Business and human rights

«Руководящие принципы предпринимательской деятельно-
сти в аспекте прав человека» являются первым общепризнанным глобальным международным стандартом в области прав человека и бизнеса. В соответствии с ними, ТНК и другие предприятия обязаны соблюдать национальные законы государств и уважать международно-признанные права человека во время осуществления своей предпринимательской деятельности. Однако, в соответствии с доктриной международного права, корпорации не обладают международной правосубъектностью и их обязательства носят скорее добровольный характер, в связи с чем, основная обязанность по обеспечению защиты прав человека ложится на государства. Одним из способов реализации Руководящих принципов на практике, является разработка и последующая имплементация государствами Национальных Планов Действий.

Greenpeace Southeast Asia and other petitioners (“petitioners” for brevity) filed a Petition against the world’s largest fossil fuel producers (“Carbon Majors,” or alternately referred herein as respondents), imploring the Commission on Human Rights (“CHR”) to use its investigatory, recommendatory, and monitoring powers to look into the Carbon Majors’ responsibility for human rights violations or threats thereof, resulting from the impacts of climate change.

The current United Nations process for drafting a Business and Human Rights treaty employs international human rights law as its paradigmatic frame of reference, including for the scope of corporations legal obligations. Applying an evaluative framework based on Thomas Franck, Robert Keohane and David Victors works on the legitimacy and effectiveness of international law and governance, this Article critiques the use of international human rights law for this purpose. Instead, due to several conceptual and practical advantages, it argues that the set of corporate human rights obligations to be enshrined in this first treaty should be based on the narrower scope of international criminal law.

The following pages present a general analysis of a key issue: the relationship between business
and human rights as one of the most salient aspects of global governance. Thus, after an
introductory section in which the link between the subject matter and private international law is
especially emphasized, in the following one an attempt is made to define such governance, also
highlighting the prominence in it of the great economic operators, along with the growing one that
corresponds in a number of ways to civil society. Then, providing multiple data and based on an
extensive literature review, the third and fourth sections, respectively, aim at determining the
entity in our world of multinational companies and their capacity to generate conflicts, and the
control mechanisms used in this regard. This work culminates with a section on final observations
in which a new paradigm is put on the record, the effective taking into consideration of the interests
of those affected in fact or potentially by business activities, the stakeholders. Something that would
undoubtedly support global governance in the best terms.

This contribution aims to give a brief analysis of the General Comment No 24 (2017) on state obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the context of business activities, adopted by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The analysis will be focused on some of the most interesting aspects of the General Comment. The first part will analyse the states’ obligations to protect human rights against violations perpetrated by third parties, which plays a seminal role as to the prevention of harms committed by business entities. The second part of the contribution will be focused on the extraterritorial dimension of states’ obligations stemming from the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: indeed, this dimension receives an unprecedented recognition in the General Comment No 24 (2017).

This article discusses the evolution, current trends, limitations and controversies around the understanding and practice of human rights due diligence (HRDD), a concept developed in the course of the work of United Nations (UN)-mandate holder, John Ruggie, and enshrined in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. While the concept has gathered broad acceptance and a growing number of legislative proposals are seeking to entrench it in law, significant differences of opinion exist among stakeholders as to its nature, objectives and relationship, if any, with legal liability. These differing understandings are at play in a contest to shape future legislation. Some of these carry significant risks for rights-holders, notably the risk of outcome being superseded by process and superficial, compliance-oriented HRDD prevailing in the law or in its interpretation and practice. As legislative efforts continue, the authors warn against the risk of hollow laws which do little ...

On 11 June 2011, the United Nations Human Rights Council endorsed the ‘Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights’ as a new set of guiding principles for global business designed to provide a global standard for preventing and addressing the risk of adverse impacts on human rights linked to business activity. This outcome was preceded by an earlier unsuccessful attempt by a Sub-Commission of the UN Commission on Human Rights to win approval for a set of binding corporate human rights norms, the so called ‘Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights’. This article identifies and discusses the reasons why the Norms eventually failed to win approval by the then UN Commission on Human Rights. This discussion assists an understanding of the difficulties in establishing binding ‘hard law’ obligations for transnational corporations with regard to human rights within the wider framework of international law. It...

