Abstract

On 20 September 2011, European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgment by which it declared Russian Federation responsible for a violation of YUKOS corporation's rights to a fair trial and the peaceful enjoyment of property, guaranteed by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 1 Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. The judgment is one of many judgments delivered by the Court in which it ruled that corporations were entitled to protection under the Convention. In contrast, despite the fact that documentary reports on human rights violations committed by transnational corporations first appeared even back in the 1970s, up to nowadays, a legally binding international instrument that would regulate legal accountability of transnational corporation for human rights violations has not been adopted. With the rare exceptions, neither national constitutions provide for a possibility to hold non-state actors, including transnational corporations, to account for constitutional rights violations. In the meantime, boosted by economic globalization, supported by World Trade Organization, International Monetary Fund and other international organizations, and accompanied by the protection stemming from bilateral international investment agreements and regional free-trade agreements, transnational corporations have acquired a quasi-sovereign power which made them capable to dominate in international relations and global economy together with the states. At the same time, by successfully using legal gaps, they have been avoided accountability for human rights abuses not only in developing countries but also in all industrialized countries which traditionally rest on the rule of law. The existing mechanisms, which envisage either accountability of states for human rights abuses committed by transnational corporations, or encourage transnational corporations to respect human rights but do not have legally binding character (Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, endorsed by UN Human Rights Council), as well as corporative codes of conducts, all prove to be ineffective for holding transnational corporations accountable for human rights violations. In order to make human rights protection efficient, one has to accept not only that different obligations correspond to individual rights but also different bearers of duties. Having in mind that a right to an effective remedy is a fundamental human right, the possibility for an individual to bring to justice transnational corporations for human rights violations should be straightforwardly introduced both on constitutional and international law level.

Highlights

  • Despite the fact that documentary reports on human rights violations committed by transnational corporations first appeared even back in the 1970s, up to nowadays, a legally binding international instrument that would regulate legal accountability of transnational corporation for human rights violations has not been adopted

  • Neither national constitutions provide for a possibility to hold nonstate actors, including transnational corporations, to account for constitutional rights violations

  • World Trade Organization, International Monetary Fund and other international organizations, and accompanied by the protection stemming from bilateral international investment agreements and regional free-trade agreements, transnational corporations have acquired a quasi-sovereign power which made them capable to dominate in international relations and global economy together with the states

Read more

Summary

KORPORACIJA ZBOG KRŠENJA LJUDSKIH PRAVA

Apstrakt: Iako su se dokumentovani izveštaji o povredama ljudskih prava od strane transnacionalnih korporacija pojavili još sedamdesetih godina prošlog veka, ni ustavni nacionalni sistemi R., 2001, Corporations and Human Rights: A Theory of Legal Responsibility, The Yale Law Journal, 111, p. Osim u SAD, korporacije imaju status titulara nekih osnovnih prava u Australiji, čiji je Vrhovni sud stao u odbranu njihove slobode političkog govora za vreme izbora, kao i u Kanadi, čija Povelja o pravima i slobodama pruža zaštitu i korporacijama.. Muijsenbergh, W., Rezai, S., 2012, Corporations and the European Convention on Human Rights, Pacific McGeorge Global Business & Development Law. Član 1. Dok s jedne strane transnacionalne korporacije uživaju status titulara nekih ustavnih prava i prava garantovanih međunarodnim pravom po istim osnovama kao i pojedinci, s druge strane, zbog kršenja ljudskih prava one ne snose direktnu pravnu odgovornost ni po principima bilo ustavnog bilo međunarodnog prava, iako se kao njihovi kršioci javljaju u istoj meri kao i države. Nedostaci postoje ih mehanizama korporativne odgovornosti za povrede ljudskih prava

Kakav je efekat Rukovodećih načela o biznisu u ljudskim pravima?
KORPORATIVNE SAMOREGULACIJE
POSREDNE ODGOVORNOSTI
Sudska praksa
SUMMARY
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call