The Business of Human Rights

On January 15, 2013, the faculty of the WVU College of Law had the privilege of hosting international law scholar and Indiana University professor Karen Bravo. Bravo discussed her current research in her talk entitled Illicit International Markets. While Bravo says that she does not emphasize human rights but rather the flow of goods and services, the three examples of illicit markets she highlighted were had significant human rights implications. First, Bravo talked about the phenomenon of “wombs for rent” – is a growing population of low caste women in India who are willing to serve as surrogates for a price. Second, she touched on organ harvesting and the black market surrounding people willing to sell their kidneys. Finally, Prof. Bravo mentioned Kenyan villagers harvesting ivories from rhinos and elephants to sell in the Asian marketplace.

Bravo’s discussion focused on the interplay between illicitness and illegality, and how they function – both together and separately. She made clear that not all illicit markets are illegal especially in a global economy and vice versa. The illicitness of a market really depends on the perceptions of the society within which it exists. Perhaps moral condemnation exists or the nature of the dangerousness of the product deems it illicit. Perhaps no positive law regulates its presence in the market and that makes it illicit. Mostly, the illicitness stems from ideas of culture and cultural norms. Because illicitness is not a concrete characteristic, it can be a fluid concept especially when tied into illegality.

Bravo’s discussion of the American drug war and how it has shaped the international market was especially compelling. She noted that sometimes the illicitness or even the illegality of a thing in a certain market can make it that much more profitable and desirable to produce in another place. She also noted that oftentimes, the market will create complimentary illegal activities. For example, drugs and violence go hand in hand and seem to perpetuate one another. While the worlds of illicit and illegal markets are not synonymous, they frequently collide and co-exist.

Ideas of trade and non-judgment were also themes that ran through the discussion of the day. Goods that are coveted and readily traded in one culture (such as the ivory trinkets in Asian markets) may be deemed illicit and/or illegal in another culture. However, because the market exists, a provider will exist as well. That provider or harvester of the ivory might have other options of employment and they might not, but whose ideas of illicitness or illegality should be imposed upon him as he carries out the tasks of his occupation?

As part of my ongoing literature review section, I wanted to highlight a relevant BHR article by Tom Campbell.

In his April 2006 article entitled A Human Rights Approach to Developing Voluntary Codes of Conduct for Multinational Corporations in the Business Ethics Quarterly, Tom Campbell uses Voluntary Codes of Conduct (“VCCs”) to highlight many of the issues that the “Respect Framework” and the “Guiding Principles” later address at the UN level. Campbell discusses a general disinclination of host countries to regulate Multinational Corporations (“MNCs”) because of their economic impact. But, he also describes the need for MNCs to be held accountable for their practices especially on a human rights level. In that regard, this article is insightful and forward-looking on the issues currently at the heart of the business and human rights debates.
-Campbell suggests inserting specific human rights language in eachVCC that will give MNCs better ideas on how adhere to human rights.
-Campbell describes that VCCs can be a “functional alternative to legal regulation” or a stopgap where there is a void in regulation, act as a supplement to a regulatory, or monitor and regulate behaviors of MNCs .
-Campbell makes clear that in order for human rights to be taken seriously in the context of VCCs, the individual rights that pose the greatest concerns in any given MNC should be stated with specificity.

About Tom Campbell: Tom Campbell is the director of Business and Professional Ethics at CAPPECharlesSturt University. He has written extensively on law and legal philosophy. He was the dean of the Dean of the Faculty of Law at ANU in the mid-nineties. He also on the Australian Alternative Bill of Rights.

Greeting fellow intrepid travelers,

In last week’s blog post, I discussed the idea of what is (and should be) considered a “business and human rights” issue. Among the things that I flagged that people have discussed as a BHRare: (1) tax avoidance by multinationals; and (2) diversity on corporate boards.

There were others, but I bring these two specific examples up because, it raises an interesting question for me. (As an academic, I’m allowed to think about interesting questions). That is this – by including such far-reaching issues in our BHR agenda, are running the risk of diluting the BHRmission as a whole?

In writing this blog for the past few months, I have sort of taken it as a given that my readers were starting from a common understanding of what the landscape of business and human rights is to most people. However, in discussing my research with a colleague over lunch last week, I realized that my understanding may not be universal. I was going on about my latest idea for business and human rights and with one very simple (and incisive) question he brought my rambling to a halt: “Can you give me some examples of business and human rights?” The example I gave him (its one of the scenarios discussed below but I’m not telling which one it is until next week) provided a direct link between businesses and the human rights impacts they can create.

But this conversation also gave me pause. Specifically, it made me wonder what other scenarios might be considered human rights violations? The issue can have very real consequences. One of the challenges that I found in doing this work is that many people who write on issues that touch business and human rights (labor scholars, trade practitioners, investment experts) may not even realize that they are writing on a “business and human rights” issue. That’s one reason that this is such an exciting field – it is incredibly dynamic. But it is also incredibly challenging, not least of all because it’s an additional obstacle – trying to get everyone to sit down and have the conversations that are needed.

Let me illustrate with a question: Which of the following issues could be labeled “Business and Human Rights” (or BHR as I have taken to calling it)?

A. A Dutch multinational company hires off-duty military personnel to act as security in an unstable community. The security officers assault, torture, and intimidate a number of people in the community.