Human rights due diligence (HRDD) has become the buzzword of much of the advocacy and work today around business and human rights.1 It is almost commonplace that companies have the responsibility to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address these adverse human rights impacts as part of their ongoing HRDD processes, in line with the UNGPs.2 The assessment of human rights impacts (HRIA) is a critical step in this process.3

In his widely influential human rights framework, the former special representative for business and human rights, John Ruggie, establishes a responsibility to respect human rights for all corporations. He does so based on an instrumental account of corporate responsibility. In this paper I will systematically explore and expose the conceptual flaws underlying such instrumental arguments, specifically when invoked in connection with human rights responsibility. I will outline four relevant situations, which stake out the scope of such business case arguments in the context of human rights. Based on the analysis of those four situations, I will argue that Ruggie's instrumental defense of the corporate responsibility to respect human rights fails. While a genuinely moral argument in favor of corporate human rights responsibility would be more plausible, it implies corporate responsibilities beyond merely respecting human rights and thus challenges the framework's rigid division of responsibility between corporation and state.

The Paris Agreement that was signed by 195 countries on December 2015 is considered both a success and a failure to the climate change politics.  It was another failure to the comprehensive integrated regime approach, but a success to the new dominant approaches “regime complex”.  There is a shift of approach of climate politics, from a comprehensive integrated regime to the ‘regime complex’ approach.    The same approach is also taken by the United Nations’ Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs).  The initiative is ‘a microcosm of a larger crisis in contemporary governance’.  The UNGPs is not part of a comprehensive and integrated global regime, but they demonstrate that it is possible to achieve a level of convergence of norms, policies, and practices.  Both, the Paris Agreement and the UNGPs on Business and Human Rights, are examples of the polycentric governance.  They can be used as ‘tools’ for the affected people, to give a voice and demand the States and Businesses.  These tools could create ‘double’ pressure to demand people’s rights over environmental degradations that were caused by business operations and the government’s inabilities to prevent such violations.  The paper suggests that there should be an increase of climate action together with human rights movements, especially in Asia.  The new ASEAN Economic Community might lead to the increase of economic growth, however it might also increase adverse impacts in the environment and human rights, if the process does not concern to prevent such issues.  More pressure should be given to the government and businesses, in order to accelerate the pledges that were widely presented at the Paris Agreement.  Afterall, climate change issues is our human rights issues.

The main objective of this report is to
- assist the business sector in human rights due diligence by
providing an overview of current tools and guidance materials
for this issue.
The report contains precise information on
- the main components of the corporate responsibility to
respect human rights according to the Ruggie Framework,
- introductory materials on the human rights and business
topic,
- what human rights due diligence is about,
- different tools and guides that may be used at the
different stages of respecting human rights,
- the main differences between the human rights impact
assessment tools, and
- the results of a questionnaire that was conducted during
the development of this report.

This article examines the involvement of Private Military and Security Companies (PMSC) in both shaping and implementing the European Agenda on Migration (European Agenda), launched by the European Union in May 2015. The migration policies which have since been adopted have increasingly enabled the outsourcing to private security contractors of various border control operations, including those related to forced returns, administrative detention and security services for the Italian and Greek ‘hotspots’. The article argues that PMSC frame, shape and entrench militarized responses in the European Agenda. It also contends that the current context of the European refugee ‘crisis’ meets the conditions of a high-risk context, as understood within the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGP). This re-definition of the refugee ‘crisis’ as a high-risk context, in turn, enables the identification of heightened human rights obligations of home states and responsib...

Does international law regulate the economic activities that sustain war? States have long guarded against international interference in their war economies. But today there is an increasing tendency to impose rules on the economic activity connected to war. Acting collectively or on their own, states have sought to sharpen the focus of multilateral sanctions, strangle terrorist finances, constrain the flows of small arms and light weapons, and exclude minerals mined in war zones from the supply chains of global commerce. A steady trickle of litigation has seen courts of different jurisdictions prosecute pillage and slavery in war and pursue business people and companies for committing or enabling crimes in situations of armed conflict.

