human rights in business

8/6/2019 Human Rights in Business

1/23

Human Rights in the Context

of Business

Lecture 5


2/23

Human Rights Defined

Human rights in the Indian context means -

all rights relating to life, liberty, equality anddignity of every individual guaranteed by the

Indian constitution or embodied in the

International covenants and enforceable by the

Courts in India


3/23

Human Rights Put SimplyHuman rights constitute the matrix of all fundamental rightsthat each individual has today.

These rights include (naming a few) -- Right to Life and health

- Right to Freedom and personal liberty

- Right of equality

- Right to work and livelihood

- Right to freedom of conscience and religion

- Right against arbitrary arrest

- Right for demanding enforcement of such guaranteed humanrights


4/23

Ambiguity

Despite the fact that business obligations towardshuman rights are so frequently the subject of news

coverage, popular debate and of consumer andNGO campaigns, they still lack definition.

We are still left with two basic questions that lie atthe heart of the dispute between businesses and

the Human Rights group: What defines businesses human rightsobligations? How far do these extend?


5/23

Distinction

One immediate distinction which limits the scope ofbusiness responsibility is the distinction between

immediate responsibility and collectiveresponsibility.

Immediate responsibility is the responsibility whichstems from the activities of a particular business,such as a factory using child labour.

The concept of collective responsibility arises fromthe participation of businesses, as a collectivity, in aninequitable global economic system which engenderssevere disadvantages for many groups and societies.


6/23

TYPES OF COMPANYACTIVITYTYPES OF COMPANYACTIVITYPotential violations

identified for

company departments

T

y

p

e

s

o

c

om

p

a

n

y

a

c

t

i

v

i

t

y

Concerns the rights of individuals residing on

or near the land owned or used by the companyConcerns the rights of individuals residing in

societies (inc. societies defined by political, cultural

or geographic boundaries) which are affected by

company activities

Concerns the rights of

individuals using or coming

into contact with company products,

and individuals or groups affected

by company marketing campaigns

Concerns the rights of individuals

involved in the research, development,

and testing phases of company products,

both as test subjects and as possessors

of knowledge

Concerns the rights of individuals employed

by the company, or seeking employment

with the company

Concerns the rights of individuals using

essential goods and services which

are provided by the company, such as

company educational, housing, andmedical facilities


7/23

In Relation to Workers

usinesses should promote, protect and

secure their rights.Health and safety regulations are agood example of the application of thisconcept of fuller duties in relation toemployees.


8/23

In Regards to Products

Businesses have a duty to ensure that theirproducts are not used in the violation of human

rights. This comprises responsibility to takereasonable measures to prevent both theintentional misuse, and the unintentional wrongfuluse of the product.

For instance-Declare Level ofPesticide


9/23

Responsibilities towardsCommunities

usinesses should assume positive responsibilities

in relation to anyone residing near its locations.This includes the positive duty to keep thepeople informed of changes in the plans to use theland, to give the people a voice in those changes,

and to ensure that the voice of the people, i.e.their leaders, is actually representative of themajority will.


10/23

Implications

It is clear that the responsibilities identifiedpreviously derive not from the power of

businesses per se, but rather from therequirement that businesses ensure that thegenerally more far-reaching effects of theiroperations do not negatively affect their own

functioning.


11/23

The proximity of a company tohuman rights violationsCan be viewed on three levels: direct, indirect,and no connection.

Direct entails a distinct, clear and unbrokenconnection between the activity of thecompany and the human rights violation.Examples include a company discriminating inits hiring practices, or locking the doors on

workers to prevent them from running away.In such cases, the company has astraightforward and immediate responsibilityto do whatever is necessary to mitigate, orstop the violations.


12/23

Indirect entails a violation, which the companycontributes to, but does not directly initiate or

perpetrate, by enabling an abusive practice to beestablished or continued. For example, companieswill sometimes buy from suppliers or producers thatviolate human rights in their operations. Or, acompany might undertake a joint venture with an

oppressive government.In such cases, the company still has someresponsibility to take action to ameliorate the harm,but the action should be proportionate to the natureof the link between the company and the violations.


13/23

In the modern world, the decisions

taken by a business can have majorimplications for lives andcommunities geographically andculturally remote, so businesses do

have to be discerning in identifyingtheir indirect connection toviolations.


14/23

Case 1

For example, in the early 1990s severalinternational oil companies undertook a jointventure with the Burmese government and the

state oil company, Myanma Oil and GasEnterprise (MOGE). MOGE assumedresponsibility for providing labour and securityfor the construction of a gas pipeline for theproject. Allegations later emerged that forced

labour and child labour were used to constructthe pipeline, and that other violations,including torture, and forced relocation,occurred in MOGEs operations to clear the

area and provide security.


