The increase in global activities of multinational corporations (‘MNCs’), especially the involvement of extractive MNCs in emerging markets, has been a source of human rights concern in recent years. This is because of the impact of corporate activities on the human rights of the local communities where they operate. The rising corporate impunity for human rights violations has been attributed to the lack of access to judicial remedies for human rights victims and the inadequacy of existing regulations available to rein in global MNCs. This has led to suggestions, especially by human rights scholars, to explore the human rights obligations of corporations under international human rights law as a means for promoting corporate accountability for human rights, with a focus on emerging markets. This paper challenges this view and argues that reliance on international human rights law as a regime for promoting corporate accountability in emerging markets is misplaced, because enforcement of international human rights law depends on municipal institutions, and the institutions available in emerging markets are weak, corrupt, and inefficient. The rampant violation of human rights has begun to generate conflicts which threaten local, national, and global security, such as the situation in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria. This paper argues that the growing distrust between MNCs and local communities, which is mostly responsible for the insecurity in the region, could be addressed through a legal regime that focuses on promoting moral behaviour from inside the corporations. Therefore, this paper proposes a review of the corporate legal architecture to incorporate the interests of those affected by corporate activities, especially the local communities, into the corporate governance structure as a strategy for promoting responsible and human rights friendly decision-making and for them to hold MNCs to human rights standards rather than relying on international human rights law itself.
2 Hanging of Ken Saro Wiwa and and eight other Ogoni activists on November 1, 1995. See Vogel, The Market for Virtue: The Potential and Limites of Corporate Social Responsibility (Washinton D.C.: Brookings Institute Press 2006), 140-4. For an example, see Bodo Community v Shell Petroleum Development Company (Nigeria) Ltd, Case No. HQ11X01280 (Shell/Nigeria); Beanal v Freeport-McMoran, Inc., 197 F.3d 161 (5th Cir. 1999) (Freeport-McMoran/ Indonesia); Jota v Texaco, Inc., 157 F.3d 153 (2nd Cir. 1998) (Texaco/Ecuador).
4 Need for Legally Enforceable Rights protection’ 81 U. Det Mercy L. Rev. 489 (2003-2004) 489.
5 See for example, Human Rights Watch & Center for Human Rights & Global Justice, On the Margins of Profit: Rights at Risk in the Global Economy (February 2008), <http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/ bhr0208webwcover.pdf> (hereinafter On the Margins of Profit) accessed 19 March 2016; Human Rights Watch, ‘The Price of Oil: Corporate Responsibility and Human Rights Violation in Nigeria’s Oil Producing Communities’ (January 1999) <http://pantheon.hrw.org/reports/1999/nigeria/nigeria0199.pdf> accessed 19 March 2016.
6 Some examples of environmental and human right disasters that has generated global outrage include, the destruction of Ecuadorian Amazon by Texaco, The Inter-American Commission on human Rights, ‘Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Ecuador’, Inter-AM. Comm’n on Hum. Rts., O.A.S. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/11.96, doc. 10 rev. 1 (1997); the activities of Shell that cause environmental degradation in Ogoni and the eventual hanging of Ken Saro Wiwa and his 8 Ogoni kinsmen, on 1st November 1995. BBC News, ‘1995: Nigeria Hangs Human Rights Activist’ 10 November 1995, <http:// www.news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/10/ newsid_2539000/2539561.stm> accessed 26 January 2015; the collapse of a factory building in Sava, Bangladesh, March 13 2013, BBC News 3 May 2012, ,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22394094> accessed 02 March 2016.
7 Broecker, ‘”Better the Devil You Know”: Home State Approaches to Transnational Corporate Accountability’ (2008-2009) 41 N.Y.U. J. Int’l L. & Pol. 159, 160.
8 Representative to the Secretary General on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and other Business Enterprises’, E/CN.4/2006/97 (22 February 2006) para. 30; see also the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) 2011 Report on the Niger Delta at <http://www.unep.ord/ nigeria> accessed 23 January 2015.
9 Pillay 522; Deva, Regulating Corporate Human Rights Violations: Humanising Business (Oxon: Routledge 2012), 12.
10 See for example, Addo, ‘Human Rights and Transnational Corporations – an Introduction’ in Addo (ed), Human Rights Standards and the Responsibility of Transnational Corporations (The Hague: Kluwer Law International 1999); Jochnick, ‘Confronting the Impunity of Non-State Actors: New Fields for the Promotion of Human Rights’ (1999) 21 Human Rights Quarterly 56-79; Pillay; Deva, Ibid.
