International Human Rights - Essay Example

INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS: THE ESSENTIALNESS OF THE ROLE PLAYED BY SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE TO THE SECRETARY GENERAL ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS Introduction The world right now is in the grip of an economic recession that has crippled businesses world wide. The repercussions are enormous; hundreds of thousands have lost their jobs world wide and thousands more have been left insecure about their employment. The recession has been blamed on myriad of things, from gross financial mismanagement by Wall Street co-operations, short term planning, greed, overspending by the average consumers and even the war in Iraq (UN, 2009)1. The underlying factor remains that there was a weak link somewhere and that the big co-operations played a role in the financial meltdown. Responsible social behavior could have minimized the scale of the recession; businesses have to learn that maybe, the only thing that is important is the bottom line, that there is an interconnectivity with other factors within and beyond the business environments (Amnesty International, 2008). International co-operations have been accused of gross human rights abuse when they are established abroad more so in third world countries where poverty levels are high. This is because poverty drives workers in these countries to work extremely long hours for minimal wages under deplorable working conditions. This is exploitation at its worst and the governments tend to turn a blind eye because they benefit from the presence of such companies (Amnesty International, 2008). Groups that are most susceptible to human rights abuse by transnational corporations and other business enterprises A group that has fallen prey often times to exploitation by corporations are illegal migrants and refugees. Rooted from their own homes in foreign lands where they cannot rely on the government for assistance, these are a vulnerable group. Their only target is survival and since most live in abject poverty, they are willing to work for extremely low wages just to help them get by. This is most unfortunate because migrant populations do contribute to the economies of the countries where they are hosted. Hence, equal working rights for migrants and fighting other discriminations of migrants should be made a priority (UNOG, 2008)2. Another challenge to upholding human rights where transnational corporations and other business enterprises are concerned is the dire poverty mostly inexperienced in third world countries where poverty drives people to accept any kind of work. It is known that multinational corporations that are involved in labor intensive industries choose to do locate their factories where wages are much lower for unskilled workers. Furthermore, those living in countries where there is extreme poverty also do without basic human rights such as civil, economic, cultural, political and social rights (UNOG, 2008). Some Australian companies working abroad have been known to forcibly evict people from land that they considered resourceful and polluting the environment by practicing unsafe disposition of toxic wastes. The companies have gotten away with it with no serous retribution from the governments of the countries within which they operate (Hewett, 2008). Oxfam, an Australian non-governmental organization that has been keeping an eye on Australian firms abroad, reports that the mining firm Lafayette was running the Rapu Rapu mines in the Philippines had practiced gross abuse of human rights such as polluting water sources and thus threatening the food security of the local community (Hewett, 2008). The pollution had also affected the local fishing industry as the number of fish fell drastically. This is just but one example of how irresponsible behavior by International Corporation can impact the lives of thousands and yet the responsible parties go unpunished. A good example of a company that has picked up its corporate social responsibility is the soft drink company coca cola which needs 2.5 liters of water to produce one liter of its products. Coca cola has developed strategies which will help to make water available in the poorer countries of the world especially Africa (Economist, 2008). Coca cola has also taken an active hand in the crisis in Darfur from providing relief food to trying to get other multinationals into participating more aggressively in the Darfur crisis (Economist). United Nations Global Compact As part of its campaign to get business co-operations involved in the upholding of basic human rights, the United Nations launched ‘Global Compact’ in 2000, which was to analyze not only corporate social responsibility in terms of upholding human rights but as well as labor, environment and fighting corruption (UNGC, 2009). The UN recognized the need for co-operations and businesses to give back in one way or another to the societies from which they were drawing their resources, and also to become more integrated into these societies by fostering the care of the environment (UNGC, 2009). The corporate social responsibility trend has been catching on; there are more than 5,000 businesses to be found spread across one hundred and thirty five countries that are active members of the U.N Global Compact. The U.N Global compact has ten principles that companies are to work by if they are to foster a spirit of promoting, economical and social well being of the societies within which they are based. Global Compact encourages companies and co-operations to do this in recognition of the fact that social responsibility nurtures the confidence of the society in business corporations as