UN:GLOBAL COMPACT
Pblished in B&E- 19 April 2007
Down with East India Company!
Multinationals needs to respect human sensibilities and dignity
Whether it is excessive pumping out of ground water in Plachimada byCola giants or aiding conflict in Africa for diamonds – all are acts prejudicial to the human rights. But can companies, with proven complicity in human rights violations be held responsible for impinging on the dignity of people. The answer is a big NO. MNCs operating in poor nations often go scot-free, because the state is incapable of implementing and ensuring that ‘best’ pratices are followed. It is to fill this gaping hole that Professor, John Ruggie (Special representative to the UN Secretary-General on Business and Human rights) presented his final report (28 March, 2007) to the UN Human Rights Council. The report is part of the ‘Global Compact’, a voluntary corporate citizenship initiative launched by the UN in 2000 (involves about 2000 companies) Commenting on the report, Annabel Short, Senior Researcher, Business & Human Rights Resource Centre told B&E “The onus of protecting human rights rests with state but the companies too have responsibilities ranging from preventing discrimination in their workplaces to taking steps to ensure security personnel protecting their operations avoid harm and this they cannot evade.” Ruggie proposes ‘hard law’ options to tame corporate behaviour & urges the third world states to be more stringent in implementing the standards. The ‘soft law’ options in the report stresses that MNCs should adopt more humane approach. Business needs to understand that 21st century does not grant them the luxury of emulating the East India Company of the 17th century. And if globalisation has to be sustained, corporations will have to enhance their credibility among the masses in these states.
B&E edit bureau
Whether it is excessive pumping out of ground water in Plachimada byCola giants or aiding conflict in Africa for diamonds – all are acts prejudicial to the human rights. But can companies, with proven complicity in human rights violations be held responsible for impinging on the dignity of people. The answer is a big NO. MNCs operating in poor nations often go scot-free, because the state is incapable of implementing and ensuring that ‘best’ pratices are followed. It is to fill this gaping hole that Professor, John Ruggie (Special representative to the UN Secretary-General on Business and Human rights) presented his final report (28 March, 2007) to the UN Human Rights Council. The report is part of the ‘Global Compact’, a voluntary corporate citizenship initiative launched by the UN in 2000 (involves about 2000 companies) Commenting on the report, Annabel Short, Senior Researcher, Business & Human Rights Resource Centre told B&E “The onus of protecting human rights rests with state but the companies too have responsibilities ranging from preventing discrimination in their workplaces to taking steps to ensure security personnel protecting their operations avoid harm and this they cannot evade.” Ruggie proposes ‘hard law’ options to tame corporate behaviour & urges the third world states to be more stringent in implementing the standards. The ‘soft law’ options in the report stresses that MNCs should adopt more humane approach. Business needs to understand that 21st century does not grant them the luxury of emulating the East India Company of the 17th century. And if globalisation has to be sustained, corporations will have to enhance their credibility among the masses in these states.
B&E edit bureau
No comments:
Post a Comment