scholarly journals The Necessity for Revisiting Direct Corporate Human Rights Obligations in the Current Business and Human Rights Treaty Process

Author(s):  
Philippa Osim Inyang

The international community has awoken to the reality that transnational corporations (TNCs) do not only control more resources than a good number of states. They wield enormous influence in the corporate world which greatly impacts on local cultures and initiatives. Many of these TNCs, who operate in developing states, engage in activities which frequently result in human rights abuses. Several states rely on the resources extracted by these large corporations as the main stay of their economies. Consequently, they lack the economic capacity and political will to effectively regulate the activities of the TNCs, leaving these entities to perpetrate human rights abuses in the local communities with impunity. Although the Human Rights Council, through the Inter-governmental working group on Business and Human Rights, has begun a treaty process on business and human rights to address these issues, the work of the IGWG, so far, has not adequately responded the root cause of the corporate impunity, which is their unwillingness and inability to hold corporate entities accountable for their harmful activities. Thus, this paper proposes that the issue of direct human rights obligations on corporate entities should be revisited in order to ensure that corporate entities do not escape accountability for human rights harm resulting from their activities.

2018 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 575-606
Author(s):  
Michelle Staggs Kelsall

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.


This book reviews the current position in this field, which has developed over the past 25 years, designed to hold multinationals to account, legally, for human rights abuses in the Global South. The authors are practising lawyers who have litigated and led prominent cases of legal significance in this field. Although the focus is on the Global North, where most of the cases have been brought—United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Australia, France, Netherlands, and Germany—there is also a chapter on South Africa. The cases cited include claims against parent companies for harm caused by subsidiary operations, claims for corporate complicity in violations perpetrated by States, and claims arising in a supply chain context. Whilst other books have included consideration of the legal aspects of many of the cases, the focus here is on the interrelated strategic and practical, as well as legal, considerations on which viability and prospects of success depend. In addition to questions of jurisdiction, applicable law, and theories of liability, obstacles to justice concerning issues such as access to information, collective actions, witness protection, damages and costs, and funding regimes (including a specific chapter on litigation funding), and issues relating to public pressure and settlement, are discussed. Although most of the authors act for victims, there is a substantial chapter providing the perspectives of business. Since this area of litigation has developed concurrently with, and has formed part of, the rapidly mushrooming field of business and human rights, the contextual relevance of the UNGPs is considered.


Author(s):  
Muchlinski Peter T

This chapter evaluates another element of corporate social responsibility (CSR) applicable to multinational enterprises (MNEs): human rights. Historically, human rights have been used by corporations to protect their vital interests against state action, leading to human/civil rights protections for corporations. The chapter focuses on how far MNEs, and other business actors, should be responsible for human rights violations. This has been significantly influenced by the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), endorsed in June of 2011 by the UN Human Rights Council, which implement the UN ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ framework. The UNGPs have created a framework for business and human rights that covers three pillars: the state duty to protect human rights, the corporate responsibility to respect human rights and access to remedy. The chapter then traces the development of concern for business and human rights, and discusses the justifications for holding businesses accountable for human rights violations, the establishment of business and human rights on the agenda of the UN and the principal areas in which business violations of human rights arise.


AJIL Unbound ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 114 ◽  
pp. 179-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tori Loven Kirkebø ◽  
Malcolm Langford

In this essay, we examine empirically whether the revised draft of the business and human rights (BHR) treaty is a normative advance on the existing jungle of global instruments. Since the 1970s, almost one hundred global corporate social responsibility (CSR) standards have been adopted, half of them addressing human rights. See Figure 1 from our global CSR database, below. What is novel about the current treaty-drafting process within the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) is that it aims to develop a comprehensive standard that would hold states legally accountable for regulating business. The question is whether this is possible. Drawing on our work on the “commitment curve,” we begin theoretically and point out why one should hold modest expectations about the process and treat strong text with skepticism as much as celebration. Using an empirical methodology, we then compare the HRC's Revised Draft Legally Binding Instrument (Revised Draft LBI) with existing standards, and find that while the draft contains a healthy dose of incremental pragmatism, its significant advances require a degree of circumspection about its strengths and prospects.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (02) ◽  
pp. 213-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Humberto CANTÚ RIVERA

