1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Law and Social Science
  4. Volume 12, 2016
  5. Article

Annual Review of Law and Social Science

Volume 12, 2016

Corporate Complicity in International Human Rights Violations

Abstract

Two literatures—business and human rights and transitional justice—can be usefully combined to consider the issue of corporate complicity in past human rights violations in dictatorships and armed conflicts. But although the transitional justice literature emphasizes the positive role that international pressure plays in advancing justice, the business and human rights literature identifies international constraints in the area of corporate abuses. These include the lack of settled law establishing businesses' human rights responsibilities, the absence of courts to adjudicate corporate human rights violation cases, and the international focus on voluntary principles over legal obligations. Despite this unpropitious international climate, civil society mobilization and judicial innovation have advanced accountability efforts and overcome the strong veto power of business in some countries, often creatively blending international and domestic law. These efforts from below provide access to justice for victims and potential models for overcoming the current accountability gap.

Keyword(s): business, corporations, human rights, transitional justice, truth commissions, voluntary principles
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110615-085100
2016-10-27
2024-04-27
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lawsocsci/12/1/annurev-lawsocsci-110615-085100.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110615-085100&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Addo M, Martin J. 2016. The evolving business and society landscape: Can human rights make a difference?. The Business and Human Rights Landscape: Moving Forward, Looking Back J Martin, KE Bravo 348–83 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  2. Albiston C. 1999. The rule of law and the litigation process: the paradox of losing by winning. Law Soc. Rev. 33:869–910 [Google Scholar]
  3. Alford RP. 2014. The future of human rights litigation after Kiobel. Notre Dame Law Rev 89:1749 [Google Scholar]
  4. Andrews EL. 1998. Volkswagen to create $12 million fund for Nazi era laborers. New York Times Sept. 11
  5. Avant DD. 2005. The Market for Force: The Consequences of Privatizing Security Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  6. Babineau K. 2015. Business as Usual? Transnational Corporations and the Challenge of Human Rights Remedy in Peru MPhil thesis, St. Peter's Coll., Lat. Am. Cent., School Interdiscip. Area Stud. Univ. Oxford Oxford, UK:
  7. Balmer JM, Powell SM, Greyser SA. 2011. Explicating ethical corporate marketing. Insights from the BP Deepwater Horizon catastrophe: the ethical brand that exploded and then imploded. J. Bus. Ethics 102:11–14 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bernal-Bermúdez L. 2016. The power of corporations and the power of people: understanding remedy and accountability for human rights violations—Colombia 2000–2014 DPhil thesis in progress, Dep. Sociol. Univ. Oxford (work on file with the authors)
  9. Bilchitz D, Deva S. 2013. The human rights obligations of business: a critical framework for the future. Human Rights Obligations of Business: Beyond the Corporate Responsibility to Respect S Deva, D Bilchitz 1–26 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  10. Block F. 1984. The ruling class does not rule: notes on the Marxist theory of the state. The Political Economy: Reading in the Politics and Economics of American Public Policy T Ferguson, J Rogers Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe [Google Scholar]
  11. Boadle A, Winter B. 2014. Brazil dictatorship probe urges prosecuting military, companies. Reuters Dec. 10
  12. Bohoslavsky JP. 2012. El eslabón financiero en la justicia transicional Uruguaya. Rev. Urug. Cienc. Polit. 21:2153–79 [Google Scholar]
  13. Bohoslavsky JP, Opgenhaffen V. 2010. Past and present of corporate complicity: financing the Argentinean dictatorship. Harvard Hum. Rights J. 23:157–203 [Google Scholar]
  14. Bohoslavsky JP, Rulli M. 2010. Corporate complicity and finance as a “killing agent”: the relevance of the Chilean case. J. Int. Crim. Justice 8:3829–50 [Google Scholar]
  15. Bohoslavsky JP, Torelly MD. 2014. Financial complicity: the Brazilian dictatorship under the “macroscope.”. Justice and Economic Violence in Transition DN Sharp 233–62 New York: Springer [Google Scholar]
  16. Brant M. 2013. Projeto Adeus Boilesen. YouTube video, June 13. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDM-PXdAS2w
  17. Bueno de Mesquita B, Cohen LE. 1995. Self-interest, equity, and crime control: a game-theoretic analysis of criminal decision making. Criminology 33:483–518 [Google Scholar]
  18. Buhman K. 2013. Navigating from “train wreck” to being “welcomed”: negotiation strategies and argumentative patterns in the development of the UN Framework. Human Rights Obligations of Business: Beyond the Corporate Responsibility to Respect S Deva, D Bilchitz 29–57 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  19. Carvalho Gomes da Silva R. 2010. Values, knowledge and activism in the Brazilian Amazon: from the boomerang to the Archimedean lever MSc ext. essay, Oriel Coll., Lat. Am. Cent., School Interdiscip. Area Stud. Univ. Oxford Oxford, UK:
  20. Černič JL. 2016. Corporate accountability for human rights: from a top-down to a bottom-up approach. The Business and Human Rights Landscape: Moving Forward, Looking Back J Martin, KE Bravo 193–218 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  21. Chesterman S. 2004. Oil and water: regulating the behavior of multinational corporations through law. N.Y. Univ. J. Int. Law Polit. 36:307–29 [Google Scholar]