15/23

Although the main Western partner, Unocal,did not directly carry out these purported

violations itself, because of its involvement inthe project, its liability for acting in concertwith the Burmese government and MOGE inbreaching universally recognised human

rights standards is now under considerationin the United States District Court ofCalifornia


16/23

Business and Human Rights Why are

Human Rights important to Business ?

Compliance with both National andInternational Laws Human rights principles arecontained in national and international law.Ensuring that business operations are consistentwith these legal principles helps companies avoidlegal challenges to their global activities.

Satisfying Consumer Concerns: Increased mediaattention to business role in protecting humanrights has led to increased consumer awareness ofthe treatment of workers producing goods for theglobal marketplace and demands for social

accountability.


17/23

Building Community Goodwill : A

multinationals presence can be viewed locally aspositive or negative. Avoiding human rightsviolations helps in maintaining positivecommunity relations.

Enhancing Risk Management : The denial of basic human rights often can lead to social or political dispruption. This in turn can cause labourstrife, delays in production or movement of

finished products etc.

Keeping Markets Open : Companies can help toensure that sanctions do not limit their ability toconduct business globally by promoting greaterrespect for human rights


18/23

Increasing Worker Productivity andRetention

Maintaining the faith of employees andshareholders


19/23

Human Rights Most Blatant Violations

The BhopalTragedyDecember 2-3, 1984 : Methyl isocyanate gas leaks from Union Carbide

factory in Bhopal, killing 2000 people instantly and 15000 people eventually.5.72 lakh people have been maimed for life requiring life-long medicaltreatment

Dec 4, 1984 : The

Bhopal police files its FIR

Dec 7, 1984 : UC chairman Warren Anderson and 8 others arrested. Releasedon bail of Rs. 25000

Dec 1, 1987 : The CBI files charge sheets against Anderson and 11 others,including UC (USA) and UCIL.

July 6,1988 : A non-bailable warrant is issued against Anderson

Feb , 1989 : While the issue of interim compensation is being heard before theSC, UC strikes a deal with the Indian government , under which the companypays a compensation of $470 million. In return , criminal charges arewithdrawn against against the company. Several groups file petitions in the SCagainst the settlement.

Oct 3, 1991 : SC revokes criminal immunity granted to UC and other accused.Also orders the government to construct a hospital for the victims. UC was

asked to pay money for construction and to run it.


20/23


The BhopalTragedy

Feb 1,1992: after ignoring 4 court summons , Anderson is declared afugitive

August 1999 : Union Carbide announces a merger with Dow

Chemical CompanyNovember 1999 : Several individual victims supported by someNGOs file a suit in a federal court in NewYork

August 2000 : Federal Judge John Keenan dismisses suit

February 2001 : Dow chemicals claims it is not responsible for afactory it didnt operate

August 28, 2002 : The chief magistrate reaffirms charges and demandsAndersons extradition

May-June, 2003: The Government conveys its request for Andersonsextradition to the US government


21/23

Human Rights Most Blatant ViolationsThe BhopalTragedy

July 13, 2004: The US Government rejects Andersonsextradition request on some technical grounds. The Indian

Government for some reason does not push any harder.July 19, 2004: As a sign of resignation,the Supreme courtorders the government to distribute the compensationmoney from Ucs settlement amount among the survivors

October 26, 2004 : The Supreme Court approves a plan

for the distribution of Rs. 1,567 crores among the 5.72 lakhvictims

The amount per victim works out to Rs. 27,395 which isnot even sufficient to pay medical bills for a year.


22/23


UnileverThe CulpritIn March 2001, Unilevers mercury thermometer factory in Kodaikanal wasexposed for illegally dumping toxic mercury wastes in a scrapyard adjacent toa school behind the factory building.

TheC

ompany had been doing this for several years unabated.

Morover, workers and ex-workers were kept in the dark about the toxic natureof mercury- which was handled by the workers without any protective gear.

Workers demanded their health records from the company in preparation for

an independent medical assessment.Also demand for financial compensation for closure of the factory and a long-term plan for health monitoring and medication

The company has ignored both demands. Instead, Unilever has stepped up theharassment by ordering relocation of the workers to a Unilever factory inKandla, Gujarat. Workers who failed to relocate within the stipulated timewere threatened with loss of pay or termination


23/23


The Bayer CaseDespite having been directed by the WHO to withdraw all WHO

Class 1 chemical pesticides, BAYER continues to market pesticides

like Methyl Parathion, Monocrotophos, Cypermetrin and 12 others

.All these chemicals are known to cause cancer, disrupt human

hormonal functions, that create birth deformities, cause liver, kidney

and nervous damage and generally suppress human immunity.

BAYER has withdrawn these chemicals in its homecountry Germany, but continues to market them in

India.

human rights in business

Documents