“If you can see the corruption at a very bottom
level, then you can only imagine the level of corruption
at the top,” says Rubin McNeely, a member of the steering
committee for Amnesty International’s (AI) Business & Human
Rights Committee. A recent addition to AI’s extensive
global research, development and watchdog programs, the Business & Human
Rights Committee is a group that researches and monitors
human rights violations in the extractive industries, such
as oil, gas and mining.
McNeely stresses that AI follows this procedure very formally,
taking as unbiased a stand as possible until hard evidence
is revealed. “We research and then discuss with companies
their actions in terms of human rights violations,” he
says. Taking action must follow the procedure of the law
and be brought through the appropriate channels to be effective.
In many countries, he points out, the members of human rights
watchdog groups like Amnesty International are forced to
conduct their investigations in secrecy.
“Overseas companies are ambassadors for the countries
they represent,” says McNeely, “Therefore it
is essential that they conduct themselves accordingly.” People
remember, he adds, long after a company has moved on, and
if a certain company has created or added to a whole bunch
of problems for the local community, then that is their impression
of an entire country.
As it is now, most governments are reserved about enforcing
laws on companies operating in overseas countries. The UN’s
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, created 3 decades
ago, is not international law, yet it is something that corporations
are being asked to consider voluntarily.
“When we ask to speak to companies, we get put on
the bottom list of priorities,” says McNeely. “The
media is our greatest weapon in this respect, it gets attention.” Yet
although the committee is young and struggling to make changes,
it is starting to be taken seriously by governments, particularly
in Canada and the UK.
The Issues
Irene Khan, Amnesty International’s Security General,
states: “Human rights are not a luxury for good times – they
must be respected and upheld at all times under all circumstances.”
Watchdog groups like AI’s Business & Human Rights
find the same situations happening in countries as different
to each other as Ecuador to Uzbekistan.
These issues are:
1) Destruction of native land and habitat – polluting
drinking water sources and farmland, thus debilitating a
local population’s ability to supply their own food
sources and be self-sufficient
2) Companies working in conflict zones and being “silent
partners” of complicity in regards to human rights
abuses. Company security forces using excessive force.
3) Weak, unstable or corrupt governments either unable or
unwilling to regulate industry standards within their country.
4) Contempt for the ILO160, created at the 1996 International
Labour Organization conventions. This treaty decrees that
aboriginal groups have a say in the use of their lands.
The UN Norms (Normal Industry Laws) is something that groups
like Amnesty International are pushing to become internationally
recognized laws.
“Voluntary action is not working out,” says
McNeely. “We need legislation if we are going to take
action.”
Stirring opposition from industry bodies such as the International
Chamber of Commerce (ICC), International Organization of
Employers (IOE), and the US Council for International Business
(USCIB), the UN Norms face great resistance in becoming accepted
internationally.
The UN Norms explain in detail the business community’s
human rights obligations relevant under international law.
Critics of the UN Norms call it “anti-business.” Supporters
of the Norms argue that stable environments are required
for investment and business in overseas operations, and that
companies have responsibilities “within their respective
spheres of activity and influence.”
The main argument against the norms is that governments,
not corporations, are responsible for human rights obligations.
While governments certainly set the standards and climate
for the way business is conducted within their country, this
argument doesn’t address how corporations, like individuals,
can themselves be the subjects of international law.
The UN Norms specifically address transnational corporations.
According to the definition within the document, transnationals
are either an economic entity operating in more than one
country or a cluster of economic entities operating in two
or more countries. The US, UK, Holland, Germany, France and
Japan are the six countries which the world’s largest
transnational corporations are based out of.
Formed in the UK in 2001, AI’s Business & Human
Rights Committee is one out of the many human rights watchdog
groups targeting the way business is effecting human rights
around the world, especially in countries where transnational
corporations are richer than the governments.
“We’re young and we still have a lot of maturing
to do as an organization,” says McNeely, “Yet
a whole movement is being born out of these issues.”
Part II:
Part II of this series will explore the philosophy of Share
Power and how organizations like AI are implementing it
in education programs and activism campaigns.
UN NORMS
http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/links/norms-Aug2003.html
AI Canada
http://www.amnesty.ca/business/
Do you have a comment or feedback on
this article? Email
us and let us know what you think.
|
