scholarly journals Business, Human Rights and the Environment—Using Macro Legal Analysis to Develop a Legal Framework That Coherently Addresses the Root Causes of Corporate Human Rights Violations and Environmental Degradation

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (22) ◽  
pp. 12709
Author(s):  
Stephen J. Turner
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Cumulative Effect ◽  
Legal Reform ◽  
World Trade Organisation ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Corporate Law ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Legal Frameworks

This article applies ‘macro’ legal analysis to the challenge of legal reform related to corporate responsibility for human rights violations and degradation of the environment. It recognises that the approaches from different communities of lawyers to the negative impacts on human rights and the environment caused by companies, sometimes operate in isolation from each other, are not always mutually supportive, can lead to a fragmentation of effort, and may not address the root causes of the problem. In particular, this article analyses the extent to which existing approaches tend to address symptoms of the issues, rather than the root causes themselves. It makes the case that in this regard specific root causes exist within the frameworks of corporate law in all jurisdictions and various aspects of international economic law too. To carry out the study, it employs macro legal analysis, a methodology not previously applied in this field, as a means of developing an understanding of the legal frameworks that, it argues, influence corporate decision making that can affect human rights and the environment. It undertakes an analysis that incorporates relevant corporate law, World Trade Organisation (WTO) law, international investment law, the law relating to multilateral development banks (MDBs), and international insurance law. By using this form of anlaysis it is possible to show how legal frameworks can operate in unison, reinforcing each other providing a cumulative effect that can influence corporate decision makers. Finally, based on the results of the analysis, it suggests a possible strategy of macro-level reforms that could be applied to the re-design of relevant legal frameworks to better facilitate the full protection of human rights and to achieve net zero degradation of the environment. As a result it seeks to demonstrate how this approach can be strategically applied by both human rights and environmental lawyers as a common pathway towards effective legal reform.

Moving towards Complicity as a Criterion of Attribution of Private Conducts: Imputation to States of Corporate Abuses in the US Case Law

2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 989-1007
Author(s):  
DANIELE AMOROSO
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
State Involvement ◽  
The Us ◽  
Terrorist Groups ◽  
Traditional Paradigm ◽  
Corporate Liability ◽  
Private Wrongs

AbstractAccording to the agency paradigm enshrined by the 2001 ILC Articles on State Responsibility, private conducts are attributed to a state when they are carried out on the state's behalf or under its tight control. On closer look, this legal framework proves to be unable to deal with state involvement in human-rights violations perpetrated by powerful non-state actors, such as terrorist groups or transnational corporations. These wrongs, indeed, are often put in place with the fundamental contribution of – but not on behalf of (or under the control of) – a state, with the consequence that, under the traditional paradigm, they could not be attributed to the latter. Against this backdrop, the present paper argues that a new secondary norm has been developing that provides that private wrongs are to be imputed to a state if the latter knowingly facilitated (or otherwise co-operated in) their commission. Although international practice will be duly taken into account, the analysis will be focused mainly on US case law concerning corporate liability for international human-rights violations.

Legal Protection of Children in Non-International Armed Conflicts in Nigeria

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Olaitan Oluwaseyi Olusegun
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Conflict Situations ◽  
Legal Frameworks ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Domestic Law

Abstract Armed conflicts are characterised by violence and human rights violations with various implications on the citizens, economy and development of nations. The impact is however more pronounced with life-long consequences on children, the most vulnerable members of the society. This article examines the impact of non-international armed conflicts on children in Nigeria and identifies the laws for the protection of children against armed conflicts, both in international law and Nigeria’s domestic law. It also addresses the challenges involved in the protection of children in armed conflict situations in Nigeria. The study found that legal efforts to protect children have not been given sufficient attention in Nigeria. This is mostly due to various challenges including the fragmentation of legal framework and the refusal to domesticate relevant treaties. It is thus recommended that these challenges be addressed through the implementation of effective legal frameworks.

Italian Practice in the Implementation of International Targeted Sanctions: Enhanced Protection or Additional Complexities?

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-114
Author(s):  
Elena Carpanelli
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Critical Issues ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
Restrictive Measures ◽  
Domestic Level

The proliferation of UN and EU targeted sanctions and their potential impact on individual rights and private interests require constantly monitoring how Member States implement such restrictive measures within their own domestic legal systems. This article focuses specifically on Italian practice in the implementation of UN and EU-mandated targeted sanctions. In so doing, it first dissects the relevant legal framework currently in place at the domestic level, taking into particular account the main novelties brought about by legislative decree (D. Lgs.) No. 90/2017. It then underscores some critical issues and shortcomings potentially stemming from its practical application. Finally, this article purports to examine the recent institution of a “domestic sanctions regime” and questions whether it might, in practice, end up rising additional grounds of concern, other then those already emerging from the implementation of UN and EU-mandated targeted sanctions, especially in terms of lack of adequate procedural guarantees for alleged human rights violations.

