scholarly journals Conceptualizing Corporate Accountability in International Law: Models for a Business and Human Rights Treaty

2021 ◽  
pp. 146-173
Author(s):  
Nadia Bernaz
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Negotiation Process ◽  
Corporate Accountability ◽  
State Support ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Future Business

This article conceptualizes corporate accountability under international law andintroduces an analytical framework translating corporate accountability into seven core elements.Using this analytical framework, it then systematically assesses four models that could be used ina future business and human rights treaty: the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business andHuman Rights model, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights model, the progressive model, andthe transformative model. It aims to contribute to the BHR treaty negotiation process by clarifyingdifferent options and possible trade-offs between them, while taking into account political realities.Ultimately, the article argues in favour of the BHR treaty embracing a progressive model of corporateaccountability, which combines ambitious development of international law with realistic prospectsof state support.

scholarly journals Conceptualizing Corporate Accountability in International Law: Models for a Business and Human Rights Treaty

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadia Bernaz
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Negotiation Process ◽  
Corporate Accountability ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Core Elements ◽  
Political Realities ◽  
Future Business

Abstract This article conceptualizes corporate accountability under international law and introduces an analytical framework translating corporate accountability into seven core elements. Using this analytical framework, it then systematically assesses four models that could be used in a future business and human rights (BHR) treaty: the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights model, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights model, the progressive model, and the transformative model. It aims to contribute to the BHR treaty negotiation process by clarifying different options and possible trade-offs between them, while taking into account political realities. Ultimately, the article argues in favour of the BHR treaty embracing a progressive model of corporate accountability, which combines ambitious development of international law with realistic prospects of state support.

scholarly journals Remedying depletion through social reproduction: a critical engagement with the United Nations’ business and human rights framework

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-202
Author(s):  
Beth Goldblatt ◽  
Shirin M. Rai
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Social Reproduction ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Development Goals ◽  
The United Nations

The growing recognition of unpaid work in international law and the Sustainable Development Goals acknowledges that gendered labour supports the global economy. This work can have harmful impacts, leading to ‘depletion through social reproduction’ (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="CIT0036">Rai et al, 2014</xref>). When corporate harms impact on workers and communities, family members are often required to provide caring labour for those directly affected. However, the consequential harms of depletion are generally invisible within the law and uncompensated. In assessing the United Nations’ business and human rights framework, we argue that the international legal regime must take account of social reproductive work and its consequent harms.

Assessing the roles of multi-stakeholder initiatives in advancing the business and human rights agenda

2012 ◽  
Vol 94 (887) ◽  
pp. 1027-1046 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Jerbi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Business Performance ◽  
Violent Conflict ◽  
Corporate Accountability ◽  
Direct Response ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
The Future ◽  
Multi Stakeholder

AbstractGrowing reliance on ‘multi-stakeholder initiatives’ (MSIs) aimed at improving business performance with respect to specific human rights-related challenges has become a significant dimension of the evolving corporate responsibility agenda over recent decades. A number of such initiatives have developed in direct response to calls for greater state and corporate accountability in areas of weak governance and violent conflict. This article examines the evolution of key MSIs in light of the 2011 adoption of the United Nations (UN) Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and addresses challenges facing these initiatives in the future.

The Necessity for a Business and Human Rights Treaty

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-227 ◽  
Author(s):  
David BILCHITZ
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Transnational Corporations ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Legal Instrument ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Council

AbstractIn June 2014, the Human Rights Council passed a resolution establishing an inter-governmental working group to discuss a legally binding instrument relating to transnational corporations and other business enterprises. In this article, I outline four arguments for why such an instrument is desirable. Identifying the purpose of such a treaty is crucial in outlining a vision of what it should seek to achieve and in determining its content. The arguments indicate that a treaty is necessary to provide legal solutions to cure serious lacunae and ambiguities in the current framework of international law which have a serious negative impact upon the rights of individuals affected by corporate activities. The emphasis throughout is upon why a binding legal instrument is important, as opposed to softer forms of regulation such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The four arguments in turn provide the resources to respond to objections raised against the treaty and to reject an alternative, more restrictive proposal for a treaty that only addresses ‘gross’ human rights violations.

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.