12 Addo, ‘Human Rights and Transnational Corporation – an Introduction’.
13 Michael K Addo, ‘The Reality of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights’ (2014) 14 Human Rights Law Review, 133.
14 Ibid, 135.
15 Elisa Giuliani and Chiara Macchi, ‘Multinational Corporations’ Economic and Human Rights Impacts on Developing Countries: A Review and Research Agenda’ (2014) 38 Cambridge Journal of Economics, 479, 482-90.
16 Ibid, 479-90.
17 Addo, Human Rights, 3.
18 Ibid.
19 Ibid,7.
20 Ibid.
21 Ibid, 8.
22 Ibid, 5.
24 Blumberg, The Multinational Challenge to Corporate Law: The Search for a New Corporate Personality (New York: Oxford University Press 1993), 7.
25 Hurts, The Legitimacy of Business Corporation in the Law of the United States 1780-1970 (The University Press of Virginia 1970) 22.
26 Louis K. Liggett, Inc. v Lee (1933) 288 US 517, 556, 589.
27 Blumberg, 8.
28 Muchlinski, Multinational Enterprises and the Law (2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press 2007), 45.
29 Addo, Human Rights, 9.
30 Ibid, 10.
31 Millon, ‘New Directions in Corporate Law: Communitarians, Contractarians, and the Crisis in Corporate Law’ (1993) 50 Wash. and Lee L. Rev. 1373, 1375. The anti-takeover agenda received approval by the courts in the following case: Unocal Corp. v Mesa Petroleum Co., 493 A.2d 946 (Del. 1985); Moran Corp. v Household Int’l Inc., 500 A.2d 1386 (Del. 1985). See for example, DEL. CODE ANN. tit. 8. S 242 (1991).
32 Millon, Ibid.
33 It is beyond the scope of this paper to undertake analysis of the history of takeover laws or its outcome in the United States in the project. For a fuller account of the benefits of takeover legislations and its effects on local communities the reader is referred to Millon above.
35 McBarnet and Schmidt, ‘Corporate Accountability through Creative Enforcement: Human Rights, the Alien Tort Claims Act and the Limits of Legal Impunity’ in McBarnet, Voiculescu and Campbell (eds), The New Corporate Accountability: Corporate Social Responsibility and the Law (Cambridge University Press 2009), 148.
36 Addo, Human Rights, 11.
37 Ibid.
38 Armour, ‘Enforcement Strategies in UK Corporate Governance: A Roadmap and Empirical Assessment’ in Armour and Payne (eds), Rationality in Company Law: Essays in Honour of DD Prentice (Hart Publishing 2009), 77.
39 Addo, Human Rights, 12.
40 Smith, Textbook on International Human Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2014), 26.
41 Smith, Textbook on International Human Rights, n 33, 26.
42 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Preamble, Dec. 10, 1948, U.N Doc. A/810 (hereinafter Universal Declaration).
43 Entered into force on March 23, 1976, G.A. Res. 2200A, 21 U.N GAOR Supp. (no 16) at 52, U.N Doc. A/6316 (1966).
44 Entered into force January 3, 1976, G.A Res. Doc. 2200A, 21 U.N GAOR Supp. (no 17) at 49 U.N Doc. A/6316 (1966).
45 Smith, 37.
46 Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Fact Sheet No 22, 3.
47 ‘International Bill of Rights’ is the expression used for the UDHR, the ICCPR and theICESCR.
48 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, opened for signature 4 November 1950, 213 U.N.T.S. 222 (entered into force 3 September 1953).
49 22 November 1969, 9 ILM 673.
50 Adopted 27 June 1981 (entered into force 21 October 1986) OAU. Doc. CAB/ LEG/67/3 Rev. 5.
51 Social and Economic Rights Action Centre (SERAC) and Centre for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) v Nigeria, Communication No. 155/96 (Unreported, African Commission on Human and peoples’ Rights, 27 October 2001) para 41.
52 Shelton, Advanced Introduction to International Human Rights Law (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited 2014), 103.
