scholarly journals Global laws for a global economy: A case for bringing multinational corporations under international human rights law

SURG Journal ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 14-23
Author(s):  
Alicia Grant
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Multinational Corporations ◽  
The State ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
International Level ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Host State ◽  
International Human

Economic globalization has created a governance gap, often leaving powerful corporations largely unregulated. The result has been frequent and gross violations of human rights that too often go unpunished. This article outlines the mechanisms that currently exist for regulating the activities of multinational corporations including: (i) corporate self-regulation; (ii) regulation within the state where a company is operating (the host state); (iii) regulation within the state where a parent company is incorporated (the home state); and (iv) codes of conduct at the international level. The advantages and insufficiencies of each level are highlighted, and an argument is subsequently made that the governance gap will only be filled if firms are subjected to binding international law. The article then turns to an examination of international human rights law and discusses the place of non-state actors within this framework. It finds that corporations do have obligations under international human rights law despite the fact that systems for enforcing these duties do not currently exist. The final section discusses the difficulties that might be associated with creating enforcement mechanisms. The article ultimately argues that binding regulation at the international level is necessary in the long run; however, due to the difficulties in achieving this objective, regulation should also continue to be improved at the company, industry, host-state, and home-state levels. Keywords: multinational corporations; international law; human rights; corporate activity (regulation of)

Jurisdictional Immunities of the State for Serious Violations of International Human Rights Law or the Law of Armed Conflict

2013 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. 243-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul David Mora
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
The State ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
International Human

SummaryIn its recent decision in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v Italy: Greece Intervening), the International Court of Justice (ICJ) held that Italy had failed to respect immunities enjoyed by Germany under international law when the Italian courts allowed civil actions to be brought against Germany for alleged violations of international human rights law (IHRL) and the law of armed conflict (LOAC) committed during the Second World War. This article evaluates the three arguments raised by Italy to justify its denial of immunity: first, that peremptory norms of international law prevail over international rules on jurisdictional immunities; second, that customary international law recognizes an exception to immunity for serious violations of IHRL or the LOAC; and third, that customary international law recognizes an exception to immunity for torts committed by foreign armed forces on the territory of the forum state in the course of an armed conflict. The author concludes that the ICJ was correct to find that none of these arguments deprived Germany of its right under international law to immunity from the civil jurisdiction of the Italian courts.

Sovereign Rights of the State and the Scope of their Implementation in the Context of Development of the International Human Rights Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 164
Author(s):  
Iryna PROTSENKO ◽  
Кostiantyn SAVCHUK
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Adequate Treatment ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right

In the contemporary science of international law, the state sovereignty issue lacks adequate treatment. In particular, the list and essence of sovereign rights and duties of the state are not defined, although these are referred to in some international legal instruments and resolutions of international courts and arbitrations. In addition, particular circumstances are being under development, which require if not precise outlining of the catalogue of fundamental rights of states, then at least determining the essence of some of these rights and the scope of their implementation. It goes about developing the practice to limit specific sovereign rights of the state to ensure the implementation of human rights (notably, the ones not directly related to the respective rights of the state). In this very way, the state is limited in its right to determine its own immigration policy. The fact is that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has ruled in some of its judgments that by implementing this right, the state violates the right to respect for private and family life provided for by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 (ECHR). This resulted in ECtHR`s practice to be somewhat considered in the draft articles on the expulsion of aliens elaborated by the International Law Commission (ILC) in 2014. The examples from ECtHR`s practice analyzed in this paper provide the basis for the conclusion that the development of the International Human Rights Law is gradually narrowing the scope of the internal sovereign rights of the state.

scholarly journals Features of the status and protection of the rights of persons living on the occupied territories

2021 ◽  
pp. 433-446
Author(s):  
Oleksiy Kresin ◽  
Iryna Kresina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Private Property ◽  
The State ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human

Based on the concluded study, the authors demonstrate that international law recognizes the unconditional responsibility of the power occupying or exercising effective (overall, general, de facto) control over the territory for the human rights of its population, and in particular the civilian population as protected persons. Such liability exists independently of the personal liability of the representatives (agents) of that State. In this case, the state, which exercises control over the territory, is automatically responsible for any actions of organizations under its control. At the same time, it is quite difficult to determine the share of responsibility of a sovereign state for the implementation of human rights on a territory over which that state does not exercise control. The legislation of Ukraine imposes responsibility for the protection and violations of human rights in the ORDLO on Russia under both international humanitarian law and international human rights law. International humanitarian law imposes on the occupying state the obligation to ensure all the minimum humanitarian needs of the population, its basic rights related to the preservation of life, health and dignity (with special emphasis on the rights of women and children), private property, effective protection of these rights and protection from any unlawful violence, preservation of the infrastructure of the territory. The occupying State cannot be absolved of responsibility for serious human rights violations, including war crimes and crimes against humanity. Decisions of international courts unequivocally extend these obligations, as well as obligations under international human rights law, to all forms of illegal control of the territory of another state. At the same time, the Constitution and legislation of Ukraine do not provide for the refusal of the state to ensure and protect human rights on its territory, even in conditions of state of emergency or war. Ukraine ensures the realization of the rights of the ORDLO population on the territory of other regions of Ukraine. Ukraine also protect and restore human rights in the territory of the ORDLO with the means provided by international law.

scholarly journals Is All Fair in Distancing Human Rights from Customary International Law Rule on State of Necessity?