well as having positive long term implications. The first of these ten tents is on human rights, exerting that co-operations and businesses should be a part of advocating for international human rights by respecting these rights and by avoiding being implicated in the abuse of human rights (GC Annual Review , 2008). Creation of the post of Special Representative of the Secretary General on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and other Business Enterprises The United Nations recognized that there was need for international corporations and other such businesses to play a role in the upholding of human rights. This was because the Commission saw that there was ample ways in which such co-operations and businesses could serve the human race in achieving human rights for people all over the world by stimulating economic growth and generating employment opportunities, which in turn would mean better quality of life overall(OFCHR, 2005)3 . But these co-operations could not achieve the set objectives of their own accord, the necessary legislation by national governments would have to be put into place so that the general populace f countries world wide would truly benefit from international trade (OFCHR, 2005). The Commission then went ahead to request the United Nations secretary General to appoint a representative who would be charged with the responsibility of analyzing the role that international co-operations play in upholding human rights, and how well they play this role. The representative would then present reports to the commission to table his/her findings over a total duration of three years (OFCHR, 2005)4. What the appointed representative would do was fivefold. To make clear what role governments played in creating stipulations and guidelines for international co-operations regarding human rights within their countries(OFCHR, 2005). To clarify what exactly is meant by terms such as ‘complicity’ and ‘sphere of ‘influence’ when it comes to international co-operations and human rights (OFCHR, 2005). To formulate methods and systems that would accurately measure what level of participation international co-operations and businesses and what this means for human rights (OFCHR, 2005). Lastly, the representative was to put together the findings of his research and from his findings formulate the most appropriate actions and policies that states could use in regulating the practices of transnational co-operations and businesses so as to support human rights (OFCHR, 2005). When it was determined that there was due cause to appoint such a person, the United nations, appointed John Ruggie, a Harvard professor, as its special representative of the secretary general on human rights and international business co-operations (Lindsay, 2008). What John Ruggie had to say about human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises The report that was represented by John Ruggie who had been appointed the United Nations Special Representative of the Secretary General on Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and other Business Enterprises (SRSG), had three principles on which the framework for supporting the upholding human rights could be built (UN, 2009). The first was that it should be impressed on governments their duty to defend human rights. The SRSG commented that he was still working the extent of the implications of states fully dedicating themselves to championing for the protection of human rights in terms of trade and investments. The SRSG also took note of the fact that there is a project underway to bring together nineteen corporate law firms from allover the world that would be integral in trying to determine how the corporate cultures inculcated into workers by firms promoted or hindered the upholding of human rights (UN, 2009). The SRSG noted that an ambiguity that was being exploited by transnational firms was that of extraterritoriality particularly in war torn regions. Why people in such regions are vulnerable is because it is not upon the governments involved to admonish companies on business abuse unless there are special circumstances, which does not happen very often (UN, 2009)5. The second was that corporations in tandem were also charged with the responsibility to uphold human rights. It is important that there be maintained the delicate balance between corporate social responsibility and overstepping the boundaries of responsibility of governments of what falls as its duties to look after its own human interests. It was highlighted in the SRSG’s report that though companies and other business entities are charged with playing their part while taking up social responsibility, there should be a reasonable limit to what they do (UN, 2009). Some of the recommendations that were forwarded as to how companies could improve their human rights practices were by adopting a human rights policy, having a regular analysis of the impacts of business practices on environment and human rights and formulating systems that would be up to the task of monitoring company human rights practices. As was noted by the SRSG, it is important that corporations ingrain within their employees, whose attitudes shaped the company’s response to human rights concerns (UN, 2009). The last of his recommendations was that there was the necessity for a more delivery oriented strategy to combat human rights abuse (UN, 2009). The SRGS pointed out that it was difficult for those whose human rights had been infringed upon by transnational corporations found it hard to get redress of any kind because there are no ready institutions to pick up their complaints (UN, 2009). Another hindrance in trying to seek justice by the afflicted was lack of