Business-related Human Rights Research Articles

The corporate responsibility to respect human rights: a status review

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.

Guaranteeing Access to Remedies for Business-Related Human Rights Abuses: Role of NHRIs

This paper considers the contribution to remediation of business-related human rights abuses of National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs). Section 2 considers definitions of “remedy” under human rights law, and under the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), and how NHRIs can contribute to remedy so defined. Section 3 explores how far NHRIs have contributed to remediating business-related human rights abuses in practice, both through the exercise of formal legal powers, and through third-party mobilisation and agenda setting, drawing on cross-regional examples. Section 4 concludes. An Annex briefly reviews how NHRIs’ mandate and scope to provide remedy for human rights and business issues has been interpreted via the ICC, the UNGPs and other international and regional human rights bodies.

The State Duty to Protect Against Business-Related Human Rights Abuses. Unpacking Pillar 1 and 3 of the UN Guiding Principles on Human Rights and Business

The purpose of this working paper is to explore and unpack the human rights duties of the state when dealing with business enterprises activities as recalled and detailed in the United Nations’ Guiding Principles on Business and Human rights. The working paper considers state duties in the following three parts: overall issues such as the state’s approach to its duty to protect, state regulatory and policy functions and the question of extraterritoriality (part 1); specific issues covered by the UNGPs such state businesses, privatisation and public procurement, conflict-affected areas and international economic agreements concluded by states (part 2); and finally state duties pertaining to access to remedy (part 3). Hence this working paper covers all the guiding principles under the UNGPs Pillar 1 as well as the relevant state principles under Pillar 3.

Human Rights in the Void? Due Diligence in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

The ‘Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights’ (Principles) that provide guidance for the implementation of the United Nations’ ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ framework (Framework) will probably succeed in making human rights matters more customary in corporate management procedures. They are likely to contribute to higher levels of accountability and awareness within corporations in respect of the negative impact of business activities on human rights. However, we identify tensions between the idea that the respect of human rights is a perfect moral duty for corporations and the Principle’s ‘human rights due diligence’ requirement. We argue that the effectiveness of the ‘human rights due diligence’ is in many respects dependent upon the moral commitment of corporations. The Principles leave room for an instrumental or strategic implementation of due diligence, which in some cases could result in a depreciation of the fundamental norms they seek to promote. We reveal some limits of pragmatic approaches to coping with business-related human rights abuses. As these limits become more apparent, not only does the case for further progress in international and extraterritorial human rights law become more compelling, but so too does the argument for a more forceful discussion on the moral foundations of human rights duties for corporations.

The Road to Song Mao: Transnational Litigation from South-East Asia

The Supreme Court’s decision in Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. (“Kiobel”) has been extensively critiqued through the lens of United States (“US”) law, policy and jurisprudence. The lament that Kiobel has “destroy(ed) an entire juridical edifice for redressing gross violations of human rights” in US courts, however, should not eclipse the fact that redress can, and at times should, be secured elsewhere. In my view, Kiobel rightly adjusts the aperture of transnational corporate accountability away from the US – hitherto the default venue – and towards regional and foreign jurisdictions where violations occur or where accomplices reside. This article examines a transnational human rights litigation (“THRL”) case regarding land evictions in Cambodia that has been accepted for adjudication by the United Kingdom (“UK”) High Court. Song Mao v Tate & Lyle Sugar Industries (“Song Mao”), I argue, reinforces and refines three crucial lessons that can be gleaned from Kiobel. First, domestic and regional processes should be the first port of call when seeking redress for business-related human rights abuse. Second, once such processes are exhausted, recourse can be sought through THRL against transnational corporations and before foreign courts that have a nexus to the claim. Third, THRL should be premised on an appropriate cause of action, however pedestrian it may seem. Garden variety tort claims may be more effective at a liminal stage than torts rooted in jus cogens norms as foreign courts may find the latter to be incompatible with comity, especially without statutes akin to the Alien Tort Claims Act (“ATS”).

The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and conflict-affected areas: state obligations and business responsibilities

AbstractThe UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights provide authoritative guidance for states and businesses on how to prevent and address business-related human rights harms, including in conflict-affected areas. States need to explore a more innovative range of policy and regulatory options in such situations, whether they are engaging with cooperating companies or dealing with uncooperative ones. Companies need to be able to know and show that they can operate with integrity – and avoid being involved in gross abuses of human rights – and that their risk assessment, mitigation, and remediation processes take full account of the potential risks to affected stakeholders, not just risks to the business.

Beyond Ruggie’s Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Charting an Embracive Approach to Corporate Human Rights Compliance

To what extent should or must a corporation contemplate international human rights law? Following a brief discussion of the increasing influence of transnational corporations and global business transactions, as well as the growth of the international human rights system, this Article uses the 2011 United Nations’ Guiding Principles on the effective prevention of, and remedy for, business-related human rights harm as a jumping-off point for addressing the most recent developments related to identifying and regulating business-related human rights practices. After identifying an emerging divide between endorsement and criticism of the Guiding Principles, the Article concludes with a forward-looking view, arguing that although the Guiding Principles may represent a good starting point, corporations genuinely concerned with ensuring the effective minimization or elimination of exposure to potentially embarrassing and costly human rights liabilities should be prepared to apply a more rigorous approach.