Contributory Fault under International Law: A Gateway for Human Rights in ISDS?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Farouk El-Hosseny ◽  
Patrick Devine
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Multinational Enterprises ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Government ◽  
Bear Creek ◽  
Shed Light

Abstract The intersection between foreign investment and human rights is gaining attention, as is evident from an increasing number of investment treaty awards analysing legal issues relating to human rights. In the recent International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) arbitration of Bear Creek v Peru, Philippe Sands QC posited, in a dissenting opinion, that the investor’s contribution to events—ie protests against its allegedly adverse environmental impact and disregard of indigenous rights, namely resulting from its ‘inability to obtain a “social licence”’—which led to the unlawful expropriation of its investment, was ‘significant and material’. He further noted that the investor’s ‘responsibilities are no less than those of the government’ and found that damages should thus be reduced. Last year, the Netherlands adopted a new model bilateral investment treaty (BIT), which allows tribunals to ‘take into account non-compliance by the investor with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises’ when assessing damages. These recent developments shed light on how states and tribunals, as part of their decision-making process, can take into account human rights in practice, and crucially in respect of damages analyses. By first dissecting the concept of contributory fault, then shedding light on the intersection of investment treaty law and human rights, as elucidated in recent jurisprudence, this article questions whether there now exists a gateway for human rights obligations (soft or hard) in the investment treaty arbitration realm through the concept of contributory fault.

scholarly journals Testing for Negative Spillovers: Is Promoting Human Rights Really Part of the “Problem”?

2021 ◽  
Vol 75 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-102
Author(s):  
Anton Strezhnev ◽  
Judith G. Kelley ◽  
Beth A. Simmons
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Instrumental Variable ◽  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
First Order ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
International Human

AbstractThe international community often seeks to promote political reforms in recalcitrant states. Recently, some scholars have argued that, rather than helping, international law and advocacy create new problems because they have negative spillovers that increase rights violations. We review three mechanisms for such spillovers: backlash, trade-offs, and counteraction and concentrate on the last of these. Some researchers assert that governments sometimes “counteract” international human rights pressures by strategically substituting violations in adjacent areas that are either not targeted or are harder to monitor. However, most such research shows only that both outcomes correlate with an intervention—the targeted positively and the spillover negatively. The burden of proof, however, should be as rigorous as those for studies of first-order policy consequences. We show that these correlations by themselves are insufficient to demonstrate counteraction outside of the narrow case where the intervention is assumed to have no direct effect on the spillover, a situation akin to having a valid instrumental variable design. We revisit two prominent findings and show that the evidence for the counteraction claim is weak in both cases. The article contributes methodologically to the study of negative spillovers in general by proposing mediation and sensitivity analysis within an instrumental variables framework for assessing such arguments. It revisits important prior findings that claim negative consequences to human rights law and/or advocacy, and raises critical normative questions regarding how we empirically evaluate hypotheses about causal mechanisms.

Criminogenic Policy Antithetical to Peace Policy: A Case Study of NAFTA as a Violation of International Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 016059762093289
Author(s):  
Daniel Patten
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Negotiation Process ◽  
Study Analysis ◽  
Business Investment ◽  
Written Text ◽  
Case Study Analysis

Successful peace policy that enshrines human rights allows individuals to thrive economically, politically, and socially with minimal conflict. Building from literature on crimes of globalization, genocide, and human rights, the current research investigates the concept of a criminogenic policy that at its core is antithetical to peace policy. Using case study analysis, North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is found to be both criminal and criminogenic in violation of international law for two primary reasons. First, the NAFTA negotiation process was criminal and criminogenic for three interrelated reasons: (1) powerful elites heavily influenced the outcome, (2) it was undemocratic, and (3) the opposition was often repressed. Second, the NAFTA policy itself was criminal and criminogenic for two reasons: (1) NAFTA as a policy ignored all of the critical voices that predicted negative outcomes and (2) the written text of NAFTA is criminal for failing to include human rights protections while offering a litany of rights to protect business investment.

ACCIDENT AND DESIGN: RECOGNISING VICTIMS OF AGGRESSION IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-132
Author(s):  
Shane Darcy
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Future Application ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Civil And Political Rights

AbstractInternational law has not traditionally recognised individuals as victims of the crime of aggression. Recent developments may precipitate a departure from this approach. The activation of the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court over the crime of aggression opens the way for the future application of the Court's regime of victim participation and reparation in the context of prosecutions for this crime. The determination by the United Nations Human Rights Committee in General Comment No. 36 that any deprivation of life resulting from an act of aggression violates Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights serves to recognise a previously overlooked class of victims. This article explores these recent developments, by discussing their background, meaning and implications for international law and the rights of victims.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document