  22. Chevron Corp. v. Naranjo 133 S.Ct. 423 2012.
  23. Clapham A. 2000. The question of jurisdiction under international criminal law over legal persons: lessons from the Rome Conference on an international criminal court. Liability of Multinational Corporations under International Law MT Kamminga, S Zia-Zarifi 139–95 The Hague, Neth.: Kluwer Law Int.
  24. Clapham A. 2008. Extending international criminal law beyond the individual to corporations and armed opposition groups. J. Int. Crim. Justice 6:5899–926 [Google Scholar]
  25. Colvin C. 2006. Overview of the reparations program in South Africa. The Handbook of Reparations P De Greiff 176–214 Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  26. Connolly K. 2008. German railways admits complicity in Holocaust. The Guardian Jan. 23. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jan/23/secondworldwar.germany
  27. Cooper N. 2002. State collapse as business: the role of conflict trade and the emerging control agenda. Dev. Change 33:5935–55 [Google Scholar]
  28. Dandan A, Franzki H. 2013. Entre analisis historico y responsabilidad juridica. See Vertbisky & Bohoslavsky 2013. 217–34
  29. Danner AM. 2005. Nuremberg industrialist prosecutions and aggressive war. Va. J. Int. Law 46:651 [Google Scholar]
  30. Davis M. 2003. The Pinochet Case: Origins, Progress and Implications London: Univ. London
  31. Deitelhoff N, Feil M, Fischer S, Haidvogl A, Wolf DK, Zimmer M. 2010. Business in zones of conflict and global security governance: What has been learnt and where to from here. Corporate Security Responsibility? N Deitelhoff, K Wolf 202–26 Glob. Issues Ser. London: Palgrave Macmillan [Google Scholar]
  32. Dougherty C. 2011. Introduction to Econometrics Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
  33. Downs GW, Rocke DM, Barsoom PN. 1996. Is the good news about compliance good news about cooperation?. Int. Organ. 50:03379–406 [Google Scholar]
  34. Felstiner WLF, Abel RL, Sarat A. 1981. The emergence and transformation of disputes: naming, blaming, claiming. Law Soc. Rev. 15:631–54 [Google Scholar]
  35. Ford J. 2015. Regulating Business for Peace Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  36. Friedman EJ. 1999. The effects of transnationalism reversed in Venezuela: assessing the impact of UN global conferences on the women's movement. Int. Fem. J. Polit. 13357–81
  37. Gualde A. 2013. El Caso Papel Prensa. See Vertbisky & Bohoslavsky 2013. 345–60
  38. Halliday TC, Carruthers BG. 2007. The recursivity of law: global norm-making and national law-making in the globalization of corporate insolvency regimes. Am. J. Sociol. 112:41135–202 [Google Scholar]
  39. Hathaway OA. 2002. Do human rights treaties make a difference?. Yale Law J 111:1935–2042 [Google Scholar]
  40. Haufler V. 2010. Disclosure as governance: the extractive industries transparency initiative and resource management in the developing world. Glob. Environ. Polit. 10:353–73 [Google Scholar]
  41. Helm T. 2001. Germany to compensate Nazi slave labourers. Telegraph May 31
  42. Heyer AKD. 2012. Corporate complicity under international criminal law: a case for applying the Rome Statute to business behaviour. Hum. Rights Int. Leg. Discourse 6:14 [Google Scholar]
  43. Horrigan B. 2010. Corporate Social Responsibility in the 21st Century: Debates, Models and Practices across Government, Law and Business Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
  44. Hutto C, Jenkins A. 2010. Report on corporate complicity litigation in the Americas: leading doctrines, relevant cases, and analysis of trends Rep., Hum. Rights Clin., Univ. Tex. Austin, TX: https://law.utexas.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2015/04/2010-HRC-Report-CorporateComplicity.pdf
  45. Int. Comm. Jurists. 2008. Report of the ICJ Expert Legal Panel on Corporate Complicity in International Crimes. Geneva: Int. Comm. Jurists
  46. Inter-Am. Comm. Hum. Rights. 2015. Situación de derechos humanos de defensores y defensoras del medio ambiente en el contexto de las industrias extractivas en América. Human Rights Brief Oct. 19. http://hrbrief.org/2015/10/situacion-de-derechos-humanos-de-defensores-y-defensoras-del-medio-ambiente-en-el-contexto-de-las-industrias-extractivas-en-america/
  47. Ite UE. 2004. Multinationals and corporate social responsibility in developing countries: a case study of Nigeria. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 11:11–11 [Google Scholar]
