Business and Human Rights Case Study of Korean Companies Operating Overseas: Challenges and a New National Action Plan

2018 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 287-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Changrok Soh ◽  
Seunghyun Nam
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Vasanthi SRINIVASAN ◽  
Parvathy VENKATACHALAM

Abstract The decade of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) coincides with India’s National Voluntary Guidelines on businesses’ social, environmental, and economic responsibilities (NVGs) and the National Guidelines on Responsible Business Conduct (NGRBC) – an updated version of the NVGs. Human rights are one of the core principles in both guidelines and they draw upon the ‘Protect–Respect–Remedy’ framework of the UNGPs. The NVGs and NGRBC go beyond the UNGPs by requiring organizations not only to respect human rights, but also to promote them in their spheres of influence. Several factors, however, derailed the implementation of this progressive policy shift. This article explores the challenges in implementation and calls for the multiple actors involved to work together and shape a collaborative action plan for effective implementation of the NGRBC in the next decade. The authors reiterate the need for alternative lenses to frame the responsible business agenda within developing countries through positive obligations.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 73
Author(s):  
Andika AB. Wahab

The release of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in 2011 aims to address gaps in human rights governance by setting a standard and corporate culture of respecting human rights. As part of the state responsibility to implement these guiding principles, some member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have already embarked preliminary steps towards establishing their respective National Action Plan on Business and Human rights (NAPBHR), while others are still lag behind. This article describes current development on business and human rights in the region. Drawing from the palm oil sector’s experience in Malaysia, this study aims to provide lessons for ASEAN member states to contemplate when developing their NAPBHR. In this article, I argue that while some large palm oil companies have shown modest progress in realizing their human rights obligation, challenges emerge in many forms including the lack of leadership, collaboration and ambition to steer and scale up industry transformation on human rights across supply chain. Equally important, challenges around certification scheme depict that it is not the only solution in persuading respect to human rights. Meaningful values transfer often overlooked in certification practice resulting in typical "ticking the audit box" exercise without understanding principles behind it. As such, the development of NAPBHR among the ASEAN member states should reflect on these reality and challenges.


Author(s):  
Caroline Bettinger-López

International human rights treaties and monitoring bodies have repeatedly called upon governments to develop national plans of action to eliminate violence against women. Although the U.S. is a global leader in the violence against women arena, it has never developed a national plan of action. The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), despite its substantial contributions, does not contain some of the core features of a national action plan—such as a strategic vision for ending violence against women, or a declaration that violence against women is a human rights violation and a form of sex discrimination, or a set of goals or benchmarks to measure progress. This chapter examines the key elements of national action plans on violence against women, and ultimately argues that in the Trump era, a national action plan can best be developed through coordinated action at the state and local levels.


Author(s):  
Michael Bader

AbstractCorporations, in their quest for the highest profit margin, have violated human rights, labour rights and environmental standards for decades, with little to no accountability. In recent years, the fight for corporate accountability under the banner of “Business and Human Rights” has come to dominate civil society’s engagement with the “question of the corporation.” This chapter aims to critically examine the political objectives underpinning the broad-church project of Business and Human Rights in its world-making aspirations, taking the Legally Binding Instrument currently under discussion at the UN Human Rights Council as a case study. Using a historical narrative approach, this article first situates the evolution of Business and Human Rights within neoliberal globalisation and, against this backdrop, attempts to think through the “dark side” of this particular strand of human rights activism. By bringing critical legal scholarship on the corporation and human rights into closer conversation with Business and Human Rights, the article aims to excavate the latter’s structural flaws, namely that it leaves the asymmetries in the global economy and the imperial corporate form unchallenged. By problematising Business and Human Rights’ presupposition of business as fact and its uncritical embrace of rights as positive change-makers, the article presents an invitation to rethink strategic political objectives vis-à-vis corporate rights abuses.


2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ni Ketut Supasti Dharmawan ◽  
Desak Putu Dewi Kasih ◽  
I Gede Agus Kurniawan ◽  
Putu Aras Samsithawrati

As a global principal, corporations have the obligation to comply with national and international hard law of human rights, respect soft laws and global standards. The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (GPs) of 2011 were unanimously endorsed by the Human Rights Council and are respected as a global standard that stipulates that corporations should respect human rights when conducting their business activities. The purpose of this paper is to examine the scope and focus of National Action Plans (NAPs) by comparing the Netherlands NAP on Human Rights (2013) is compared to the UK’s updated NAP of 2016 with the aim of providing ideas and good examples of a NAP for Indonesia. This study used normative legal method. It is considered to be a valuable lesson both for developed and developing countries that for practical matters it is highly important to create and implement a NAP for the implementation of the GPs. Fortunately, Indonesia in June 2017 has launched a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights (NAP). The burden responsibility to carry out the NAP on Business and Human Rights to corporation to be implemented strongly rests on the government authorities both central government and all levels authorities, including the local level, have the duty to implement human rights obligation, including to convince corporations that upholding the GPs will ultimately be to their benefit.


2019 ◽  
Vol 06 (01) ◽  
pp. 128-150
Author(s):  
Wicipto Setiadi ◽  
Mario Siagian

In recent years, the numbers of refugees who transit in Indonesia are increasing. Since Indonesia is a state that upholds and respects human rights, the Indonesian government has an obligation to provide the best treatment and protection for refugees while they settle in the Indonesian territory. One of responsibilities of the state for these refugees is to implement programs that are alternatives to detention through the National Action Plan Beyond Detention 2014-2019. After the issuance of the Action Plan, the Indonesian government has collaborated with UNHCR and IOM to implement alternatives to detention in Indonesia. The alternatives are to provide care and the best protection for refugees living in the Indonesian territory. Refugees have to live in Indonesia temporarily because of various factors from the third countries. They have to stay for a while without a clear period until they are transferred to a third country of settlement. There are various problems in determining alternatives to detention in Indonesia. This paper aims to analyze and examine the policy of handling the problem of refugees in Indonesia since Indonesia has not ratified the Refugee Convention 1951.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document