Thailand: ICJ co-hosts discussion on National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights

Thailand: ICJ co-hosts discussion on National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights

On 22 August, the ICJ co-organized a preparatory discussion in Bangkok for civil society organizations on Thailand’s National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights (NAP).

This event was organized one day in preparation for a formal NGO consultation event on the NAP held today.

The formal NGO consultation event was organized by the National Human Rights Commission of Thailand (NHRCT) to consider the draft NAP released by Thailand’s Ministry of Justice’s Rights and Liberties Protection Department (RLPD) in August 2018.

The ICJ hosted the preparatory discussion jointly with Community Resource Centre Foundation (CRC), Amnesty International Thailand (AI Thailand), Protection International (PI), Fortify Rights and the United Nations’ Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).

Thirty members of civil society organizations from all across Thailand attended the preparatory discussion.

Of these participants, four persons from the North of Thailand were supported by the ICJ to attend the discussion, including Ms. Arisara Lekkam, Lecturer of Law at Mae Fah Luang University in Chiang Rai, who was also a speaker at the event.

The event began with a presentation about the NAP and business and human rights issues in Thailand, during which Arisara Lekkam provided an overview of the business and human rights situation in Thailand.

Following the presentation, participants divided into groups to discuss four prioritized areas covered by the NAP: Labour, Land and Natural Resources, Human Rights Defenders and Cross-Border Investment.

At the end of the discussion, each group presented a set of recommendations on the draft NAP pertaining to each prioritized area. These recommendations will be provided to the Ministry of Justice’s RLPD.

This is the third event the ICJ has held on business and human rights in collaboration with partners from the North of Thailand.

On 22 November 2017, the ICJ, in collaboration with Chiang Mai University’s Faculty of Law, held a roundtable discussion on human rights litigation concerning special economic zones in Myanmar and Thailand.

Between 29 and 31 July 2017, the ICJ, in collaboration with Chiang Mai University’s Faculty of Law, held a workshop on ‘Introduction to Business and Human Rights & Basic Principles on Documenting Human Rights Violations” for 25 academics, NGO representatives and lawyers in Chiang Mai.

Background

During the second Universal Periodic Review of Thailand in May 2016, the Royal Thai Government accepted a recommendation to develop, enact and implement a national action plan on business and human rights in order to implement the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

In August 2018, Thailand’s Ministry of Justice’s RLPD, which is currently leading the development of the NAP, released a revised ‘zero draft’ of the NAP.

In line with the release of the revised ‘zero draft’, the NHRCT led the organization of a formal NGO consultation event on 23 August 2018, jointly with Thailand’s Ministry of Justice, Thailand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and OHCHR.

The Royal Thai Government reportedly plans to launch the NAP in September 2018.

Myanmar: ICJ hosts workshop on strategic litigation, speaks on CSR at society forum in Mon State

Myanmar: ICJ hosts workshop on strategic litigation, speaks on CSR at society forum in Mon State

The ICJ held a workshop in Mawlamyine on 3 July attended by religious leaders and youth activists from southern Mon State in Myanmar’s southeast.

The workshop aimed to facilitate discussion on strategic litigation options for communities adversely affected by existing and proposed investment projects.

The ICJ and civil society organizations have extensively documented how human rights abuses continue to occur in the context of business activities in Myanmar.

Communities generally have limited understanding of their rights, while government actors and businesses regularly flout their legal obligations.

The ICJ’s international legal adviser Sean Bain first set out applicable international standards, with a focus on the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

He identified Myanmar’s nascent legal framework for environmental protection as a key area of law with potential to deter rights abuses. He noted that while in December 2015 the Government of Myanmar issued the Environmental Impact Assessment Procedure, its provisions are rarely followed or enforced in practice.

Workshop participants, from two different areas of Mon State, shared experiences of community mobilization and ideas on how to use law to protect human rights.

Presentation on Corporate Social Responsibility

Prior to this workshop, also in Mawlamyine, on 29 June the ICJ’s legal adviser presented on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) at invitation of the national assembly of MATA, the Myanmar Alliance for Transparency and Accountability.

Introduced to Myanmar only in recent years, CSR activities are increasingly invoked by foreign and local companies as evidence of responsible investment.

But in reality, many companies doing CSR have been and continue to be involved in unlawful business activities, sometimes constituting human rights abuses.

