Voluntary Codes of Conduct for Religious Persuasion: Effective Tools for Balancing Human Rights and Resolving Conflicts?

2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-183
Author(s):  
Are L. Svendsen ◽  
Rainer O. Bless ◽  
Matthew K. Richards

AbstractAttempts by people of faith to persuade others to their beliefs can provoke conflicts—even violence—in communities intent on protecting their privacy and identity. Both advocates and targets claim the protection of competing human rights, which must be balanced. Voluntary codes of conduct offer a viable alternative to government regulation. This article evaluates twenty-one codes and identifies which have greatest potential for conflict-resolution. Effective codes balance competing rights consistent with international law norms, respect multiple traditions, and address a general audience. They motivate compliance, provide a platform for dialogue, and promote the pluralism necessary to freedom of conscience. In contrast, codes focused on a single faith’s or network’s own constituencies are less likely to prevent or resolve conflicts because they tend to advocate a sectarian view and sometimes violate international law. Like aggressive state regulations, these codes can perpetuate rather than prevent conflict.

2002 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morton Winston

This article describes and evaluates the different strategies that have been employed by international human rights nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in attempting to influence the behavior of multinational corporations (MNCs). Within the NGO world, there is a basic divide on tactics for dealing with corporations: Engagers try to draw corporations into dialogue in order to persuade them by means of ethical and prudential arguments to adopt voluntary codes of conduct, while confronters believe that corporations will act only when their financial interests are threatened, and therefore take a more adversarial stance toward them. Confrontational NGOs tend to employ moral stigmatization, or “naming and shaming,” as their primary tactic, while NGOs that favor engagement offer dialogue and limited forms of cooperation with willing MNCs.The article explains the evolving relationship between NGOs and MNCs in relation to human rights issues and defines eight strategies along the engagement/confrontation spectrum used by NGOs in their dealings with MNCs. The potential benefits and risks of various forms of engagement between NGOs and MNCs are analyzed and it is argued that the dynamic created by NGOs pursuing these different strategies can be productive in moving some companies to embrace their social responsibilities. Yet, in order for these changes to be sustainable, national governments will need to enact enforceable international legal standards for corporate social accountability.


2021 ◽  
pp. 147-200
Author(s):  
Erika George

This chapter argues that regulation can occur through rankings and reporting by providing information about risks to rights allowing concerned citizens to exercise informed choice. This chapter examines the emergence and evolution of selected ranking and reporting frameworks in the expanding realm of business and human rights advocacy. Specifically, it examines how indicators in the form of rankings and reports evaluating the conduct of transnational corporate actors can serve as regulatory tools with potential to bridge a global governance gap that places human rights at risk. It explains the conditions that have led to coordination and collaboration among those entities engaged in creating reporting frameworks and rankings while nevertheless relying upon the competitive impulses of the business enterprises being ranked to assert influence. It also identifies why the businesses being ranked have been slow to deploy effective counterstrategies despite efforts to contest emerging reporting requirements. It considers the interaction of selected business and human rights indicators with recent laws regulating supply chain transparency in the United States and with recent global policy initiatives calling for business enterprises to conduct human rights impact assessments. It reviews some of the methodological and moral risks raised with respect to ranking rights. In conclusion, the chapter argues that in the ecology of global governance, these new business and human rights indicators will provide rights advocates with greater power and have the potential to play an important role in solidifying emerging soft law standards and in strengthening corporate self-regulation. The strategic use of indicators in the business and human rights realm could ultimately prove to make the commitments contained in voluntary codes of conduct to respect human rights obligatory.


2006 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Campbell

The criticism that voluntary codes of conduct are ineffective can be met by giving greater centrality to human rights in such codes. Provided the human rights obligations of multinational corporations are interpreted as moral obligations specifically tailored to the situation of multinational corporations, this could serve to bring powerful moral force to bear on MNCs and could provide a legitimating basis for NGO monitoring and persuasion. Approached in this way the human rights obligations of MNCs can be taken to include support for political as well as economic rights. This will go some way towards filling the regulatory gap created by the difficulty of controlling the activities of corporations operating globally. However, such a proposal will require a measure of ‘meta-regulation’ whereby the operations of MNCs are legally required to be sufficiently transparent to create the conditions for effective external moral scrutiny


2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoilo A. Velasco

Abstract Throughout its development as an international law principle, there prevailed an assumption that self-determination gives rise to secession. This assumption, which has fuelled the most violent ethno-national conflicts in modern history, is however misleading. Self-determination does not lead to secession. Self-determination is conceptually and legally separate and independent from secession. Its association with secession actually makes self-determination a legal anomaly. Whether a “nation” can secede is not a function of self-determination but is dictated by an entirely different variable – effective power or authority in international politics. There is a need to break the link between self-determination and secession, and instead recognise self-determination as a human right per se rather than a principle that justifies, confuses, and exacerbates ethno-national conflicts. The result is a change in our way of understanding, and hopefully resolving, existing secessionist struggles and ethno-national conflicts worldwide.


Author(s):  
Emilie M. Hafner-Burton

In the last six decades, one of the most striking developments in international law is the emergence of a massive body of legal norms and procedures aimed at protecting human rights. In many countries, though, there is little relationship between international law and the actual protection of human rights on the ground. This book takes a fresh look at why it's been so hard for international law to have much impact in parts of the world where human rights are most at risk. The book argues that more progress is possible if human rights promoters work strategically with the group of states that have dedicated resources to human rights protection. These human rights “stewards” can focus their resources on places where the tangible benefits to human rights are greatest. Success will require setting priorities as well as engaging local stakeholders such as nongovernmental organizations and national human rights institutions. To date, promoters of international human rights law have relied too heavily on setting universal goals and procedures and not enough on assessing what actually works and setting priorities. This book illustrates how, with a different strategy, human rights stewards can make international law more effective and also safeguard human rights for more of the world population.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-179
Author(s):  
Alessandro Suppa ◽  
Pavel Bureš

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.


Author(s):  
Bożena Drzewicka

Conceptions And Interpretations of Human Rights in Europe and Asia: Normative AspectsThe issue of confronting values between civilizations has become very important. It influences not only the level of international politics but also the international normative activity. It is very interesting for the modern international law and its doctrine. The most important factor of causing huge changes in the system of international law is still the international human rights protection and the international humanitarian law which is related to it. It is very difficult to create one catalogue of executive instruments and procedures but it is possible to influence the attitude toward the basic paradigms. The frictions appear from time to time and move to other planes. The West and Asia are still antagonists in the dialogue on the future of the world. The article is a contribution to the intercivilizational dialogue.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document