53 Article 60.
54 ACHPR, article 24.
55 For example, Art 1 UDHR; Art 25 UDHR; Art 6 ICCPR; and Art 12 ICESCR.
56 CCPR Art 2 (1).
57 De Feyter, Human Rights: Social Justice in the Age of the Market (Dhaka: The University Press Ltd 2005) 1.
58 Reinisch, ‘The Changing International Legal Framework for Dealing with Non-State Actors’ in Alston (ed), Non-State Actors and Human Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2005) 70-1.
59 Anderson, ‘Human Rights Approaches to Environmental Protection: An Overview’ in Boyle and Anderson (eds), Human Rights Approaches to Environmental Protection (Oxford: Clarendon Press 1996).
60 Reinisch, 71; Beth Stephens, ‘The Amorality of Profit: Transnational Corporations and Human Rights’ (2002) 20 Berkely J. Int’l L. 45, 72.
61 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Dec. 19, 1966, para. 5, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, 173 (entered into force Jan. 3, 1976); International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Dec. 19, 1966, para. 5, 993 U.N.T.S. 3, 5 (entered into force Jan. 3, 1976).
62 Reinisch, 71.
63 Human Rights Committee, General Comments No. 31: The Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on State Parties to the Covenant, UN Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.13, para. 8 (May 26, 2004) reprinted in Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, UN Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.8, (May 8, 2006) 233 (hereinafter Treaty Bodies Compilation).
64 Shelton, Advanced Introduction to International Human Rights Law, 209 Ibid.
65 OECD (2011) OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (OECD Publishing 2011) <http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264115415-en> (hereinafter OECD Guidelines 2011) accessed 26 September 2016.
67 Human Rights Council, ‘Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework: Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises’, A/HRC/17/31 (21 March 2011) (SRSG ‘Guiding Principles’). UNGP, para 54.
69 The terms obligations, duties and responsibilities will be used interchageably throughout in this paper to represent the human rights obligations of business corporations.
70 Addo, 28.
71 By the breadth of endorsement, we mean the number of states that have ratified the covenants and are bound by it. According to Rhona K.M. Smith, ‘[a]proximately three-quarters of the membership of the United Nations is bound by the Covenants …’. Smith, 44.
72 Deva, Human Rights, 16.
73 Addo, 23.
74 ICCPR Art. 2 (1).
75 General Comments No. 31 (n 60).
76 ICESCR Art. 2 (1).
77 SERAC (2001), para 59.
78 Ibid, para 44.
79 Ibid, para 46.
80 Stavrinides, ‘Human Rights Obligations under United Nations Charter’ (1999) 3 Int’l J. Hum. Rts. 38, 45-6. SERAC, para 59.
81 2004- XII; (2005) 41 EHRR 324 [GC].
82 Oneryildiz, para 101.
83 Shelton, 214.
84 Ibid.
86 Bradley, 214. ‘The Cost of International Human Rights Litigation’ (2001) 2 Chi. J. Int’l L. 457,, 458.
87 Human Rights commission and UNEP 2011 Report, n 7.
88 Okolobo, ‘SPDC Declares Force Majeure on Forcados Export’ (Shell, News and Media Releases, 30 September 2015) <http://www.shell.com.ng/aboutshell/ media-centre/news-and-media-releases/production-updates/spdc-declares-force-majure-on-forcados-export.html>. Accessed 30 August 2016; John Vidal, ‘Niger Delta Oil Pipeline Vandalism Estimated to Cost $14bn a Year’ The Guardian, (Lagos, 10 November 2015) 1.
89 Vidal, Ibid.
90 The Vanguard, ‘Renewed Rumpus in Niger Delta’ (Lagos, 26 January 2016), 1.
91 Vidal, n 85.
92 UDHR Arts. 19, 21; ICCPR Arts 18, 19; African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, Art 9.
93 Ikpe, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: Perspectives and Challenges’ (2005) 20 African Journal of International Affairs, 7.
94 Martin, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility in Nigeria: Challenges, Opportunities and Strategic Approach’ (2011) 4 African Research Review 135.
95 Adele, ‘Human Rights and the Corporate Sector in Nigeria’ in P. O. Osilapa (ed), Human Rights in Nigeria: Challenges and Prospects (Nigeria: University of Lagos 2013) 107.
96 Ibid.
1 Candidate (University of Nottingham), LLM (Western Ontario), LLB (Lagos State University).
(2017). Regulating MNCs and International Norms: Challenges in Focusing on a Human Rights Approach in Emerging Markets and Possible Alternatives. Legal issues Journal, 5 (2), https://www.legalissuesjournal.com/article/05-02-09072017/
