Business and Human Rights Journal最新文献

{"title":"Remedy and Accountability a Decade after the Marikana Massacre","authors":"Jordi Vives-Gabriel, H. van der Merwe","doi":"10.1017/bhj.2023.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2023.2","url":null,"abstract":"August 16th, 2022 marked the 10th anniversary of the Marikana Massacre in Rustenburg, South Africa. This was the worst incident of mass killing by police since the Sharpeville Massacre in 1960 in the heyday of the Apartheid regime. In the first days of August 2012, workers at Lonmin plc, a platinum group metals mining company, went on a wildcat strike demanding a minimum salary of 12500 Rand, circa 800 USD, per month and protesting against the poor living conditions they and their families where subjected to in the Marikana vicinity, an area 100 km north of Johannesburg where the mine is located. As days passed, tension escalated leading to the killing of ten people, including three non-striking workers, two security guards, three striking workers, and two police officers. Various attempts to facilitate negotiations with striking workers were turned down by Lonmin management. Instead, Lonmin managers actively engaged in communications with senior political leaders, police officers, and state mining officials to frame the situation as one that required strong and decisive police intervention.1","PeriodicalId":9399,"journal":{"name":"Business and Human Rights Journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"115 - 119"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43652236","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Muddying the Waters: The Concept of a ‘Safe Harbour’ in Understanding Human Rights Due Diligence","authors":"L. Smit, C. Bright, Stuart Neely","doi":"10.1017/bhj.2022.40","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2022.40","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The concept of a ‘safe harbour’ has been mentioned in several contexts during ongoing discussions around regulatory developments towards mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence (mHREDD) which continue at international, European and national levels. This article analyses the concept of a ‘safe harbour’ and how it relates to human rights due diligence (HRDD) as described in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). It discusses examples of other types of safe harbours which were recognized in legislation and case law; considers that a safe harbour could result in a ‘tick-box’ approach; highlights the implications for access to remedy; and distinguishes a safe harbour exemption from a defence of having undertaken HRDD in accordance with an expected standard of conduct.","PeriodicalId":9399,"journal":{"name":"Business and Human Rights Journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"1 - 17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44541051","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Whistleblowers as Defenders of Human Rights: The Whistleblower Protection Act in Japan","authors":"Masaki Iwasaki","doi":"10.1017/bhj.2022.41","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2022.41","url":null,"abstract":"In October 2020, the Government of Japan formulated a National Action Plan (NAP) on Business and Human Rights in response to the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) and ensuing greater international awareness of violations of human rights by corporations.1 In the NAP, the government of Japan stated that on the basis of the UNGPs, it expects companies to (i) formulate human rights policies, (ii) conduct due diligence with respect to human rights, and (iii) establish grievance mechanisms.2 In order to achieve these goals, businesses need to understand whether and how they are violating human rights and prepare appropriate solutions. Whistleblowers play a crucial role in this process.","PeriodicalId":9399,"journal":{"name":"Business and Human Rights Journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"103 - 109"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44299745","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Business and Human Rights in Russia: Emerging or Merging?","authors":"M. Rogerson","doi":"10.1017/bhj.2022.29","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2022.29","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The increasing focus on business and human rights (BHR) in civil society and policymaking has not been matched by research on corporate actions to respect and protect human rights. The lack of research on BHR is especially acute outside of Western Europe and Anglo-centric contexts. This paper seeks to investigate how the largest Russian firms conceptualize and fulfil their human rights obligations under the UN Guiding Principles and the extent to which internationalization of those firms may have impacted these behaviours. I use a unique dataset created from a sample made of the 100 largest firms listed on the Moscow Stock Exchange. Using the theoretical construct of institutional conflict, I find that cross-listing on other stock exchanges and the extent to which firms frame their broader social responsibility issues as ‘sustainability’ or ‘sustainable development’ rather than ‘corporate social responsibility’ has a substantial impact on firm attention to human rights. While this attention is encouraging, firm disclosure of actions taken to mitigate against violations and protect human rights is extremely limited and