  48. Joseph S. 2000. An overview of the human rights accountability of multinational enterprises. Liability of Multinational Corporations Under International Law MT Kamminga, S Zia-Zarifi 75–93 The Hague, Neth.: Kluwer Law Int. [Google Scholar]
  49. Karp DJ. 2014. Responsibility for Human Rights: Transnational Corporations in Imperfect States Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  50. Keck ME, Sikkink K. 1998. Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  51. Kelly MJ. 2012. Prosecuting corporations for genocide under international law. Harvard Law Policy Rev. 6:339–67 [Google Scholar]
  52. Kempster N. 1999. Agreement reached on Nazi slave reparations. War: Tentative accord between U.S. and Germany would provide $5.2 billion for those forced to labor during WWII. Los Angeles Times Dec. 15 A1–2
  53. Khulumani v. Barclay National Bank Ltd. 509 F.3d 148 2d Cir. 2007.
  54. Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. 133 S. Ct. 1659 2013.
  55. Laufer WS. 2003. Social accountability and corporate greenwashing. J. Bus. Ethics 43:3253–61 [Google Scholar]
  56. Levit JK. 2007. Bottom-up international lawmaking: reflections on the New Haven School of International Law. Yale J. Int. Law 32:2008–3 [Google Scholar]
  57. Lim A, Tsutsui K. 2012. Globalization and commitment in corporate social responsibility: cross-national analyses of institutional and political-economy effects. Am. Sociol. Rev. 77:169–98 [Google Scholar]
  58. Lindblom C. 1977. Politics and Markets: The World's Political-Economic Systems. New York: Basic Books
  59. Liu S, Halliday TC. 2009. Recursivity in legal change: lawyers and reforms of China's criminal procedure law. Law Soc. Inq. 34:4911–50 [Google Scholar]
  60. Lutz EL, Reiger C. 2009. Prosecuting Heads of State Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  61. Maassarani TF. 2005. Four counts of corporate complicity: alternative forms of accomplice liability under the Alien Tort Claims Act. N.Y. Univ. J. Int. Law Polit. 38:39–65 [Google Scholar]
  62. Madami D. 1999. A review of the role and impact of export processing zones Policy Res. Work. Pap., World Bank Washington, DC:
  63. Mantilla G. 2009. Emerging international human rights norms for transnational corporations. Glob. Gov. Rev. Multilater. Int. Organ. 15:2279–98 [Google Scholar]
  64. Martin J, Bravo KE. 2016. The Business and Human Rights Landscape: Moving Forward, Looking Back Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  65. McCarthy B. 2002. New economics of sociological criminology. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 28:417–42 [Google Scholar]
  66. Michalowski S. 2014. Corporate Accountability in the Context of Transitional Justice Abingdon, UK: Routledge
  67. Miliband R. 1969. The State in Capitalist Society New York: Basic Books
  68. Mills CW. 1956. The Power Elite Oxford: Univ. Oxford Press
  69. Moran M. 2002. Misunderstanding of the regulatory state?. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 32:391–413 [Google Scholar]
  70. Mwangi W, Rieth L, Schmitz HP. 2013. Encouraging greater compliance: local networks and the United Nations Global Compact. The Persistent Power of Human Rights: From Commitment to Compliance T Risse, SC Ropp, K Sikkink 203–21 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  71. Nagin DS. 1998. Criminal deterrence research at the outset of the twenty-first century. Crime Justice 23:1–42 [Google Scholar]
  72. Narine ML. 2016. Living in a material world—from naming and shaming to knowing and showing: Will new disclosure regimes finally drive corporate accountability for human rights?. The Business and Human Rights Landscape: Moving Forward, Looking Back J Martin, KE Bravo 219–53 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  73. Neumayer E. 2005. Do international human rights treaties improve respect for human rights?. J. Confl. Resolut. 49:6925–53 [Google Scholar]
  74. Nolan J. 2013. The corporate responsibility to respect human rights: Soft law or not law?. Human Rights Obligations of Business: Beyond the Corporate Responsibility to Respect S Deva, D Bilchitz 138–61 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  75. O'Donnell GA. 1973. Modernization and Bureaucratic-Authoritarianism: Studies in South American Politics Polit. Mod. Ser. Berkeley: Inst. Int. Stud., Univ. Calif.
