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

18 Jun 2008

Author:
UN Special Representative John Ruggie

[PDF] Background Note on the State Duty to Protect

[prepared for Business Leaders Initiative on Human Rights: “Session on Partnerships between Business and Government”] ...[The] State duty to protect lies at the core of the international human rights regime... [Most] governments take a narrow approach to managing the business and human rights agenda. [The Special Representative to the UN Secretary General (SRSG)] found that it is often segregated within its own conceptual and (typically weak) institutional box... This inadequate domestic policy coherence is often replicated internationally... Thus the SRSG’s main recommendation for States is that human rights concerns in relation to business need to go beyond their currently narrow institutional confines. His 2008 report emphasizes the need for Governments to ensure that human rights compliance becomes part of defining corporate cultures respectful of rights, and to consider human rights impacts when they sign trade agreements, investment treaties, and host government agreements. He also speaks of the importance of a rights-based approach to the provision of export credit or investment guarantees for overseas projects...