Business and Human Rights – Recent Trends in Germany

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-72
Author(s):  
Marlen Vesper-Gräske

There is an undeniable, growing trend in the current Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) discussions: the responsibility of corporations to abide by and to protect human rights. This discussion includes potential criminal liability for corporations as well as their management for human rights violations. This article will survey the legal status quo of corporate responsibility in the context of human rights protection in Germany. It will then outline two drafts of legislation: a first draft leaked to the press in February 2019 that did not result in further legislative action, and a second draft recently leaked to the public that included key points for such a legislation to become the new German Human Rights Supply Chain Due Diligence Law.

Author(s):  
Mary E Footer

Since the turn of the millennium, the European Union (EU) has sought to advance its policies on business and human rights with the aim of achieving specific outcomes on human rights protection, core labour standards, and a better alignment of European and global approaches to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). At the heart of this endeavour lies the European Commission’s renewed strategy for CSR in its 2011 Communication. This chapter critically analyses the impact of the EU’s re-calibration of its CSR policy to allow for the fuller engagement of European business with human rights on the internal and external plane. The EU has sought to develop a ‘smart mix’ of voluntary policy measures and complementary regulatory initiatives to achieve its aims. Consequently, it has made considerable progress towards embedding business and human rights in European law and policy. However, it continues to face challenges due to its lack of competence along the whole spectrum of business-related human rights, and the transversal character of EU policy, which elicits a multidimensional response to implementation, involving a plethora of actors from government, business, and civil society.


Author(s):  
Alvise Favotto ◽  
Kelly Kollman

AbstractThe adoption of the Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights by the United Nations (UNGPs) in 2011 created a new governance instrument aimed at improving the promotion of human rights by business enterprises. While reaffirming states duties to uphold human rights in law, the UNGPs called on firms to promote the realization of human rights within global markets. The UNGPs thus have sought to embed human rights more firmly within the field of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and to use CSR practices to improve corporate human rights accountability. In this paper, we explore how this incorporation of human rights into the CSR field has affected the business practices and public commitments British firms have made to promote human rights. We analyse the CSR reports published by the 50 largest British firms over a 20-year period starting in the late 1990s and interview senior CSR managers of these firms. We find that these firms have expanded how they articulate their responsibility for human rights over time. These commitments however remain largely focused on improving management practices such as due diligence and remediation procedures. Firms are often both vague and selective about which substantive human rights they engage with in light of their concerns about their market competitiveness and broader legitimacy. These outcomes suggest that, while firms cannot completely resist the normative pressures exerted by the CSR field, they retain significant resources and agency in translating such pressure into concrete practices.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (14) ◽  
pp. 7886
Author(s):  
Pavel Kotlán ◽  
Alena Kozlová ◽  
Zuzana Machová

Establishing criminal liability for environmental offences remains daunting, particularly with regard to the ‘no plaintiff—no judge’ element as a result of which the public seems to be ultimately deprived of the possibility to participate in criminal environmental proceedings. While there is arguably a lack of specific instruments at the European Union (EU) level which would prescribe such legal obligation on the part of the State, there has been a shift in understanding the role of the public and its participation in criminal liability cases, namely under the auspices of the so-called effective investigation and the concept of rights of victims in general. Using the example of the Czech Republic as a point of reference, this article aims to assess the relevant legal developments at both EU and Czech levels to illustrate why the non-governmental organizations (NGOs), essentially acting as public agents, should be granted an active role in environmental criminal proceedings. After examining the applicable legal framework and case law development, the article concludes that effective investigation indeed stands as a valid legal basis for human rights protection which incorporates an entitlement to public participation. Despite that, this pro-active shift is far from being applied in practice, implying that the legislation remains silent where it should be the loudest, and causing unsustainable behaviour of companies.


2017 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Radha Ivory ◽  
Anna John

Allegations of extraterritorial corporate misconduct illustrate the global dimensions of Australia’s challenge to implement the United Nations (‘UN’) Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (‘Guiding Principles’).In the mid-1990s, companies in the BHP Billiton group faced claims that they had polluted a river in Papua New Guinea, thereby causing damage to the customary lands and livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples.Less than a decade later, the Australian Federal Police commenced a criminal investigation against an Australian-Canadian joint venture for alleged support of government violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo.


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.


Author(s):  
Itziar Gandarias Goikoetxea ◽  
Oihane Urrutikoetxea Lekanda ◽  
Miguel Ángel Navarro Lashayas

Trafficking for sexual exploitation is a complex, highly changeable phenomenon that needs to be tackled on a multi-faceted, inter-disciplinary basis by different social actors including social organisations, police forces and public institutions, because it entails not just gender violence but also a web of other serious breaches of human rights. This briefing on “Key points for supporting and accompanying women victims and survivors of human trafficking for sexual exploitation” seeks to provide guidelines for specialists at social organisations and for technical staff at public administrations and institutions who work to prevent, deal with and care for victims. It begins by giving an outline of the characteristics of women classed as victims of trafficking dealt with in the Historical Territory of Bizkaia between 2015 and 2017. It goes on to describe the gaps and needs detected among specialists at social organisations. Finally, it provides recommendations that highlight the importance of making the needs of women the core concern, avoiding re-victimisation and enhancing coordination and networking between social organisations and the public institutions involved.


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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document