the strength of domestic institutional pressures has resulted in very little firm action in the face of the extreme and widespread human rights violations being committed in Ukraine by Russia.","PeriodicalId":9399,"journal":{"name":"Business and Human Rights Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49552881","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Human Rights Violations Connected with Deforestation – Emerging and Diverging Approaches to Human Rights Due Diligence","authors":"Anouska Perram, N. Jiwan","doi":"10.1017/bhj.2022.38","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2022.38","url":null,"abstract":"As the climate and biodiversity crises gain unprecedented attention, many governments across the global north are taking legislative steps to address deforestation in supply chains linked to their domestic consumption or commercial activities, among them, the United Kingdom (UK) and the European Union (EU).1","PeriodicalId":9399,"journal":{"name":"Business and Human Rights Journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"110 - 114"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45843007","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Modernization of the Energy Charter Treaty: Fulfilled or Broken Promises?","authors":"Bart-Jaap Verbeek","doi":"10.1017/bhj.2022.39","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2022.39","url":null,"abstract":"On 24 June 2022, the Contracting Parties of the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) finalized discussions on the modernization of the treaty. After fifteen rounds of negotiations, an agreement in principle was reached to be adopted by the Energy Charter Conference on 22 November 2022 in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.1 The ECT, adopted in 1994, establishes a legal framework that aims to promote international cooperation in the energy sector.2 It has a membership of 53 countries primarily from Europe and Central Asia, as well as the European Union (EU) and the European Atomic Energy Community. In recent years, the ECT attracted widespread public attention due to its impact on states’ environmental and climate policies. Particularly, the treaty’s provisions on investment protection, with investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) at the centre, allow foreign investors in the energy sector to challenge adverse state action before international arbitration and claim compensation for measures affecting their business activities. Fossil fuel investors have increasingly used the ECT to challenge environmental and climate measures, such as phasing out coal-fired power generation, banning offshore oil drilling in coastal areas, and prohibiting gas fracking projects. Such cases have fuelled concerns regarding the abilities of governments to roll-out large-scale climate action. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has warned that international investment agreements (IIAs) like the ECT could ‘be used by fossil-fuel companies to block national legislation aimed at phasing out the use of their assets’.3 With some of these damage claims running into billions of euros, the ECT enables fossil fuel investors to offload the costs and risks associated with their affected assets onto society at large in the face of necessary climate action. This would go, in the words of the editorial board of the Financial Times, against the ‘heart of the capitalist social contract’ and the ‘ability of markets to deal adequately with the challenge of climate change’.4","PeriodicalId":9399,"journal":{"name":"Business and Human Rights Journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"97 - 102"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41483801","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Grievance Mechanisms in Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives: Providing Effective Remedy for Human Rights Violations?","authors":"J. Harrison, Mark Wielga","doi":"10.1017/bhj.2022.37","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2022.37","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article presents an empirical study of six grievance mechanisms in multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs). It argues that key characteristics of each grievance mechanism as well as the contexts in which they operate significantly affect human rights outcomes. However, even the most successful mechanisms only manage to produce remedies in particular types of cases and contexts. The research also finds that it is prohibitively difficult to determine whether ‘effective’ remedy has been achieved in individual cases. Furthermore, the key intervention by the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), to prescribe a set of effectiveness criteria for designing or revising MSI grievance mechanisms, itself appears ineffective in stimulating better outcomes for rights-holders. Drawing on these findings, the article reflects on the future potential and limitations of MSI grievance mechanisms within broader struggles to ensure business respect for human rights.","PeriodicalId":9399,"journal":{"name":"Business and Human Rights Journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"43 - 65"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49322109","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Human Rights Litigation against Multinationals in Practice, Richard Meeran and Jahan Meeran (eds.) