From ‘Due Diligence’ to ‘Adequate Redress’. Towards Compulsory Human Rights and Environmental Insurance for Companies?

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW
Stephen J. Turner, Claire Bright
{"title":"From ‘Due Diligence’ to ‘Adequate Redress’. Towards Compulsory Human Rights and Environmental Insurance for Companies?","authors":"Stephen J. Turner, Claire Bright","doi":"10.1163/18719732-12341487","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article considers the case for compulsory corporate human rights and environmental insurance. It approaches it within the context of the need for more effective, efficient and just systems of redress for the victims of human rights and environmental harm that is caused by companies where they have operations or supply chains in single or multiple jurisdictions. Developments within the field of corporate responsibility for human rights and environmental issues have led to a variety of different initiatives that range from the UN ‘protect, respect, and remedy’ framework and the associated human rights due diligence (<span style=\"font-variant: small-caps;\">HRDD</span>) framework, to specific legal developments in certain jurisdictions and other schemes developed by international organisations, as well as by civil-society and businesses themselves. From the perspective of corporate law, these changes have taken place within a legal framework that has certain features that have hindered the availability of remedies for victims of associated human rights and environmental harm. This article problematises the issue of redress for corporate human rights violations and environmental degradation within the context of international developments in this field. It considers whether there is a <em>prima facie</em> case for the establishment of a comprehensive compulsory human rights and environmental insurance regime for companies that would require them to operate to a high standard of care in their operations, and which would ultimately provide a more straightforward system of redress for victims.</p>","PeriodicalId":43487,"journal":{"name":"International Community Law Review","volume":"77 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Community Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18719732-12341487","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article considers the case for compulsory corporate human rights and environmental insurance. It approaches it within the context of the need for more effective, efficient and just systems of redress for the victims of human rights and environmental harm that is caused by companies where they have operations or supply chains in single or multiple jurisdictions. Developments within the field of corporate responsibility for human rights and environmental issues have led to a variety of different initiatives that range from the UN ‘protect, respect, and remedy’ framework and the associated human rights due diligence (HRDD) framework, to specific legal developments in certain jurisdictions and other schemes developed by international organisations, as well as by civil-society and businesses themselves. From the perspective of corporate law, these changes have taken place within a legal framework that has certain features that have hindered the availability of remedies for victims of associated human rights and environmental harm. This article problematises the issue of redress for corporate human rights violations and environmental degradation within the context of international developments in this field. It considers whether there is a prima facie case for the establishment of a comprehensive compulsory human rights and environmental insurance regime for companies that would require them to operate to a high standard of care in their operations, and which would ultimately provide a more straightforward system of redress for victims.

从“尽职调查”到“充分补救”。企业走向强制性人权与环境保险?
本文考虑了强制性企业人权与环境保险的案例。它是在需要更有效、高效和公正的补救制度的背景下处理这一问题的,这些制度是由在单一或多个司法管辖区有业务或供应链的公司造成的人权和环境损害的受害者。企业对人权和环境问题的责任领域的发展导致了各种不同的倡议,从联合国的“保护、尊重和补救”框架和相关的人权尽职调查(HRDD)框架,到某些司法管辖区的具体法律发展,以及国际组织、民间社会和企业自己制定的其他计划。从公司法的角度来看,这些变化是在一个法律框架内发生的,而这个法律框架的某些特点阻碍了向相关人权和环境损害的受害者提供补救。本条在这一领域的国际发展范围内提出了纠正集体侵犯人权和环境退化的问题。它审议是否有初步的理由为公司建立一个全面的强制性人权和环境保险制度,这将要求它们在其业务中以高度谨慎的标准运作,并最终为受害者提供一个更直接的补救制度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: The Journal aims to explore the implications of various traditions of international law, as well as more current perceived hegemonic trends for the idea of an international community. The Journal will also look at the ways and means in which the international community uses and adapts international law to deal with new and emerging challenges. Non-state actors , intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations, individuals, peoples, transnational corporations and civil society as a whole - have changed our outlook on contemporary international law. In addition to States and intergovernmental organizations, they now play an important role.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信