The process towards a treaty on business and human rights: a roundtable multistakeholder discussion

The process towards a treaty on business and human rights: a roundtable multistakeholder discussion

The ICJ convenes today a roundtable at the United Nations gathering several stakeholders to discuss on a possible future treaty on business and human rights.

Tuesday 25 October, 2016

13:00 to 15:00 hrs

Room XXVII- Palais des Nations

The second session of the Open Ended Intergovernmental Working Group to elaborate a legally binding instrument on Transnational Corporations and other business enterprises in relation to human rights, offers the opportunity to significantly advance the process of establishing an effective treaty that assist in preventing and addressing business related human rights abuses. Advancing the process will require stakeholders to reach a common platform of understanding on some core concepts and foundational elements before textual details can be elaborated and negotiated.

The objective of the roundtable is to assist in this process by creating a space for various stakeholders to address issues of importance for the treaty process from diverse points of view with the goal of enhancing mutual understanding among stakeholders of concepts and element that can serve as the basis for possible agreement for the future. This panel has a multistakeholder nature with a view to create a space of dialogue and understanding among the most important actors of the process.

Moderator:
Mr Ian Seiderman, Legal and Policy Director, International Commission of Jurists

Speakers:
Mr Ariel Meyerstein- United States Council of International Business, representing the International Organization of Employers
Mrs Makbule Sahan, Legal Advisor, International Trade Union Confederation
Prof Douglas Cassel, School of Law, University of Notre Dame, Indiana, United States
Prof Surya Deva, member of the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights
Mr Humberto Cantú Rivera, Researcher at University of Panthéon-Assas, Paris II
Mrs Debbie Stothard, Secretary-General, International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH)

icj-side-event-2nd-session-flyer (download the flyer)

Recommendations for the content of a treaty on business and human rights

Recommendations for the content of a treaty on business and human rights

In a paper published today, the ICJ recommends a series of substantive elements that it considers as key to an effective treaty on business and human rights.

The ICJ is publishing this paper as the second session of the open ended intergovernmental working group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights (OEIWG) will be held next week (24-28 October).

On 26 June 2014, the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) adopted Resolution 26/9 establishing an “open ended intergovernmental working group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights” (OEIWG) with the mandate to “elaborate an international legally binding instrument to regulate, in international human rights law, the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises”.

The first session of the OEIWG took place from 6 to 10 July 2015.

The ICJ supports the objective of establishing an international legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises, with a focus on business accountability and access to effective remedies for human rights abuses by business enterprises.

There is a substantial international protection gap to be filled in this respect, on which the ICJ has previously commented extensively.

It is with a view to closing this gap and ensuring that international human rights law can optimally fulfil its protective function that the ICJ is engaging in the present treaty process.

The key elements in the ICJ paper are a contribution to the ongoing discussions about the future instrument, without being exhaustive as to such elements.

The ICJ has already published a paper focused on issues of scope of businesses to be addressed in the treaty, in particular the meaning or “transnational corporations (TNCs) and other business enterprises” a question which remains unresolved and is contentious in the OEIWG discussions.

The present paper will focus on the possible content of the prospective treaty.

universal-oewg-session-2-icj-submission-advocacy-analysis-brief-2016-eng (full text in PDF)

 

Thailand: verdict in Andy Hall case underscores need for defamation to be decriminalized

Thailand: verdict in Andy Hall case underscores need for defamation to be decriminalized

The ICJ expresses its disappointment with today’s verdict criminalizing the work of human rights defender, Andy Hall, and calls upon Thailand to decriminalize defamation and amend the Computer Crime Act in line with international standards protecting freedom of expression.

This morning, Thailand’s Southern Bangkok Criminal Court found Andy Hall guilty of defaming a Thai fruit processing company under Article 328 of the Thai Criminal Code and violation of Article 14(1) of the Computer Crime Act, and sentenced him to a fine of THB 200,000 (USD$ 5,700) reduced to THB 150,000 (USD $4,300); and four years imprisonment, reduced to three years and suspended for two years.

Andy Hall has said he will appeal the verdict.

“Human rights defenders such as Andy Hall have the right to exercise freedom of expression in advocating for the protection and realization of human rights – a right that Thailand has a duty to protect,” said Kingsley Abbott, Senior International Legal Adviser at the ICJ.

“Unfortunately, there are numerous examples of criminal defamation and the Computer Crime Act being used against human rights defenders in Thailand, a practice that must end, including through a substantial reform of these laws,” he added.

The ICJ and Lawyers Rights Watch Canada submitted a joint amicus curiae brief in the proceedings, arguing that the imposition of harsh penalties such as imprisonment or large fines on a human rights defender risk having a ‘chilling effect’ on the exercise of freedom of expression, which Thailand is bound to protect pursuant to its international legal obligations.

The ICJ anticipates the arguments contained in the joint amicus will be considered on appeal.

“It is also disappointing that the Court did not appear to take into account the recent decision of the Phuket Provincial Court in the Phuketwan case, which found that the Computer Crime Act was not intended to be used in cases of alleged defamation,” said Abbott.

On 1 September 2015, the Phuket Provincial Court acquitted two journalists of criminal defamation and violations of the Computer Crime Act after the Royal Thai Navy complained the journalists defamed it when, on 17 July 2013, the journalists reproduced a paragraph from a Pulitzer prize-winning Reuters article that alleged “Thai naval forces” were complicit in human trafficking.

The criminal defamation proceedings brought against Andy Hall are among several that have been brought against human rights defenders in Thailand in recent years.

Others examples include the charges laid against activists Pornpen Khongkachonkiet, Somchai Homloar and Anchana Heemina in July 2016 for raising allegations of torture in the deep South; and those brought against activists protesting various development projects in Thailand which are allegedly having an adverse impact on communities.

Background

Today’s case is one of four criminal and civil proceedings (two criminal and two civil) a Thai fruit processing company, Natural Fruit Company Ltd., has brought against Andy Hall in relation to the report of a Finnish NGO, Finnwatch, published in January 2013, called Cheap Has a High Price.

Andy Hall’s research was included in the report which alleged that labour rights violations were taking place at Natural Fruit Company Ltd., whose employees included migrant workers from Myanmar.

In September 2015, a Thai Appeal Court upheld the dismissal of the other criminal defamation proceeding Natural Fruit Company Ltd. brought against Andy Hall. That proceeding is currently before the Supreme Court. Two civil proceedings are also before the Thai courts but have been suspended pending resolution of the two criminal proceedings.

The use of criminal defamation laws, carrying penalties of imprisonment, against human rights defenders reporting on alleged human violations, constitutes a violation of Thailand’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which it is a state party.

thailand-verdict-andy-hall-case-news-press-release-2016-eng (full text in PDF)

thailand-verdict-andy-hall-case-news-press-release-2016-tha  (full text in Thai, PDF)

Contact

Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; e: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org

Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser, t: +66 9 4470 1345, e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org

 

Translate »