abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb
Article

20 Mar 2019

Author:
Debadatta Bose, Erasmus University Rotterdam

Commentary: The OHCHR Zero Draft Legally Binding Instrument: Fragmentation vs. inclusivity

It may seem that the OHCHR Zero Draft Legally Binding Instrument is a true champion of coherence at a first glance — seeking to make TNCs responsible against all human rights, as the binding glue between specialised and fragmented regimes, e.g. international investment law, environmental law and human rights law.

Article 2.1(b) of the Zero Draft Legally Binding Instrument states, the treaty is [t]o ensure an effective access to justice and remedy to victims of human rights violations in the context of business activities of transnational character [...]. This is an access to justice treaty, dissimilar from other access to justice treaties in the sense that it provides a right to individuals against transnational corporations, which is a bold step in itself. Traditionally, treaties that provided access to justice mechanisms were addressed against states...