AbstractAs of October 2018, 21 states have adopted National Action Plans on Business and Human Rights (NAPs), with several more in different phases of development. This is an important political step to raise awareness of the importance of intragovernmental policy coherence and of the need to move forward to prevent human rights abuses linked to business activity. However, despite the global intergovernmental support to such policy strategies, the actual effectiveness of NAPs needs to be called into question: do they represent progress, or are they a mirage to block possible avenues of development? Currently existing NAPs have done little (yet) to ensure more effective protection in key policy areas, including trade and investment, state-owned enterprises, and particularly in relation to legislative developments and access to remedy. This contribution seeks to analyse the merits of developing NAPs, the importance of ensuring they become only the very first step towards a more effective protection of human rights, and to question whether their importance needs to be adjusted to what they really are: policy tools with limited effects and with a politically linked time frame.


Author(s):  
Mārtiņš Birģelis ◽  

The current legal framework does not properly address the impact that transna­tional corporations have on human rights. In 2014, the UN Human Rights Council established an open-ended intergovernmental working group with a mandate to elaborate an international legally binding instrument to regulate the activities of transnational corporations and other business enter­prises. Yet this decision was strongly contested. This article outlines the main arguments for desirability of an international treaty on business and human rights and provides a response to some of the most common objections raised against the development of such legally binding instrument.


Author(s):  
Jernej Letnar Černič

Central and Eastern Europe has been often overseen in the debates on business and humanrights. Countries in the regions share a common history, experience and culture. Human rights andfundamental freedoms were in the past systematically and generally violated. Since democratisation,countries have suffered from a wide range of related human rights abuses. Corporations in theregions have often directly and indirectly interfered with the human rights of employees and thewider communities. Business and human rights has in the past lagged behind global developmentsalso in the light of the lack of capacity and general deficient human rights situation. This articledescribes and discusses contours of the National Action Plans on Business and Human Rights of theCzech Republic, Poland, Lithuania, Georgia, Ukraine and Slovenia by examining their strengths anddeficiencies. It argues that the field of business and human rights in Central and Eastern Europe hasmade a step forward in the last decade since the adoption of the United Nations Guiding Principleson Business and Human Rights. Nonetheless, human rights should be further translated into practiceto effectively protect human dignity of rights-holders.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 55
Author(s):  
Laila Abdul Latif

Mining corporations in Africa stand accused of violating human rights. This article gives a voice to the plight suffered by local African communities in accessing justice to remedy the violation of their human rights as a result of the business activities of mining corporations. It focuses specifically on the right to access justice in order to ask whether the affected communities get a fair and effective share of financial remedies to mitigate against the violation of their rights to health, clean environment and property. It examines two separate and independent avenues through which local communities access justice and asks which of the two, judicial or non-judicial approaches, guarantee these local communities a right to be heard and a recourse to financial remedies.


2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 487-505
Author(s):  
Daria Davitti

AbstractThis Article focuses on the accountability challenges raised by the increased involvement of Private Military and Security Companies (PMSC) in migration control. I argue that migration control activities outsourced to PMSC can be classified as high-risk operations for the purposes of the application of relevant business and human rights standards. This reclassification of migration control activities as high-risk business operations, in turn, has two significant implications in terms of establishing accountability for PMSC’s wrongful conduct. First, it acknowledges that the privatization of migration control, especially within the context of continued containment and deterrence trends, entails a high risk of human rights abuses to which PMSC may contribute, both directly and indirectly. Second, this reclassification enables us to identify heightened obligations vested upon the home state of a PMSC, as well as the heightened responsibility of PMSC themselves. The article also examines what these heightened obligations and responsibilities entail.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document