Implementing the New UN Corporate Human Rights Framework: Implications for Corporate Law, Governance, and Regulation

2012 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Muchlinski
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Corporate Law ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Corporate Managers ◽  
Rights Issues ◽  
Oriented Approach ◽  
Human Rights Due Diligence

ABSTRACT:The UN Framework on Human Rights and Business comprises the State’s duty to protect human rights, the corporate responsibility to respect human rights, and the duty to remedy abuses. This paper focuses on the corporate responsibility to respect. It considers how to overcome obstacles, arising out of national and international law, to the development of a legally binding corporate duty to respect human rights. It is argued that the notion of human rights due diligence will lead to the creation of binding legal duties and that principles of corporate and tort law can be adapted to this end. Furthermore, recent legal developments accept an “enlightened shareholder value” approach allowing corporate managers to consider human rights issues when making decisions. The responsibility to respect involves adaptation of shareholder based corporate governance towards a more stakeholder oriented approach and could lead to the development of a new, stakeholder based, corporate model.

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.

Establishing a Corporate Responsibility Ombudsman: Enhancing remedy through state-based non-judicial mechanisms?

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-122
Author(s):  
Juho Saloranta
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
Export Credit ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Credit Financing ◽  
Human Rights Due Diligence

This article assesses the efficiency of non-judicial grievance mechanisms in providing victims of corporate human rights violations with improved access to remedy. As no such mechanism is currently available, this article formulates a proposal for a new mechanism in the form of a corporate responsibility ombudsman, which would offer a great deal of flexibility as well as being an inexpensive, expeditious and informal manner of dealing with such issues. The article argues in favour of utilizing states’ regulatory arsenal to improve victims’ access to remedy extraterritorially. Based on recent international developments, I elaborate approaches to human rights due diligence regulation and export credit financing by means of two corporate responsibility ombudsman proposals. In relation to these proposals, I divide the effectiveness criteria of Principle 31 of the United Nations Guiding Principles into three main categories: empowerment, investigation and enforcement. Since obtaining sufficient evidence is of paramount to those seeking remedies for violations of corporate responsibility, states should bestow quasi-judicial powers on corporate responsibility ombudsmen to achieve efficiency, which could also create legitimacy. This article provides decision-makers and scholars with insights into how access to remedy could be synchronized with the momentum of human rights due diligence legislation in the European Union and beyond.

Due Diligence, the UN, and Peacekeeping

2020 ◽  
pp. 217-233
Author(s):  
Nigel D. White
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
Meaning And Purpose ◽  
Human Rights Due Diligence

This chapter focuses on the application, acceptance, and implementation of human rights due diligence obligations in UN peacekeeping operations. It points to growing, but uneven, evidence of the development of standards and measures by the UN that would fit the meaning and purpose of due diligence, although there are very few instances of due diligence being used as a term within the UN. The chapter argues that due diligence obligations are applicable either through customary human rights law, or the internal law of the UN, or both due to the fact that the UN’s principles of peacekeeping are themselves based on general principles of international law. The chapter stresses that the UN should have due diligence obligations especially as there is a gap between the commissioning of peacekeeping operations by the UN and the day-to-day control of peacekeepers by the UN.

The corporate responsibility to respect human rights: a status review

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 542-567 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Methven O'Brien ◽  
Sumithra Dhanarajan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Corporate Accountability ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Civil Society Organisations ◽  
Stage Of Development ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Human Rights Due Diligence

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to discuss a wide range of significant developments that have emerged in the wake of the UNs endorsement of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (GPs) in June 2011. In particular, the paper offers a preliminary assessment of how the GPs’ corporate responsibility to respect human rights has been interpreted and to what extent it has been operationalised through government action, business behaviour and the praxis of other social actors. Design/methodology/approach – The paper provides a comprehensive assessment of a number of key developments related to Pillar 2 of the GPs – concerned with the corporate responsibility to respect human rights. More specifically, the paper considers a range of elements relating to corporate human rights due diligence, including: establishing a corporate human rights policy; the undertaking of human rights impact assessment; integrating findings of impact assessment, and; corporate human rights reporting. Findings – Based on the assessment of recent developments and initiatives, the paper suggests that the corporate responsibility to respect human rights, as expressed in Pillar 2 of the GPs, embodies the culmination of significant progress in the sphere of corporate accountability. In doing so, the paper documents a plethora of innovations in regulation and praxis, led by actors in government and the corporate sector, civil society organisations, labour unions and others, in the areas of human rights due diligence, impact assessment and reporting. Yet overall, change is slow and partial and the results achieved are still unsatisfactory. Severe business-related human rights abuses remain endemic in many industry sectors and in many countries. Research limitations/implications – The implementation of the GPs is at a key stage of development, with a multitude of initiatives and actors attempting to develop and influence new forms of corporate governance. This paper provides an overview and assessment of these key developments. Originality/value – This paper provides an important assessment and synthesis of key developments related to corporate responsibility for human rights.

scholarly journals Business, Human Rights and Climate Due Diligence: Understanding the Responsibility of Banks

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (15) ◽  
pp. 8391
Author(s):  
Chiara Macchi ◽  
Nadia Bernaz
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Climate Change Impacts ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Form Part ◽  
Normative Standard ◽  
Human Rights Due Diligence