Participants from different areas of Myanmar shared stories of businesses using CSR activities in a non-transparent way without accountability.

Cases were described where CSR has allegedly been associated with corruption, undermining trust and cohesion in communities affected by large investment projects.

The presentation from ICJ pointed out that while CSR activities are voluntary and without a specific legal framework, all businesses are subject to national law and should respect human rights in accordance with international law and standards, including the UN Guiding Principles.

Lawful conduct that respects human rights lies at the core of any responsible business, and CSR activities do not change these obligations.

These activities in Mon State are part of the ICJ’s ongoing support to civil society actors in Myanmar, from community-level up to national level actors.

 

The ICJ and other groups call States to join multilateral negotiations of a UN treaty on business and human rights

The ICJ and other groups call States to join multilateral negotiations of a UN treaty on business and human rights

The statement on behalf of four groups was delivered in the context of the General Debate on Item 3 during the 38th Session of the UN Human Rights Council.


The groups called all States to take up the opportunity to strengthen a multilateral approach the issue of business and human rights by joining the intergovernmental process to establish a legally binding instrument in this field.

The statement is as follows:

The current intergovernmental process to establish a legally binding instrument in the field of business and human rights offers States the opportunity to work through international cooperation and multilateral engagement to effectively address the human rights impact of business activities.

We thus urge all States –including those that have been so far reluctant to engage- to actively participate in this process.

Only constructive dialogue among all States and other stakeholders, especially the affected communities, can lead to sustainable solutions to the existing normative and protection gaps.

This 38th session of the Human Rights Council marks the 10th anniversary of its adoption of the Framework Report “Protect, Respect and Remedy”.

As we celebrate the contribution of this Framework, which led to the creation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, we must emphasize the need to increase the international community’s response.

In the past ten years, although important work has been done in some areas and by some countries, little systemic positive change has been felt on the ground, where many individuals, especially indigenous and peasant workers and communities, continue to endure the violation of their rights without recourse to real remedy avenues.

The creation of an international legally binding framework for States to maximize action and cooperation regarding rights abuses in the context of business operations remains a compelling necessity of our times.

I thank you.

Full statement in English (PDF): Universal-HRC38-BHR-treaty-Advocacy-non-legal-submission-June-2018-ENG

Judicial Councils and Judicial Independence (UN Statement)

Judicial Councils and Judicial Independence (UN Statement)

The ICJ today spoke at the UN on the role of judicial councils, judicial independence in Turkey and Poland, and on business and human rights in Peru.

The statement was made at the UN Human Rights Council during the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers and the Working Group on Business and Human Rights.

The statement on judicial councils and independence was made jointly with the Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association. The whole statement read as follows:

“Mr President,

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association (CMJA) welcome the report of the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (A/HRC/38/38) on the role of judicial councils and similar bodies.

Based on many decades of relevant experience around the world, we urge that:

All countries should consider establishing an independent judicial council. Reliance on constitutional customs, cultures, and traditions alone often proves insufficient if a crisis arises.

To guarantee independence, a majority of members should be judges elected by their peers. Any other members must also be independent. The Head of State, executive or legislative officials, or political candidates, should not be members. Proactive measures should address under-representation of women or persons from minority or marginalized groups.

Such bodies should be responsible for all decisions relating to the selection, appointment, promotion, transfer, discipline, suspension and removal of judges.

As an example of concern, in Turkey following constitutional reform in 2017 no member of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors is elected by their peers, contributing to a lack of institutional independence of the judiciary. We also share the concerns for lawyers in Turkey already expressed by The Law Society and other colleagues today.

On the report on the visit to Poland (A/HRC/38/38/Add.1), we concur that reforms in the name of efficiency and accountability have undermined the independence of the Constitutional Tribunal, the Supreme Court and the National Council of the Judiciary, and effectively placed the entire judiciary under “control of the executive and legislative branches” (para 74). Mr Special Rapporteur, how can other States assist in securing full implementation of your recommendations on Poland?

The findings of the Working Group on Business and Human Rights report on its mission to Peru (A/HRC/38/48/Add.2) are of great concern, that “large number of human rights defenders and local leaders” were reportedly killed, attacked or threatened for defending the environment and land rights, legitimate social protest is criminalized, and wide use of states of exception and the armed forces have lead to serious abuses. The ICJ urges Peru to implement the recommendations and asks the Working Group what it will do to follow up?

Thank you.”

Translate »