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021)","authors":"Björn Fasterling","doi":"10.1017/bhj.2022.30","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2022.30","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":9399,"journal":{"name":"Business and Human Rights Journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"123 - 126"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44153570","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Localizing the UNGPs – An Afrocentric Approach to Interpreting Pillar II","authors":"Akinwumi Ogunranti","doi":"10.1017/bhj.2022.35","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2022.35","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper presents an alternative epistemic worldview of the corporate responsibility to respect human rights (CR2R) as a norm. It examines how an Afrocentric interpretation of the CR2R norm can contribute to a relational system where corporations promote human rights in African host communities. It uses an African norm — Ubuntu — to reframe and reinterpret Pillar II in Afrocentric terms. It argues that this reframing is important for three reasons. First, Ubuntu reframing increases the CR2R norm’s intelligibility in Africa because it clarifies and contextualizes the term ‘respect’ used in Pillar II. Second, reframing the CR2R norm through Ubuntu fills the ethical gap in the interpretation of the CR2Rnorm. Third, an Ubuntu-inspired interpretation insulates the CR2R norm from some scholars’ critique that the CR2R norm’s scope is narrow because it only encourages MNCs to avoid infringing on the human rights of others without prescribing positive obligations. This paper then examines channels through which Ubuntu can influence the CR2R norm.","PeriodicalId":9399,"journal":{"name":"Business and Human Rights Journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"66 - 84"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46221556","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Incorporating Rights: Strategies to Advance Corporate Accountability, Erika George (New York: Oxford University Press, 2021)","authors":"Tim Bartley","doi":"10.1017/bhj.2022.32","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bhj.2022.32","url":null,"abstract":"A lot has happened since 2005, when the late John Ruggie was appointed as the UN Special Representative on human rights and transnational corporations.Multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs) have continued to grow, despite concerns about their limited accomplishments. NGOs have developed a variety of score cards to rank the human rights and sustainability practices of leading brands and retailers. ESG (environmental, social and governance) ratings have moved into themainstreamof the investmentworld, spurring debates aboutwhether they are meaningful and ‘material’ to corporate returns. Recently, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights – which Ruggie helped to forge – have inspired an EU draft directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence, moving towards mandatory rather than voluntary standards. In Incorporating Rights, Erika George makes a hopeful argument about how these types of initiatives – particularly the voluntary ones – can gradually lead to greater respect for the human rights of workers in labour-intensive industries, communities in extractive zones, and individuals subject to high-tech surveillance. While occasionally acknowledging limitations, she argues that MSIs, score cards and demand from responsible investors and consumers have combined to make attention to human rights essentially obligatory rather than voluntary for large corporations. This is especially significant, she argues, because international law offers few meaningful paths for corporations to be held accountable to human rights norms, especially as courts have narrowed the scope of extra-territorial claims. In essence, George carries on Ruggie’s legacy in making the case that norms for international business are changing and that this is no small accomplishment. Empirically, George traces the discourse of corporate social responsibility in several large food/beverage, apparel/footwear, oil/gas and information technology companies (e.g., Coca-Cola, Adidas, ExxonMobil and Microsoft). Looking over time, she shows that human rights were increasingly incorporated into policies and reports as the companies faced controversies (roughly 2005 to 2017 in most cases). Beyond this, George draws on her observations of various meetings (e.g., UN Annual Forum on Business and Human Rights) and interviews with developers of MSIs and score cards to paint a multi-faceted portrait of the expectations that large companies face to respect human rights throughout their global operations and supply chains. In each chapter, she examines a different piece of the puzzle – such as business and human rights norms, MSIs, score cards, shareholder and consumer pressures – highlighting the evolution and expansion of expectations. Her analysis ends prior to the development of the EU mandatory due diligence directive – and earlier laws, such as the French Corporate Duty of Vigilance law, are not in her purview – but these developments would seemingly bolster her overall point: global h","PeriodicalId":9399,"journal":{"name":"Business and Human Rights Journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"120 - 122"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47091811","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}