The paper is an introduction to the doctoral dissertation in law (defended in December 2017, University of Oslo) which examines how international law regulates the economies that help sustain today’s wars. The dissertation focuses on the international legal norms that have arisen to regulate phenomena that arise at the nexus of commerce and conflict. Drawing on advances in our understanding of the social and economic dynamics in situations of irregular warfare, the dissertation discusses developments in international humanitarian law, international criminal law, international human rights law and the law of international peace and security. The dissertation maps the global regulatory system that has arisen to respond to the nexus of commerce and conflict and resolves a principal uncertainty for international lawyers, namely the nature of the problem to be regulated and the normative content of the applicable rules of international law.

The publication provides an overview of the key principles of the state’s fulfillment of the positive obligation to protect human rights from violations by business during the crisis caused by COVID 19: the constitutional procedure of state’s using emergency powers in times of crisis; balancing the need to ensure public health and human rights protection; balancing the competing rights of non-state actors with taking into account the concept of the right to security as freedom from fear and freedom from want; implementation international human rights law requirement on restriction of human rights, including the derogation from international human rights obligations. The second part of the publication is an overview of the results of a survey on the implementation of the obligation to protect human rights from business violations by various countries around the world during COVID 19. The purpose of the survey was not to compare countries, so we do not provide information on each coun...

O presente trabalho é fruto de pesquisa bibliográfica que procura demonstrar se houve e quais são os avanços alcançados com a edição dos Princípios Orientadores das Nações Unidas sobre Empresas e Direitos Humanos. Para tanto, desenvolve o histórico da elabo-ração dos princípios, para demonstrar que se tratam do ápice de um movimento que há alguns anos procurava deslocar a responsabilidade do Estado, até então único ente admi-tido pelo Direito Internacional como possuidor da obrigação de proteger e garantir os di-reitos humanos, para as empresas. Em seguida, o trabalho analisa o conteúdo dos princí-pios, apontando avanços e identificando pontos de fricção com a expectativa de defenso-res de direitos humanos. Ao final, o texto conclui que apesar de estarem aquém das ex-pectativas e da necessidade urgente de maiores avanços, há que se reconhecer o quanto eles representam uma evolução e como é necessário estender a responsabilidade por vio-lações dos direitos humanos para outros agentes não estatais. Os avanços com os princí-pios não, excluem, contudo, os esforços para a elaboração de um tratado.

Business and human rights indicators, ratings and indices have proliferated in the past few years. Yet, measuring respect for human rights by corporations is not an easy task. This article offers an overview of the most prominent business and human rights measurement initiatives and draws attention to the normative, methodological, practical and political challenges related to the production of valid and emancipatory measures of corporate respect for human rights. The objective is to move the debate forward, from the if (should we use indicators?) to the how (how to create better initiatives?).

This chapter focuses on the work of the UN Working Group on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises, in order to understand how the UN Special Procedures system engages with this sui generis thematic issue. More importantly, with the on-going negotiations for a binding treaty on business and human rights and increased efforts towards the operationalisation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, it is important to reflect on broader questions which are particularly pertinent to this area of international law. Do UN Special Procedures have a role in shaping the way in which changes occur in international human rights law? Can they support the creation of effective remedies for victims of human rights abuse, or can they actually unwillingly hinder or delay potential processes of change?

Dünyamız değişiyor. Artık karşımızda çoğu devletten hem siyasi hem de ekonomik olarak daha güçlü olan çok uluslu şirketler gerçeği duruyor. Çok uluslu şirketler ciddi insan hakları ihlalleriyle birlikte anılıyor. Bu durum insan hakları hukukunda bazı ezberlerin bozulmasına yol açmıştır. Devlet-dışı aktörler olarak şirketler ve onların insan hakları yükümlülükleri önemli bir tartışma konusu haline gelmiştir. Bu çalışmada yabancı yatırımcının insan hakları yükümlülüğü meselesi, uluslararası yatırım hukuku kapsamında ve uluslararası yatırım hukukundaki güncel gelişmeler ışığında incelenmiştir.

https://www.onikilevha.com.tr/yayin/2268/uluslararasi-yatirim-hukukunda-yatirimcinin-insan-haklari-yuekuemlueluegue

By the end of 2015, the ASEAN community will fulfill its will to create the ASEAN Economic Cooperation (AEC). As then, the freedom of movement of qualified workers will be guaranteed within the ASEAN states. The question of the regulation of businesses will nevertheless stay the prerogative of each State.
Some ASEAN countries are still developing countries and are subject to an increasing number of human rights violations linked to economic development of their country. This growing economy which is often impulsed by state regulations are setting governments in the situation of judge and jury regarding the enforcement of human rights regulations.