  76. Offe C, Wiesenthal H. 1980. Two logics of collective action: theoretical notes on social class and organizational form. Polit. Power Soc. Theory 1:67–115 [Google Scholar]
  77. Paul G, Schönsteiner J. 2013. Transitional justice and the UN guiding principles on business and human rights. Corporate Accountability in the Context of Transitional Justice S Michalowski 73–92 Abingdon, UK: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  78. Payne LA. 1994. Brazilian Industrialists and Democratic Change Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press
  79. Payne LA. 2013. Cumplicidade empresarial na ditadura brasileira. 10a Revista Anistia: Cooperação Econômica com a Ditadura July/Dec.
  80. Payne LA. 2014. The justice paradox? Transnational legal orders and accountability for past human rights violations. Transnational Legal Orders TC Halliday, G Shaffer 439–74 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  81. Payne LA, Lessa F, Pereira G. 2015. Overcoming barriers to justice in the age of human rights accountability. Hum. Rights Q. 37:3728–54 [Google Scholar]
  82. Payne LA, Pereira G. 2015. Accountability for corporate complicity in human rights violations: Argentina's transitional justice innovation?. The Economic Accomplices to the Argentine Dictatorship: Outstanding Debts JP Bohoslavsky, H Verbitsky 29–46 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  83. Payne LA, Pereira G. 2016. Report on truth commissions and corporate complicity. Peace, Everybody's Business! A Comparative Analysis of Corporate Accountability in Transitional Justice: Lessons for Colombia M Moor, J van de Sandt. Utrecht, Neth.: Pax. In press [Google Scholar]
  84. Popova A. 2016. Business and human rights after Ruggie's mandate: feasible next steps. The Business and Human Rights Landscape: Moving Forward, Looking Back J Martin, KE Bravo 106–144 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  85. Porter ME, Kramer MR. 2006. Strategy and society. Harvard Bus. Rev. 84:1278–92 [Google Scholar]
  86. Poulantzas N. 1968. Political Power and Social Classes. London, UK: Verso Ed.
  87. Red Card Campaign. 2010. Farewell Germany…but what about Daimler?. Khulamani Red Card Campaign Blog July 8. https://redcardcampaign.wordpress.com/2010/07/08/farewell-germany-but-what-about-daimler/
  88. Reno W. 1997. African weak states and commercial alliances. Afr. Aff. 96:383165–86 [Google Scholar]
  89. Risse T, Ropp SC. 2013. Introduction and overview. The Persistent Power of Human Rights: From Commitment to Compliance T Risse, SC Ropp, K Sikkink 3–25 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  90. Roht-Arriaza N. 2005. The Pinochet Effect: Transnational Justice in the Age of Human Rights Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. Press
  91. Roht-Arriaza N. 2013. ¿Por qué la dimensión económica estuvo ausente tanto tiempo en la justicia transicional? Un ensayo exploratorio. See Vertbisky & Bohoslavsky 2013. 31–43
  92. Roht-Arriaza N. 2015. Why was the economic dimension missing for so long in transitional justice? An exploratory essay. The Economic Accomplices to the Argentine Dictatorship: Outstanding Debts JP Bohoslavsky, H Verbitsky 19–28 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  93. Ruggie J. 2013. Just Business: Multinational Corporations and Human Rights New York: W.W. Norton
  94. Ruggie JG. 2014. Global governance and “new governance theory”: lessons from business and human rights. Glob. Gov. 20:15–17 [Google Scholar]
  95. Sagafi-Nejad T, Dunning JH. 2008. The UN and Transnational Corporations: From Code of Conduct to Global Compact Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press
  96. Schabas WA. 2005. War economies, economic actors, and international criminal law. Profiting from Peace: Managing the Resource Dimensions of Civil War K Ballentine, H Nitzschke 425–43 Boulder, CO: Lynne Reinner [Google Scholar]
  97. Sharp D. 2013. Interrogating the peripheries: the preoccupations of fourth generation transitional justice. Harvard Hum. Rights J. 26:149–78 [Google Scholar]
  98. Sharp D. 2014. Justice and Economic Violence in Transition New York: Springer