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
Dmitry V. Krasikov ◽  
Nadezhda N. Lipkina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Basic Research ◽  
The State ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Rfbr Grant ◽  
International Human

The international human rights law theory and practice traditionally follow the path of distancing human rights from the state of necessity under general international law. The existence of derogation clauses contained in major human rights treaties excludes the possibility for States parties to invoke the customary rule on necessity to excuse non-compliance with the obligations under such treaties (the narrow distancing approach). Presently, a broader distancing approach, covering human rights obligations outside the treaties’ derogation regimes, is evolving employing certain alternative grounds for departure from human rights obligations. The article argues that the way the broader distancing approach evolves raises doubts as to its conformity with its intrinsic rationale. To address this concern a due account should be taken of the pro homine reasoning for distancing human rights from the state of necessity. The present paper is a part of a larger project “Circumstances precluding wrongfulness of conduct: the analysis of functional role and applicability parameters in the framework of International Human Rights Law” supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR Grant No. 18-011-00660).

The Idea of International Human Rights Law

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Wheatley
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Moral Concept ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
International Human ◽  
Fragmentation Of International Law

International Human Rights Law has emerged as an academic subject in its own right, separate from, but still related to, International Law. This book explains the distinctive nature of the new discipline by examining the influence of the moral concept of human rights on general international law. Rather than make use of moral philosophy or political theory, the work explains the term ‘human rights’ by examining its usage in international law practice, on the understanding that words are given meaning through their use. Relying on complexity theory to make sense of the legal practice in the United Nations, the core human rights treaties, and customary international law, The Idea of International Human Rights Law shows how a moral concept of human rights emerged, and then influenced the international law doctrine and practice on human rights, a fact that explains the fragmentation of international law and the special nature of International Human Rights Law.

scholarly journals Governmental human rights focal points in federal contexts: The implementation of the Istanbul convention in Switzerland as a case study

2021 ◽  
pp. 092405192110169
Author(s):  
Matthieu Niederhauser
Keyword(s):  
Domestic Violence ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Focal Points ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Federal States ◽  
International Human

The implementation of international human rights law in federal States is an underexplored process. Subnational entities regularly enjoy a degree of sovereignty, which raises questions such as whether they implement obligations of international law and how the federal level may ensure that implementation takes place at the subnational level. This article aims to answer these questions, using the implementation of the Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (Convention) in Switzerland as a case study. To implement the Convention at the cantonal level, federal actors decided to use networks of civil servants in charge of domestic violence issues, who act as governmental human rights focal points (GHRFPs). This article is based on original empirical data, on 25 interviews with State officials who participate in this implementation. The findings show how complex GHRFPs networks work in practice to implement the Convention and highlight the role played by numerous non-legal State actors in this process. As a result, the article argues that international human rights law implementation becomes more diversified both within and across federal States.

Judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada of February 28, 2020, on Nevsun v. Araya: a “quiet revolution” in the assessment of the status of corporations under public international law?

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 25-39
Author(s):  
Vera Rusinova ◽  
Olga Ganina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
International Human

The article analyses the Judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada on the Nevsun v. Araya case, which deals with the severe violations of human rights, including slavery and forced labor with respect of the workers of Eritrean mines owned by a Canadian company “Nevsun”. By a 5 to 4 majority, the court concluded that litigants can seek compensation for the violations of international customs committed by a company. This decision is underpinned by the tenets that international customs form a part of Canadian common law, companies can bear responsibility for violations of International Human Rights Law, and under ubi jus ibi remedium principle plaintiffs have a right to receive compensation under national law. Being a commentary to this judgment the article focuses its analysis on an issue that is of a key character for Public International Law, namely on the tenet that international customs impose obligations to respect human rights on companies and they can be called for responsibility for these violations. This conclusion is revolutionary in the part in which it shifts the perception of the companies’ legal status under International Law. The court’s approach is critically assessed against its well-groundness and correspondence to the current stage of International law. In particular, the authors discuss, whether the legal stance on the Supreme Court of Canada, under which companies can bear responsibility for violations of International Human Rights Law is a justified necessity or a head start.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document