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

9 Mar 2016

Author:
Rights and Accountability in Development (RAID) & MiningWatch Canada

[Press Release] NGOs Warn: ‘Companies Duck Responsibility for Abuse Because of Flawed Human Rights Guidance, Lack of Independent Oversight’

NGOs are calling on the Canadian government to seize the opportunity to correct practices that undermine the prospects of impoverished communities overseas to seek remedy for corporate abuse...Both MiningWatch Canada and the British NGO Rights and Accountability in Development (RAID) warn that the UN Guiding Principles and the Voluntary Principles allow companies to privatise and control the implementation of human rights, and that this is most apparent in the implementation of “operational level” grievance mechanisms...[F]or the victims of corporate abuse, company-controlled mechanisms offer few procedural safeguards and result in take-it-or-leave-payments or remedy packages, which, as a general rule, are not even remotely commensurate with the alleged harm that the victims have suffered...[NGOs are now calling on] [g]overnments [to] make clear that operational-level grievance mechanisms are not an appropriate mechanism for dealing with cases of gross human rights violations and serious crimes such as torture, rape, and killing.