  99. Sikkink K. 2011. The Justice Cascade: How Human Rights Prosecutions Are Changing World Politics Norton Ser. World Polit. New York: W.W. Norton
  100. Skinner G. 2008. Nuremberg's legacy continues: the Nuremberg Trials' influence on human rights litigation in US courts under the Alien Tort Statute. Albany Law Rev 71:1321–67 [Google Scholar]
  101. Skocpol T, Somers M. 1980. The uses of comparative history in macrosocial inquiry. Comp. Stud. Soc. Hist. 22:2174–97 [Google Scholar]
  102. Stanley W. 1996. The Protection Racket State: Elite Politics, Military Extortion, and Civil War in El Salvador Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press
  103. Stephens B. 2000. Corporate accountability: international human rights litigation against coprorations in US courts. Liability of Multinational Corporations Under International Law MT Kamminga, S Zia-Zarifi 209–29 The Hague, Neth.: Kluwer Law Int. [Google Scholar]
  104. Stewart JG. 2014. Turn to corporate criminal liability for international crimes: transcending the Alien Tort Statute. N.Y. Univ. J. Int. Law Polit. 47:121 [Google Scholar]
  105. Sunstein CR. 1996. Social norms and social roles. Columbia Law Rev 96:903–68 [Google Scholar]
  106. Teitel RG. 2000. Transitional Justice Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
  107. Thompson G. 2013. South Africa to pay $3,900 to each family of apartheid victims. New York Times April 16. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/16/world/south-africa-to-pay-3900-to-each-family-of-apartheid-victims.html
  108. Thompson RC, Ramasastry A, Taylor M. 2009. Translating Unocal: the expanding web of liability for business entities implicated in international crimes. George Wash. Int. Law Rev. 40:4841–902 [Google Scholar]
  109. Tófalo I. 2006. Overt and hidden accomplices: transnational corporations' range of complicity in human rights violations. Transnational Corporations and Human Rights O de Schutter 335–58 Oxford: Hart [Google Scholar]
  110. van der Wilt H. 2013. Corporate criminal responsibility for international crimes: exploring the possibilities. Chin. J. Int. Law 12:143–77 [Google Scholar]
  111. Verbitsky H, Bohoslavsky JP. 2013. Cuentas pendientes: Los cómplices económicos de la dictadura Buenos Aires: Siglo Veintiuno
  112. Verbitsky H, Bohoslavsky JP. 2015. The Economic Accomplices to the Argentine Dictatorship: Outstanding Debts Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  113. Vest H. 2010. Business leaders and the modes of individual criminal responsibility under international law. J. Int. Crim. Justice 8:3851–72 [Google Scholar]
  114. Vogel D. 1978. Why businessmen distrust their state: the political consciousness of American corporation executives. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 8:45–78 [Google Scholar]
  115. Vogel D. 1983. The power of business in America: a re-appraisal. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 13:119–43 [Google Scholar]
  116. Wawryk A. 2003. Regulating transnational corporations through corporate codes of conduct. Transnational Corporations and Human Rights JG Frynas, S Pegg 53–78 New York: Springer [Google Scholar]
  117. Weissbrodt D, Kruger M. 2005. Human rights responsibilities of businesses as non-state actors. Non-State Actors and Human Rights P Alston 315–49 Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  118. Wiesen SJ. 2000. German industry and the Third Reich: fifty years of forgetting and remembering. Dimensions 13:2 [Google Scholar]
  119. Wolf KD, Deitelhoff N, Engert S. 2007. Corporate security responsibility towards a conceptual framework for a comparative research agenda. Coop. Confl. 42:3294–320 [Google Scholar]
  120. Wouters J, Ryngaert C. 2009. Impact on the process of the formation of customary international law. The Impact of Human Rights Law on General International Law MT Kamminga, M Scheinin 111–31 Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  121. Zerk J. 2014. Corporate Liability for Gross Human Rights Abuses: Towards a Fairer and More Effective System of Domestic Law Remedies. Geneva: UN High Comm. Hum. Rights [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110615-085100
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error