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

25 Aug 2015

Nicolás Carrillo-Santarelli, La Sabana University (Colombia)

Regulating companies’ human rights obligations is controversial but necessary, says academic

"Direct International Corporate Human Rights Obligations: controversial but necessary", 24 Aug 2015

The adoption of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, welcomed by many, is just one step in the road to fully protect victims of corporate abuses.  However, some sectors oppose the adoption of hard law, as revealed by debates and rejection by some of the proposal to draft and adopt a treaty on business and human rights…The fact that corporations benefit from international economic law, reinforces calls for holding them accountable, for consistency and to ensure they can be addressed by international law…[E]ven among individuals and NGOs who advocate the adoption of a business and human rights treaty, some question whether it should regulate direct international corporate obligations…[D]ebates often center on concerns that this could somehow weaken human rights frameworks; give excessive power to corporations; or undermine voluntary initiatives. I will address some of those fears…