Free, Prior, and Informed Consent

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW
Laurence Klein, M. Muñoz-Torres, M. A. Fernández-Izquierdo
{"title":"Free, Prior, and Informed Consent","authors":"Laurence Klein, M. Muñoz-Torres, M. A. Fernández-Izquierdo","doi":"10.1163/15718115-bja10153","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nFree, Prior, and Informed Consent (fpic) is crucial for the exercise of indigenous peoples’ right to self-determination, a binding human rights norm, as it provides them with the opportunity to determine how their lands and resources are developed. While numerous companies have committed to respecting fpic in their corporate policies, there continues to be a huge disconnect between public rhetoric and actions on the ground, and indigenous peoples generally struggle to have a meaningful voice in decision-making processes that concern them. Even if the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (ungp, 2011) have compelled companies to gain ground with regards to their responsibility to respect human rights, the ‘do-no-harm’ principle does not require them to take positive actions towards fulfilling human rights. This approach is inconsistent with the moral foundation of human rights, which implies duties, and does not account for the substantial economic and political power that increases companies’ potential as guarantors of human rights. Based on the normative and moral legitimacy sustaining the narrative on corporate human rights obligations and the political, moral and legal imperative behind fpic, this article asserts that companies have a normative obligation to observe fpic, which they ought to operationalise in the context of heightened requirements regarding their human rights due diligence.","PeriodicalId":44103,"journal":{"name":"International Journal on Minority and Group Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal on Minority and Group Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718115-bja10153","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

Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (fpic) is crucial for the exercise of indigenous peoples’ right to self-determination, a binding human rights norm, as it provides them with the opportunity to determine how their lands and resources are developed. While numerous companies have committed to respecting fpic in their corporate policies, there continues to be a huge disconnect between public rhetoric and actions on the ground, and indigenous peoples generally struggle to have a meaningful voice in decision-making processes that concern them. Even if the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (ungp, 2011) have compelled companies to gain ground with regards to their responsibility to respect human rights, the ‘do-no-harm’ principle does not require them to take positive actions towards fulfilling human rights. This approach is inconsistent with the moral foundation of human rights, which implies duties, and does not account for the substantial economic and political power that increases companies’ potential as guarantors of human rights. Based on the normative and moral legitimacy sustaining the narrative on corporate human rights obligations and the political, moral and legal imperative behind fpic, this article asserts that companies have a normative obligation to observe fpic, which they ought to operationalise in the context of heightened requirements regarding their human rights due diligence.
自由、事先和知情同意
自由、事先和知情同意(fpic)对于土著人民行使具有约束力的人权准则--自决权至关重要,因为它为土著人民提供了决定如何开发其土地和资源的机会。虽然许多公司已承诺在其公司政策中尊重 fpic,但公开言论与实际行动之间仍然存在巨大的脱节,土著人民通常很难在涉及他们的决策过程中发出有意义的声音。即使《联合国工商业与人权指导原则》(UNGP,2011 年)已迫使企业在尊重人权的责任方面取得进展,但 "不伤害 "原则并未要求企业采取积极行动来实现人权。这种做法不符合人权的道德基础,因为人权意味着义务,也没有考虑到企业作为人权保障者所具有的巨大经济和政治力量。基于支撑企业人权义务论述的规范性和道德合法性,以及 fpic 背后的政治、道德和法律要求,本文主张企业有遵守 fpic 的规范性义务,并应在加强人权尽职调查要求的背景下将其付诸实施。
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
26
×
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