Reasons for EU double standards: comparative overview of the cases of the Erased and the Non-citizens

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 302-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanja Vrbek
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Violent Conflict ◽  
Local Context ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Legal Provision ◽  
The Eu

On the basis of a comparative analysis of the case studies of the Slovenian Erased and the Latvian Non-citizens, the paper endeavors to identify the reasons for the EU involvement in the latter, but not the former case. These two situations are recognized as similar enough to be compared, and endure the counter-argumentation that the different EU approach is conditioned by the specifics of the local context, not by double standards. Hence, the paper comes to a conclusion that the involvement in Latvia has been conditioned by the fear of the potentially violent conflict, the existence of a proactive kin state, and a minority, significant in number, as well as the explicitly discriminatory legal framework that was in collision with the EU economic acquis. Thus, it has been inferred that double standards occur due to the lack of EU and international interest in these situations of human rights violations, where the powerful kin state and the minority, significant in number, are absent, do not have a potential to develop into a violent conflict, do not derive from explicitly discriminatory legal provision, and do not challenge the fundamental market freedoms of the EU.

scholarly journals Conscientious Objection to Abortion: A Comparative International Legal Framework

2020 ◽  
pp. 71-96
Author(s):  
Екатерина Вячеславовна Киселева ◽  
Ольга Сергеевна Кажаева
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Basic Research ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Termination Of Pregnancy ◽  
Mutual Position ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Doctor Who ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
State Cooperation

В настоящем исследовании дается сравнительно-правовой анализ подхода к пониманию содержания и взаимного положения некоторых прав человека, связанных с искусственным прерыванием беременности, понимания, отраженного на универсальном уровне международно- правового сотрудничества государств в актах договорных органов защиты прав человека. Если по существу факт искусственного прерывания беременности поднимает правозащитные вопросы в отношении трёх субъектов (женщины, вынашивающей ребёнка, нерожденного ребёнка и врача, осуществляющего аборт или отказывающегося от проведения такового), то со стороны защиты прав человека речь ведётся почти исключительно о женщине, чья жизнь и материалистически понимаемые интересы приоритизируются над всеми остальными правозащитными аспектами. В настоящей работе сравнению подвергаются именно права различных субъектов, оказывающихся связанными через аборт, объем и защищенность этих прав международным правом. В качестве международно-правовой основы для сравнения взят Международный билль о правах человека. Тезисы авторов иллюстрируются двумя делами в отношении врачей, отказавшихся проводить процедуру аборта исходя из христианских убеждений в Польше и Аргентине, соответственно. Статья подготовлена при финансовой поддержке РФФИ в рамках научного проекта № 18-011- 00292. This study provides a comparative legal analysis of the understanding of the content and mutual position of some human rights associated with artificial termination of pregnancy, the understanding reflected at the universal level of international legal inter-state cooperation in the acts of human rights treaty bodies. While, in essence, the fact of artificial termination of pregnancy raises human rights questions in relation to three subjects (a woman carrying a child, an unborn child and a doctor who performs an abortion or refuses to perform it), from the point of human rights protection, it is almost exclusively about a woman, whose life and materialistically understood interests are prioritized over all other human rights aspects. In this work, it is the rights of various subjects who find themselves bound through abortion, the scope and protection of these rights by international law, limited to the International Bill of Human Rights as an international legal basis for comparison are subjected to comparison. The authors illustrate their theses with two cases against the doctors who refused to carry out an abortion procedure for reasons of conscience in accordance with their Christian beliefs in Poland and Argentina, correspondingly. The article was prepared with the financial support of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research within the framework of research project № 18-011-00292.

scholarly journals Obtaining Damages for Corporate Human Rights Violations in Investment Arbitration Through a Procedural Lens

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasmin S
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
The Past ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Violent Acts ◽  
Public Scrutiny ◽  
Investment Law

Over the past decades, transnational corporations have come under increasing public scrutiny for their involvement in human rights abuses, particularly in developing countries. One may think of violent acts against local communities, slave labor, and grand scale environmental pollution. International investment law protects and safeguards the rights of foreign investors but falls short of holding them accountable to societies where they operate. Recently, a few arbitral tribunals have grappled with the question of whether corporations can be held accountable for illegalities that constitute human rights violations inflicted upon the host state or its people. This article discusses the arbitral treatment of corporate human rights violations by investment tribunals in three treaty-based cases: Copper Mesa v. Ecuador, Burlington v. Ecuador and Urbaser v. Argentina and draws on recent scholarly work on causation in investor-state arbitration to evaluate their approaches.

The Legal Framework for the Protection of Foreign Direct Investment in Ethiopia

2019 ◽  
pp. 741-762
Author(s):  
Won L. Kidane
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Investment ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Enforcement Mechanisms ◽  
Legal Frameworks

Historically, Ethiopia’s near-perpetual independent existence has uniquely permitted latitude to shape policy and legal frameworks for the admission, protection, and management of foreign direct investment (FDI). The contemporary legal framework is a product of many external influences. International investment law principles have been part of Ethiopia’s investment law since 1903, when Ethiopia signed the Treaty of Amity and Commerce with the United States. This treaty contained some modern notions of international. Following military rule (1974–91), during which all domestic and international principles of fairness and equity were abrogated, Ethiopia attempted to build a new legal framework for the ordering of FDI. The existing framework is composed of evolving domestic legislation and an increasing number of international bilateral and regional investment treaties. This corpus of law is also equipped with institutional enforcement mechanisms. This chapter provides an overview and critique of existing rules and institutions.

Human and Group Rights Issues in Ethiopia: A Reply to Kjetil Tronvoll

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Getachew Assefa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Ethnic Identity ◽  
Racial Discrimination ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Federal System ◽  
Group Rights ◽  
Current Article ◽  
Rights Issues

AbstractIn an article published in the International Journal on Minority and Group Rights ('Human Rights Violations in Ethiopia: When Ethnic Identity is a Political Stigma', 15(1) (2008) 49–79), Kjetil Tronvoll from Oslo University argued that in federal Ethiopia, the violations of human rights are in some ways ethnically motivated. Tronvoll's arguments are based on the concluding observations of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) on Ethiopia. The objective of my Reply is to show that both CERD and Tronvoll have made unsubstantiated generalisations in trying to gauge any violation of human rights in Ethiopia as an ethnically-motivated occurrence. With this purpose in view, the current article briefly discusses the constitutional legal framework of the Ethiopian federal system, and critically examines the positions of CERD and Dr. Tronvoll.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document