSR reports published by the 50 largest British firms over a 20-year period starting in the late 1990s and interview senior CSR managers of these firms. We find that these firms have expanded how they articulate their responsibility for human rights over time. These commitments however remain largely focused on improving management practices such as due diligence and remediation procedures. Firms are often both vague and selective about which substantive human rights they engage with in light of their concerns about their market competitiveness and broader legitimacy. These outcomes suggest that, while firms cannot completely resist the normative pressures exerted by the CSR field, they retain significant resources and agency in translating such pressure into concrete practices.

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.

From a Stark Utopia to Everyday Utopias

2018 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 575-606
Author(s):  
Michelle Staggs Kelsall
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Transnational Corporations ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Karl Polanyi ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Council ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Human Rights Due Diligence

This article considers the emergence of the Business and Human Rights agenda at the United Nations (UN). It argues that the agenda can be seen as an example of the UN Human Rights Council attempting to institutionalise everyday utopias within an emerging global public domain. Utilising the concept of embedded pragmatism and tracing the underlying rationale for the emergence of the agenda to the work of Karl Polanyi, the article argues that the Business and Human Rights agenda seeks to institutionalise human rights due diligence processes within transnational corporations in order to create a pragmatic alternative to the stark utopia of laissez-faire liberal markets. It then provides an analytical account of the implications of human rights due diligence for the modes and techniques business utilises to assess human rights harm. It argues that due to the constraints imposed by the concept of embedded pragmatism and the normative indeterminacy of human rights, the Business and Human Rights agenda risks instituting human rights within the corporation through modes and techniques that maintain human rights as a language of crisis, rather than creating the space for novel, everyday utopias to emerge.

Creating a Human Rights Framework for Mapping and Addressing Corporate Tax Abuses

2019 ◽  
pp. 385-408
Author(s):  
Matti Kohonen ◽  
Radhika Sarin ◽  
Troels Boerrild ◽  
Ewan Livingston
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
The State ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Corporate Personhood ◽  
Business Partners ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Corporate Decisions ◽  
Human Rights Due Diligence

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.

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.

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights and Multinational Enterprises: Towards Business and Human Rights in the Americas?

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
María Carmelina Londoño-Lázaro ◽  
Ulf Thoene ◽  
Catherine Pereira-Villa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Multinational Enterprises ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Business And Human Rights

Abstract This article analyses the role of the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) within a business and human rights framework. A qualitative data analysis of cases on multinational enterprises (mnes) identifies the following: that the obligations the IACtHR places upon States explicitly contemplate soft law instruments, such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights; and that there exist shared obligations with companies and attempts to regulate mne conduct by establishing conditions for due diligence, such as prior consultation, benefit-sharing and reparation measures for affected communities. Therefore, IACtHR rulings may contribute to the rule of law in so far as they have normative effects on member States, but they can also prove to be ineffective given the nature of corporate conduct and certain non-enforceable responsibilities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document