To prevent this process, in June 2011, -in the resolution A/HRC/17/4- the Human Rights Council (HRC) established a Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises. Regional Forums have been organised in Latin and Central America in 2013 and in Africa in 2014 but in Asia, such event have not been planned -for now- and even if there is an ASEAN Business & Investment Meeting every year, it does not comprise official talks on Human Rights.

A case study on Cambodia will highlight human rights linked to business and common to different ASEAN countries. In 2010, CCHR released a very complete report on Business and Human Rights in Cambodia focusing on the impact of Business and Human Rights on land rights, labor rights, and the freedoms of expression, assembly and association.

In his last book, Robert J. Hanlon concludes that “CSR in Cambodia is in its infancy and stakeholder consolidation is weak. Most firms perceived CSR as public relations. Human Rights are generally considered as a non-business issue, while corruption is a fact of life.” But, initiatives on a long-term basis like the ILO Better Factories Program  and the national growing concerns about workers’ rights show that human rights are becoming a business risk that need to be taking into account by both the Cambodian Government and businesses.

Various litigation strategies have been elaborated with the aim of circumventing the corporate veil. In particular, a number of cases have focused on the direct liability of parent companies on the basis of an act (generally a decision at the origin of the damage) or an omission (a failure to act and take positive steps in order to prevent or remedy the damage). The proceedings brought both in the Netherlands and in the UK against Shell in relation to the environmental damage caused by oil spills in the Niger Delta are particularly interesting in this respect.

This essay addresses two critical, intersecting, questions regarding the legal status of responsibility for corporate abuses of human rights standards as portrayed in the UN’s Business and Human Rights Framework and Guiding Principles. One relates to the obligations of states to regulate corporations in this respect, and the other to the extent that they can and must do so extra-territorially. By reconstructing the nature of the relationship between the first and the second pillar of the UN Framework, combined with a critique of the relationship between the authority under general international law for a state to regulate corporate behavior extra-territorially (the ‘permissive question’), and the obligation for it to do so under international human rights laws (the ‘prescriptive question’) the authors reach the following conclusion. That in order for a state to comply fully with its human rights obligations under international law, it must ensure the protection of human rights to those who fall within its jurisdiction, whether inside or outside its territorial boundaries, and against threats to their rights, whether from state or non-state actors over which the state has jurisdiction.

El artículo analiza los impactos en la vulneración de derechos de dos megaproyectos extractivos en comunidades indígenas de Guatemala (proyecto Renace) y México (Proyecto Integral Morelos) donde hay participación de empresas españolas. En el marco de los proyectos extractivos se genera una gran conflictividad y criminalización de las personas que defienden sus recursos naturales y sus medios de vida. Detrás de todo esto, hay incumplimiento de protección por parte de los Estados, y de las empresas españolas, que también están obligadas por el marco internacional de los derechos humanos. Esto sin duda debe alentar el debate sobre la necesidad de avanzar en la definición de mecanismos vinculantes en el ámbito empresas y derechos humanos.
Palabras clave: extractivismo, empresas y derechos humanos.

The decade 2015--25 will probably see fairly sustained pressure for the adoption of measures to narrow the ‘governance gap’ between corporate influence and accountability, including with regard to business respect for human rights. This regulatory gap is not a vacuum and a range of standards do already apply. However, uncertainty about the future of the ‘business and human rights’ (BHR) agenda explains the need for more guidance on wider trends for policy-makers, legal advisers and others.

Moves to advance the BHR agenda will continue to gather momentum, both in its own right and as one aspect of wider trends on responsible business conduct. Market incentives are shifting so that there is no necessary trade-off between being competitive and being responsible; indeed, in some sectors proven social responsibility may increasingly provide a competitive edge.

Intergovernmental processes and activists are focusing on access to remedy, but progress will be slow and piecemeal. Some legislative and business actors are focusing on prevention issues, and Europe shows an emerging trend towards more mandatory due diligence and disclosure requirements for corporations.

Big business in major economies will not necessarily resist some legislation on due diligence, if only to reduce prevailing regulatory uncertainty. Yet any legislative moves will be patchwork in global terms, and may be less significant in prevention terms than self-regulatory initiatives by the business and financial sectors.