information on how to go about it. The transnational corporations are considered indomitable and the damage they may inflict is taken as being inevitable and unpunishable. Judicial processes to seeking redress are inaccessible and non-judicial options are limited with serious flaws in their working (UN, 2009). What is most important is that the recommendations made by Ruggie should be followed through, not remain fancy words on paper that in practice remain ineffectual. This is what will actually make a difference; if governments and co-operations choose to actively work at stumping out the abuse of human rights in any form. Ruggie noted that due to globalization, there has been created a sort of ‘no-mans-land’ which has proved a governance loophole in the fight against the abuse of human rights by international co-operations and businesses. Governments have been reluctant to curb these abuses because they feel that the benefits from the investments made by companies within their countries far outweigh whatever form of abuse that may be taxed on the people. The governments are shy about retribution of such companies because they fear the latter might take their investments somewhere else and that will be a loss to them. As the United Nations Global Compact has pointed out, improving social responsibility amongst multinational co-operations and businesses is a complex and massive task that calls for the cooperation of the businesses, governments and civil societies. Outlined here are some of the ways in which corporate responsibility can be improved so that there is lees human rights abuse, more regard paid to the environment and lower incidences of graft and corruption. There are several ways in which governments can work hand in hand with the United Nations to ensure that human rights abuse is minimized within their borders. Governments can create stringent laws that protect human rights and that companies and businesses under their jurisdiction have to observe both at home and abroad. Here are some which were made by the International Cooperation for Development and Solidarity (CISDE) Lindsay, 2008)6. There could be set up an independent international advisory centre that would furnish countries with young economies with the information that they need on legal matters concerning their interaction with international business co-operations especially when drawing up contracts (Lindsay, 2008). That there be created the post for an autonomous ombudsperson who would have the mandate to investigate accusations brought against businesses co-operations to ensure that there is no biasness and complete objectivity when such cases are dealt with (Lindsay, 2008). The overall objective which is to be persistently pursued is the formation of an international framework for human rights which would ensure that co-operations and business world wide would be charged with the responsibility of defending human rights (Lindsay, 2008).7 Conclusion The creation of a post for the Special Representative of the Secretary General in Human Rights issues and transnational Corporations was a step in the right direction. There have been brought to light exactly what ways in which human rights are unwittingly infringed and the necessary steps that need to be taken by states, the corporations themselves to rectify this. Multinationals along with other business enterprises have reacted positively to protecting human rights as reflected by the statistic of the companies that have joined the UN Global Compact. This is a way in which the companies not only get to uphold human rights but also carry out practices that are environmentally friendly as well as socially healthy practices. Change is gradual; it is not a process that takes place over time. There is need for change to be enacted where the abuse of human rights and transnational co-operations are concerned. There are loopholes in the guiding principles that have been applied to international human rights practices that still have to be ironed out. The development of a framework to be used as a guide in human rights practices is still in its infant stages and testing the waters. Mistakes will be made but as long as progress is being made, then the mistakes will be notched as learning experiences. Bibliography Amnesty International (July, 2008) “Submission to the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and other Business Enterprises” Economist (24 April, 2008). “Beyond the ‘genocide olympics’” April 9, 2009 Hewett Andrew (June 4, 2008). “Where Business and Human Rights Intersect,” BusinessDay April 9, 2009 Lindsay Anne (August, 2008). “The UN Special Representative on Buisness and Human Rights” April 10, 2009 Office of the High Commissioner fro Human Rights (OHCR, 2005). “Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and other Business Enterprises: Human Rights Resolution 2005/69” April 10, 2009 < http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/CHR/resolutions/E-CN_4-RES-2005-69.doc> Unite Nations Global Compact (UNGC, 2009). “Overview of the UN Global Compact” April 10, 2009 < http://www.unglobalcompact.org/AboutTheGC/index.html> United Nations Global Compact (UNGC, 2008). “United Nations Global Compact Annual Review March 2009.” United Nations (February, 2009) “Protect, Respect and Remedy: A Framework for Business and Human Rights” Paper presented by the Special Representative of the Secretary General on Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises in New Delhi India, 5-6 February, 2009. United Nations Office at Geneva (UNOG, 5 June, 2008). “Human Rights Concil Reviews Mandates on Arbitrary Executions, Human Rights of Migrants, Transnational Corporations and Extreme Poverty” April 10, 2009 Read More