Under the 2011 UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), banks, like all businesses, have a responsibility to respect human rights and to carry out human rights due diligence. Although climate due diligence is not explicitly included in the UNGPs, tackling an enterprise’s direct and indirect climate change impacts is arguably a dimension of the corporate responsibility to respect human rights and should form part of the human rights due diligence process. At present, it is unclear how such responsibility applies to banks, whose contribution to climate change is mostly indirect. This article addresses the research question: how should the law be interpreted to form a coherent climate due diligence standard for banks? To address it, the article first maps out the climate responsibility of banks under international soft law standards and assesses privately developed guidance. It then elucidates the emerging concept of climate due diligence, reading climate change responsibilities into the now well-established corporate responsibility to respect human rights as authoritatively elaborated in the UNGPs. Finally, it explains how such normative standard applies to banks and unpacks the key elements that a bank’s climate due diligence process should include.

scholarly journals Oxfam GB Statement on Modern Slavery for the financial year 2019/20

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Brill ◽  
Beck Wallace
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supply Chains ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Initial Response ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Public Statement ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Human Rights Due Diligence

The UK Modern Slavery Act 2015 requires organizations with a turnover of over £36m to make a public statement on the steps they are taking to identify and prevent modern slavery in their operations and supply chains. Oxfam GB advocated for this legislation to be enacted. In this, our fifth statement, we share our progress against the three-year objectives set last year, which focus on corporate responsibility governance, human rights due diligence and inclusion of our country programmes. Due to the particularly devastating impacts of the coronavirus pandemic, we have added a section to highlight our initial response in March 2020, which fell under this reporting period.

scholarly journals Neglecting the Proactive Aspect of Human Rights Due Diligence? A Critical Appraisal of the EU’s Non-Financial Reporting Directive as a Pillar One Avenue for Promoting Pillar Two Action

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karin BUHMANN
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Communication Process ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Governmental Regulation ◽  
Regulatory Strategies ◽  
Ex Post ◽  
Human Rights Due Diligence

AbstractFirms’ human rights due diligence (HRDD) and communication on their human rights impacts are not only elements in the Corporate Responsibility to Respect human rights (Pillar Two), but also to be promoted by States as part of their State Duty to Protect (Pillar One) through regulatory strategies aiming at shaping business conduct. Analysing the EU’s 2014 Non-Financial Reporting Directive as an example of governmental regulation for promoting responsible business conduct, the article discusses conditions for HRDD and reporting as a communication process to stimulate organizational change in accordance with the UN Guiding Principles to avoid harm, including through affected-stakeholder engagement. Applying socio-legal regulatory theory along with organizational and accounting literature, the article finds that the Directive’s predominant focus on ex-post measures appears to be a neglected opportunity to induce ex-ante organizational learning and changed business conduct to prevent adverse human rights impact. It offers recommendations for regulators and stakeholders for stronger regulation.

scholarly journals POLYCENTRICITY AND POLYPHONY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: INTERPRETING THE CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY TO RESPECT HUMAN RIGHTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 133-164
Author(s):  
Enrico Partiti
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Polycentric Governance ◽  
Additional Layer ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Management Processes ◽  
Interpretive Authority

AbstractComplex multi-actors and multi-level governance structures have emerged in areas that were traditionally exclusively the preserve of the State and treaty-making. The adoption of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGP) affirmed a corporate responsibility to respect human rights to be implemented through human rights due diligence (HRDD), ie via management processes. The open-ended character of the UNGP generated the emergence of other soft instruments offering guidance to corporations in structuring HRDD. This contribution conceptualises the UNGP from the perspective of regulation as a principles-based exercise in polycentric governance reliant on regulatory intermediaries for interpretation. It then assesses the role of various sui generis normative instruments in providing interpretation to the UNGP and, how the presence of an additional layer of interpretative material contributes to the institutionalisation of responsible corporate conduct. The analysis of instruments drafted by international, non-governmental and business organisations reveals both a decentralising tension between different intermediaries due to disagreements and divergence concerning the precise extent of corporate human rights responsibilities, as well as attempts to centralise the interpretation of the UNGP. The article concludes by recommending some caution towards the employment of polycentric governance regimes and their lack of centralised interpretive authority in this domain of international law and suggests possible ways to formally establish centralised interpretation.

Corporate Liability Design for Human Rights Abuses: Individual and Entity Liability for Due Diligence

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nick Friedman
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Global Supply Chains ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
Corporate Liability ◽  
Human Rights Due Diligence ◽  
Individual Human

Abstract In this article, I critically review the economic theory of corporate liability design, focusing on the allocation of liability between a corporation and its individual human agents. I apply this theory to transnational commercial contexts where human rights abuses occur and assess the likely efficacy of some putative liability regimes, including regimes requiring corporations to undertake human rights due diligence throughout their global supply chains. I advance a set of general considerations justifying the efficacy of due diligence in relation to alternative liability regimes. I argue, however, that due diligence regimes will likely under-deter severe human rights abuses unless they are supported by substantial entity-level sanctions and, in at least some cases, by supplementary liability for individual executives. The analysis has significant policy implications for current national and international efforts to enforce human rights norms against corporations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document