The international legal framework on BHR issues is not evolving as fast or as fully as some experts maintain. In particular, there is insufficient evidence behind claims that a general international law duty now exists on states to regulate the human rights impacts of corporate nationals abroad. It remains easy to overstate levels of awareness and activity around BHR issues and the 2011 UN Guiding Principles (GPs) on Business and Human Rights. Most firms lack sufficient awareness, capacity or incentives in this area. Pressures on governments to narrow the governance gap will not necessarily see the GPs receive greater global priority.

The BHR agenda is about much more than national-level uptake of the GPs, and is not simply a legal or legislative project. Yet the ideal scope of the BHR narrative remains debatable. Wide framings of the BHR debate could affect how readily it is able to gain a transformative degree of traction as a legal, policy and business strategy issue. With the focus on procedural due diligence requirements, one emerging risk is that the BHR narrative becomes primarily about narrow issues of technical compliance and reporting. If so, it will lose its power to drive broader, transformative strategic and commercial thinking.

Comprehensive, just, effective and predictable future BHR frameworks at any level will require both public law grounding and widespread positive business engagement. An ideal strategy cannot be limited either to top-down state ‘command’ regulations or to voluntary business-driven initiatives alone.

This case study is one of a series commissioned and edited by the Carnegie Council on Ethics and International Affairs. The purpose of each case study is to address competing moral claims in the conduct of international affairs in a format useful to college and university teachers.

ABSTRACT
TARANTINI, Vanessa Celano. Local integration of refugees in Brazil and human rights: the role of the companies. 2016. 130 p. Master – Faculty of Law, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, 2016.
The number of refugees and asylum-seekers increased significantly in the last years. Refugees are people who have been forcibly displaced due to violations of human rights. One of the durable solution for refugees is the integration into the host society. Refugees and asylum-seekers face many obstacles to integrate into the Brazilian society, such as difficulties with the local language, access to adequate housing,  education, health and labour. Their inclusion in the labour market under proper conditions is essential to achieve self-sufficiency. To that end, the private sector has a pivotal role of in the refugee integration to society. Human rights and business, diversity in the workplace and corporate
social responsibility have gradually gained ground on the corporate agenda – companies are encouraged to respect human rights and actively engage in its promotion. Within this context, businesses are relevant actors for the integration of refugees through employment,
professional training and mentoring, donations and the encouragement of corporate volunteering at refugee aid organizations, among others. This thesis provides several examples of companies promoting refugees and asylum-seekers human rights internationally and in Brazil. Those initiatives are voluntary and are mainly based on ethical and moral principles. Furthermore, it is outlined the benefits gained by
implementing such iniciatives: a) improved reputation, b) increased employee’s motivation, c) development of leadership skills to those engaging with refugees, d) greater credibility in the local community. The research showcases companies that hire refugees and asylum seekers benefit from a lower turnover, increased motivation and employee’s
commitment. To conclude, it is demonstrated that companies are playing a fundamental role in the inclusion of refugees and should be considered as a relevant actor to the integration of refugees and asylum seekers in Brazil.

Key-words: Refugees – human rights and business – corporate social responsibility.

The report looks at key issues around business and human rights in Tanzania, in line with key international standards such as the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the Ten Principles of UN Global Compact, ILO conventions, and the international bill of rights.

To this day, Liberia has a primarily agrarian economy, with more than eighty per cent of the population dependent on some form of subsistence agricultural production for their livelihood. It is estimated that almost seventy per cent of the labour force in Liberia is engaged in agriculture; twenty per cent in services and less than ten per cent in industry. In addition, the country is heavily reliant on natural and mineral resources. In fact it has been the promise of increased mining of natural resources that have allowed the country to recover financially as much as it has since the end of the war in 2003. With World Bank Loans and the selling of mining licenses to multinationals providing much needed cash injection in the immediate years post the peace agreement. In 2010 the top seven exports were rubber, timber, iron, diamonds, cocoa, and coffee. Of Liberia's USD 207 million in export earnings in 2010, sixty-one per cent alone came from the sale of rubber. Liberia's largest export partners in that year were South Africa (27%), the United States (18%), Spain (8%) and Denmark (6%).

