abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapelocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewprofilerefreshnewssearchsecurityPathtagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

A treaty should ensure corporate accountability through an intl. court or natl. legislation, says David Bilchitz

"Globalisation, human rights and business: Why a treaty is a moral and legal necessity", 14 Sep 2015

…Difficult problems…arise in holding corporations to account for rights violations…[One solution] would be for multi-national corporations to become capable of being sued for wrongs they commit across the world in any state where they have offices…A treaty on business and human rights could require all states to adopt laws permitting them to hold corporations to account for violations of fundamental rights they commit across the world…[Another] solution would be to establish an international court that could adjudicate cases where corporations violate fundamental rights across international borders…There are many good reasons for a global treaty on business and human rights: one of the most significant is its ability to ensure that a remedy is found for victims of human rights violations by corporations…Objections thus far have been largely pragmatic, recognising significant division between developed and developing states on the need for such an international instrument…[T]he US and EU countries…oppose this initiative [seemingly] based on the self-interested expediency of their business interests…A new global consensus needs to be forged…on business and human rights: the starting point is to recognize the moral and legal necessity for a treaty in this area...