Peter Muchlinski

Human Rights and Multinationals: Is there a Problem?

In recent years interested individuals and pressure groups have expressed considerable concern over the alleged complicity of multinational enterprises (MNEs) in violations of human rights. While such allegations are not historically unprecedented, the context in which they arise has changed. In particular, the increased integration of the global economy has created a perception that MNEs should take more responsibility for the social dimension of their actions, a perception that enterprises themselves have in part accepted through inter alia the issuing codes of corporate conduct. Furthermore, the rise of identity and lifestyle politics has made MNEs, as purveyors of products and services that help to define consumer lifestyles, a target of concern. These changes have significant implications for the evolution of human rights theory. In particular, they require a shift in the traditional view that corporations can only be victims of violations of human rights committed by states, towards one that extends responsibility for the commission, prevention and avoidance of such violations to MNEs themselves. On the other hand, there exist strong arguments against such an extension of human rights responsibilities. In particular, it is said that MNEs should only be responsible for the conduct of their business and should not be forced to involve themselves in such wider social issues. They are also private law entities and so should not possess the same responsibilities as states. This articles posits that such arguments in favour of extension, though strong and likely to remain influential, cannot answer the need for an extension of responsibility for human rights violations to MNEs where appropriate, on the basis that any attack on human dignity, whatever that legal nature and functions of its originator, must be liable to legal sanction. The technical legal means by which this might be done are considered. None the less, the article ends with a caution that any extension of human rights responsibilities to MNEs must not be allowed to deflect attention from the primary responsibility of states, as the most likely perpetrators of human rights violations, to avoid human rights violations on their own part and to establish a legal order in which the risk of such violations committed by private entities can be minimized, whether through effective national regulatory laws or international agreements on standards of corporate conduct.

Human Rights Due Diligence in Global Value Chains

Purpose – This chapter discusses the possibilities and difficulties in the development of pragmatic solutions to address human rights issues in global value chains in line with the existing institutional framework. Design/methodology/approach – A conceptual chapter examining the development and impact of a new public–private governance institution, namely the protect–respect–remedy framework developed under the auspices of the UN. Findings – The concept of due diligence that is central to the UN framework has been incorporated into other codes by the OECD and the IFC, and offers a promising way of defining the human rights responsibilities of MNEs. At the same time, the information required for an effective due diligence analysis is difficult to gather, and requires extensive cooperation with nonmarket partners. Originality/value – The chapter combines perspectives from international business and legal studies to achieve a better understanding of the development and implications of a new governance instrument concerning the human rights obligations of MNEs.

Operationalising the UN Business and Human Rights Framework: The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights and Due Diligence

The debate on the legal and ethical responsibilities of multinational enterprises (MNEs) to respect human rights has become one of the most significant recent developments in the wider field of corporate social responsibility (CSR). That debate has been fuelled by the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (Guiding Principles) endorsed in June 2011 by the UN Human Rights Council for implementing the UN ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ Framework (UN Framework).1 This instrument can be said to constitute, ‘the first global standard for preventing and addressing the risk of adverse human rights impact linked to business activity’2 It is the purpose of this chapter to develop a specific theme in the wider debate, namely, the role of the due diligence concept in formulating and making operational the second pillar of the UN Framework, the corporate responsibility to respect human rights.