European-based multinational corporations can cause or be complicit in human rights abuses in third countries. Victims of corporate human rights abuses frequently face many hurdles when attempting to hold corporations to account in their own country. Against this backdrop, judicial mechanisms have increasingly been relied on to bring legal proceedings in the home States of the corporations. This study attempts to map out all relevant cases (35 in total) filed in Member States of the European Union on the basis of alleged corporate human rights abuses in third countries. It also provides an in-depth analysis of 12 cases and identifies various obstacles (legal, procedural and practical) faced by claimants in accessing legal remedy. On the basis of these findings, it makes a number of recommendations to the EU institutions in order to improve access to legal remedies in the EU for victims of human rights abuses by European based companies in third countries.

MEMBERS OF THE INDEPENDENT COMMISSION OF EXPERTS
The Corporate Crimes Principles were adopted by the
following experts in their individual capacity: Justice Ian Binnie
(Co-Chair), Anita Ramasastry(Co-Chair), William Bourdon, Siri Frigaard
Nuhu Ribadu, James G Stewart, Mark Taylor, Alex Whiting, Martin Witteveen

This research will analyse corporate legal accountability of parent companies for transnational human rights violations committed by a subsidiary. To this end, the paper will first examine the current international status of MNCs regarding their duty to respect human rights and the different legal approaches that would permit the establishment of liability of the parent company at the national level in their home court. We argue the necessity of parent company liability as a means to access substantive justice and to close the current regulatory gap regarding corporate acts and human rights abuses. Via the legal analysis of the cases, we scrutinize the possibility and the methods under each system to bring the parent company and the subsidiary under the home court jurisdiction for foreign subsidiary HR violations. Despite the lack of a parent company liability doctrine, the situational approach and the different views regarding proximity in the corporate structure, determining the presence or the lack of foreign direct liability, we find several patterns and common features that might further determine the possibility to sue the parent company for human rights abuses in their home court and the subsequent potential future legal liability. We do a comparative study to determine the main obstacles to the establishment of jurisdiction over the case and the potential of this new jurisdictional decisions to establish a precedent in future litigation. Finally we consider the possibility of a broadened duty of care in parallel with recent legal developments concerning mandatory HRDD requirements, the need to connect HRDD with jurisprudence to develop expansive liability (a widening of the duty of care) based on the companies HRDD policies and commitments to establish the factual involvement and liability of the parent, and the limits of this approach.

(2012) 12 Human Rights Law Review 421
At a time when the legitimacy and suitability of international standards for both human rights and investment protection are called into question, I argue that the two legal projects can be reclaimed as spaces for transformative change. Specifically, I suggest that common elements can be identified in both protection discourses. These can then be revisited in light of alternative roles that international investment law and international human rights law may take on. I nominate the due diligence principle as one such element since it enables a repositioning of the fair and equitable treatment standard of investment protection as a standard of mutual conduct adopted by states towards investment. The due diligence principle also opens up an alternative reading of the state duty to protect within the United Nations Framework for Business and Human Rights, thus enabling a focus on home-state extraterritorial obligations.

Cette thèse se propose d'analyser l'accès à la justice civile pour les victimes de violations de droits de l'homme commises par des entreprises multinationales, au regard des règles de compétence internationale des tribunaux de international privé en matière de responsabilité civile délictuelle.
D'une part, elle cherchera à montrer l'émergence d'une obligation de droit international général à la charge de l'Etat d'origine de l'entreprise de pourvoir un for de réparation pour les victimes de violations de droits de l'homme commises par les entreprises multinationales qui possèdent sur son territoire leur siège social. Elle examinera dans quelle mesure la mise en oeuvre de cette obligation sur le plan du droit international privé permet de garantir l'accès effectif à la justice pour les victimes.
D'autre part, elle s'interrogera sur le rôle résiduel que peuvent jouer les Etats tiers - dans lesquels les entreprises multinationales sont simplement présentes - dans la mise en place d'un for de réparation, au travers de l'exercice de la compétence civile universelle. Elle examinera également la légitimité d'une telle démarche au regard du droit international.
La recherche mettra en exergue la double fonction que peuvent ainsi endosser les règles de compétence de droit international privé dans ce domaine, en assurant, d'une part, un accès effectif à la justice et à la réparation pour les victimes de tels abus, et en participant, d'autre part à l'effort de régulation des entreprises multinationales sur le plan global.