Angelica Bonfanti, Business and Human Rights in Europe: International Law Challenges (Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press, 2018), 264 pp.

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 171-174
Author(s):  
Caroline KAEB
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Business And Human Rights

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.

Regolazione internazionale e responsabilitŕ globale delle imprese transnazionali

2009 ◽  
pp. 229-258
Author(s):  
Fabrizio Marrella
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Global Financial Crisis ◽  
Holistic Approach ◽  
Transnational Corporations ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
State Control ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
The Global Financial Crisis

- In recent years and before the global financial crisis, international law has struggled to regulate the activity of transnational corporations since the latter have greatly expanded their capacity for action on a global scale. Despite numerous efforts by the International Community to agree on a hard law international legal framework, the soft law process has been the primary arena for the regulation of transnational corporations and human rights. In addition, host state control, home state control and international responsibility of directors and companies itself have so far remained the fundamental avenues through which issues of global corporate responsibility have been assessed. ‘Contractualisation' of human rights has also been viewed as a further avenue to control the human rights impact of corporate activity. The UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises has generated an impressive stock of report capitalizing on issues well known in specialised international economic law literature. He is raising global awareness and institutionalizing new paradigms of understanding the complex relationship between business and human rights: a matter of vital importance for this century. The work of the UN Special Representative constitutes therefore a step forward towards an holistic approach of contemporary international law.

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.

scholarly journals Institutional actors as international law-makers in Business and Human Rights: The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and beyond

Pravni zapisi ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 594-617
Author(s):  
Jernej Letnar-Černič
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Global Supply Chains ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Interdisciplinary Field ◽  
Business Operations ◽  
Guiding Principles ◽  
Institutional Actors

Business and human rights is an interdisciplinary field, which advocates that both state and businesses are duty-holders of human rights obligations. The area of business and human rights aims to regulate and prevent negative impact of business operations at all levels of global supply chains. The approach of international law in this regard has so far been piecemeal. States have been traditionally a principal participant in the international community. Nonetheless, this article aims to test arguments submitted by Jovanović in his 2019 book "The Nature of International Law" that institutional non-state actors are capable of creating international legal rules. Equipped with this knowledge, this article argues that the UN Human Rights Council has through adoption of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights restated human rights obligations of states and indirectly of corporations in international law in order to protect the dignity of rights-holders in local and global environments

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.

In Defence of Direct Obligations for Businesses Under International Human Rights Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrés Felipe LÓPEZ LATORRE
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Human Person ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Legal Obligations ◽  
International Human ◽  
Human Rights Standards

AbstractThis article presents three arguments on why businesses have direct obligations under existing international law. Nevertheless, in the present state of international law, the obligations of businesses are limited and wholly dependent on the state’s further action of implementation and enforcement. To reach this conclusion, the article asserts that businesses have partial legal personality in international law; that legal obligations and the enforcement model must be distinguished as two separate issues; and that human rights are requirements of justice that emanate from the dignity of each human person to any social actor, including businesses and other non-state actors. The article attempts to contribute to the debate about a binding instrument on business and human rights and presents an alternative understanding of international law that can assist domestic tribunals in applying international human rights standards to businesses as they carry out activities in their jurisdictions.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document