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

[PDF] General Comment 16 on State Obligations Regarding the Impact of the Business Sector on Children's Rights: What Is Its Standing, Meaning and Effect?

A lot of attention has been paid to the responsibility of business to protect human rights generally, but very little to the role of the business sector when it comes to children’s rights specifically. This lack of attention is being addressed by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (‘CRC’), which has developed a new General Comment on State Obligations regarding the Impact of the Business Sector on Children’s Rights. This article explores the legal standing of general comments developed by United Nations treaty committees before examining the implications of this new general comment on the business sector and children’s rights. This article also analyses the innovative drafting process adopted by the CRC for this particular general comment and considers whether that process reflects a trend towards increased stakeholder participation in human rights norm-building on the international stage. Finally, the authors evaluate the new general comment in light of the broader international dialogue on business and human rights. [Refers to Archer Daniel Midland, Cargill, DuPont, Firestone, Nestle, Pfizer, Sanlu Group, Wet-A-Line Tours]