Feeling the Heat of Human Rights Branding: Bringing Transnational Corporations Within the International Human Rights Fence

A review of: Human Rights Standards and the Responsibility of Transnational Corporations edited by Michael K. Addo. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1999. 384pp

re-trial detention and human rights in the Commonwealth: Any lessons from civil law systems?

There are a significant percentage of people in prison or police detention across the Commonwealthwho have not been convicted of an offence. This raises many human rights issues, especially in regard topre-trial procedures. The article analyses the international legal framework and the Commonwealth legalprinciples relevant to these issues. Within the course of this examination, consideration is given to thesituation in those Commonwealth States which have a civil law criminal justice system, in order to see if theycan offer guidance for ways to improve the protection of human rights in pre-trial detention

Defying gravity: defining the international rule of law

This article aims to offer a definition of the international rule of law. It does this through clarifying the core objectives of a rule of law and examining whether the international system could include them. It demonstrates that there can be a definition of the international rule of law that can be applied to the international system. This definition of the international rule of law is not dependent on a simplistic application of a national rule of law, as it takes into account the significant differences between national and international legal systems. It seeks to show that the international rule of law is relative, rather than absolute, in its application, is not tied to the operation of the substance of international law itself, and it can apply to states, international organizations and non-state actors. It goes further to show that the international rule of law does exist and can be applied internationally, even if it is not yet fully actualized

Directors duties and human rights impacts: a comparative approach

This article provides a comparative perspective on the issue of directors’ liability for actions by a company which causes or contributes to human rights impacts. International, European and national regulatory developments in business and human rights are influencing company law. This article will consider directors’ duties in relation to the meaning of ‘the best interests of a company’ and how the expectations on directors from various stakeholders are changing due to legislation, court decisions and practice. Based on this, there is an analysis of the link between directors’ duties and human rights due diligence, and about access to remedy for the victims of actions arising from the acts or omissions of directors, including any decisions made by directors without proper regard for the human rights of those affected by the company’s activities. It considers what might be the personal liabilities of directors in this area and possible ways forward, including in relation to probable EU regulation on this area

The concept of ‘due diligence’ in the UN guiding principles on business and human rights

Due diligence is at the heart of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which establish the main parameters internationally for considering corporate responsibility for human rights violations. However, the Guiding Principles invoke two different concepts of due diligence: the first is a process to manage business risks and the second is the standard of conduct required to discharge an obligation. In this article, we show that the Guiding Principles invoke these two concepts without explaining how they relate to each other. This confusion creates uncertainty about the extent of businesses’ responsibility to respect human rights and uncertainty about how that responsibility relates to businesses’ correlative responsibility to provide a remedy when they infringe human rights. On this basis, we propose and justify an interpretation of the Guiding Principles that clarifies the relationship between the two concepts of due diligence

The Theorized Relationship between Organizational (Non)Compliance with the United Nations Guiding Principles on Human Rights and Desired Employee Workplace Outcomes

Despite the presence of guiding legislation such as the United Nations Guiding Principles, respect for human rights is subject to the conscience of organizational actors. Given that some transnational corporations are more powerful than nation states, they play an important role in the economies in which they operate, often with far-reaching impact on the labor conditions and human rights protections within these countries. In the current global context, respect for human rights may be undermined when organizational decision-makers are tempted to ignore unethical practices due to considerations such as competition and short-term financial incentives. We propose that the higher standards to which younger generations increasingly hold corporations provide a compelling and “business case” incentive for the protection of human rights of external stakeholders by organizational decision-makers. Drawing on related research on corporate social responsibility and on projections regarding demographical changes in the workplace worldwide, we make the case for a bottom-line advantage to respecting human rights in attracting and retaining top talent in work organizations. We conclude by highlighting the theoretical and practical implications of our theorizing

Human rights due diligence in law and practice: good practices and challenges for business enterprises

AbstractThis article considers the practices of companies worldwide in attempting to implement human rights due diligence (HRDD) as envisaged by the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Based on empirical research conducted through surveys and interviews, it analyses corporate practices in this area. It examines the responses of companies with reference to the core elements of implementing HRDD: identifying actual or potential human rights impacts; taking action to address these impacts; and tracking or monitoring the effectiveness of actions. In addition, the article places these practices in the context of the legal developments in the field of HRDD. The research shows the difference that dedicated HRDD – in comparison with non-human rights specific processes – can make in terms of identifying adverse human rights impacts of both the company as well as of those which are part of its business relationships.</jats:p