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

6 Jul 2015

Mark Taylor, Research Director, Rights and Security, at the Fafo Research Foundation (Norway)

Civil society's mobilisation for binding treaty already has positive outcomes, says expert

"The Movement and the IGWiG", 3 Jun 2015

One year ago...the Human Rights Council passed two separate resolutions on business and human rights: one was focused on the continued work of implementing the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (GPs) while the other established an Open Ended Intergovernmental Working Group (OEIWG) ‘to elaborate an international legally binding instrument...My fear was that a protracted treaty process would sink civil society energies into the swamp of member state negotiation of a treaty text in Geneva...One year on, I am happy to report that I was wrong...[I]t is hard to deny that a mobilization is underway...This is not to suggest that the battle has been won, nor does it suggest that human rights violations by business are in decline. But it does suggest that the people are determined to get on with things. As Phil Bloomer, Director of the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre...“the treaty vote had acted as a political spur … rather than creating a ‘legal chill’.” I think Phil is correct...Is it impossible to imagine an open dialogue within the movement..? I don’t think so...