In times of austerity, budget cuts and drastic reductions in Official Development Assistance (ODA) by many countries, the contribution of the private sector in developing countries has increasingly come under the spotlight.
The compatibility between the activities of transnational companies, and the objectives of development actors such as national and international institutions, NGOs and voluntary organisations, have always been hotly debated. Development actors are oriented towards solidarity with vulnerable communities, development of local (including entrepreneurial) resources and protection of the common good, including the environment. Conversely, profit is by definition at the heart of commercial activities of the private sector, in any country.
While at home companies usually play by the rules, abiding to laws and regulations, they often fail to do so abroad where laws and regulations can leave sufficient room to maneuver. It is therefore legitimate to question their impact on the lives of people in developing countries, as the ethical principles of entrepreneurship, international law and human rights are too often violated.
As an international alliance of Catholic development agencies, CIDSE believes that in order to achieve real change, transnational companies must abide by the same rules abroad as at home, in accounting and in dealing with local communities. Companies should, for example, disclose information about financial operations for each country in which they work. This would reduce the risk of corruption and conflict, especially in relation to extractive industries, which is crucial for developing countries to mobilise domestic resources for development. Respect of the rights of local communities is even more important.
Work on business and human rights within the United Nations is crucial in this regard. In 2005 the United Nations Secretary General appointed Prof. John Ruggie as Special Representative, tasking him with looking into how to address human rights violations by companies operating in developing countries. CIDSE members have been closely following and contributing to Ruggie’s work over the past six years, urging national and international institutions to adopt adequate and binding regulations to protect and promote the rights of all people.
In the final days of his mandate, Ruggie presented the outcomes of his work at the Human Rights Council in Geneva. Even though CIDSE would have liked him to be more ambitious, his recommendations represent a useful starting point for minimum threshold standards. We need preventive measures against human rights violations, monitoring and effective sanctions against offending companies. The relationship between profit and the inalienable rights of each person, local communities and the environment must be urgently rebalanced. The question is: what happens next?
The 16 June resolution by the UN Human Rights Council on the future of work on business and human rights within the United Nations gives priority to dissemination and take-up of the Guiding Principles on Business & Human Rights proposed by Prof. Ruggie. However, it does not really acknowledge the fact that they still need to be tested and developed in the reality of different situations on the ground. Action to implement these principles is needed, but they are one tool, not a single solution.
The role of the United Nations is, above all, to defend rights-holders and victims of human rights violations. It is therefore important that the new UN Working Group mandate holders can evaluate the impact of the Guiding Principles and the broader Protect, Respect, Remedy Framework of Prof. Ruggie, and develop the UN’s work on business and human rights further to ensure that it is relevant and effective. This includes providing greater clarity on standards and increasing legal protections– so important for many of the communities and groups with whom we work. Many human rights defenders face threats of violence or even death. After so many years, it is disappointing that states have not give priority to exploring new multilateral approaches which would help people in conflict-affected regions such as in Colombia, the Philippines and Peru.
In setting out his Protect, Respect and Remedy framework, welcomed by the Human Rights Council in 2008, Ruggie said that the UN « can and must lead intellectually and by setting expectations and aspirations ». The new UN mandate on business and human rights must work in this spirit, examining emblematic cases of human rights violations and identifying obstacles in order to close governance gaps on business and human rights. At all times it must focus on how best to prevent and substantially reduce cases of serious corporate violations of human rights.
Denise Auclair
Derniers articles parDenise Auclair (voir tous)
- The future of business and human rights in the United Nations – 3 juillet 2011
