Feb 11, 2021
In a new report published today, the ICJ called on the Thai Government to review and amend its laws, policies and practices to remove obstacles in holding Thai companies accountable for wrongdoing outside the country’s borders.
The recommendations of the report, addressing business activities of a transnational character, include a request for the Government to ensure that its laws and actions are in alignment with Thailand’s international legal obligations and international human rights standards.
Some of obstacles that are identified include: limitations on liability owing to the status of companies as legal persons as opposed to natural persons; the legal nature of corporations as distinct juridical entities; evidentiary challenge of access to corporate documentation; jurisdictional challenges in the home state; conflict of laws; and statutes of limitation.
The report also looks at the aspects of complexities in civil and administrative liability and the use of collective complaints for redress.
The report analyses Thailand’s legal framework governing corporate legal accountability for outbound investments and the remedies available and accessible to affected persons.
It recalls the obligations of Thailand to protect the human rights of persons not only within its territory, but also, to some measure, extraterritorially. This obligation extends to activities of Thai business entities, especially in cases where the remedies available to victims before the domestic courts of the State where the harm occurs are unavailable or ineffective.
Key recommendations to the Government of Thailand, the Parliament of Thailand and justice sector actors include:
- Extending the jurisdiction of Thai courts to cover claims against corporations and State enterprises that are domiciled or which principally conduct their business affairs in Thailand, regardless of whether alleged human rights abuses by the companies or their subsidiaries occurred in another country;
- Expanding liability for certain abuses caused by the conduct of a company’s subsidiaries over which it exerts control;
- Providing legal and procedural guarantees in domestic law to increase access to information about corporations and their activities, particularly in relation to cross-border enterprise activities;
- Relaxing the rule governing statutes of limitations to ensure that it will not be unduly restrictive to injured persons seeking to bring claims relating to human rights abuses committed abroad by corporations, including – by providing that a statute of limitation shall not be effective against civil or administrative actions brought by victims seeking reparation for serious human rights abuses;
- Facilitating access to justice of victims and their representatives in ensuring their agency in choosing the appropriate jurisdiction and justice mechanism before which they can litigate their case or otherwise seek remedy or reparation;
- Processing class action trials without undue delay and allowing class suit for cases filed in a Thai court by plaintiffs from another country who may not have the resources or capacity to otherwise pursue a claim individually before Thai courts;
- Ensuring that the division between administrative and civil jurisdiction, particularly for State enterprises, should not be used as a reason to obstruct victims or their representatives in accessing justice;
- Strengthening the role of the National Human Rights Commission of Thailand (NHRCT) to investigate, document, and expose instances of human rights abuse committed by Thai transnational corporations abroad, even in the absence of express powers;
- Providing training for members of the legal and judicial professions in handling cases involving corporate human rights abuse, and particularly abuse arising from cross-border business activities; and
- Providing legal aid and other funding schemes to claimants who are citizens and non-citizens in relation to cases of rights abuses arising from business activities.
Download
Southeast-Asia-Access-to-Justice-Thai-companies-Publication-ENG (English)
Southeast-Asia-Access-to-Justice-Thai-companies-Publication-THA (Thai)
Nov 29, 2020 | News
The ICJ and its Swiss section (ICJ-CH) regret the results of the vote yesterday in Switzerland rejecting the popular initiative for responsible businesses. While the majority of the popular vote approved the initiative, there was no majority of voters in a majority of Cantons.
Under the Swiss constitution, to be approved, such initiative amending the constitution needs the majority of both the popular vote in Switzerland and in a majority of Cantons part of the Swiss Confederation.
“The strong support gathered by this initiative, expressed in the majority of the popular vote, is encouraging, and a strong message that the Federal Parliament and the Federal Council must take into account in the process of the implementation of the legislative counter-proposal and in further legislation,” said Marco Sassòli, ICJ commissioner.
A counter-proposal prepared by the Federal Council is now approved by default. This counter-proposal foresees due diligence obligations for some sectors and reporting obligations, but no specific legal liability.
The proposed initiative would have required multinationals based in Switzerland to respect human rights also abroad, and to carry out human rights due diligence to identify and prevent potential human rights abuses.
It would also have clarified the multinational’s legal responsibility for violations of internationally recognized human rights and environmental norms by enterprises that it controls and operate abroad.
Nov 14, 2020 | Advocacy, News
On 12-13 November 2020, the ICJ co-hosted a discussion on “Thailand’s National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights: 1-Year Progress Review” in Bangkok. The forum was co-organized with other 11 organizations.
Participants on the first day included some 95 individuals representing populations affected by business operations from all regions of Thailand and members of civil society organizations. The considered reviewed the progress that has been made by Thailand over the past year towards fulfilling its commitments in the four priority issues in its First National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights (NAP): (1) Labor; (2) Land, environment and natural resources; (3) Human rights defenders; and (4) Cross border investment and multi-national enterprises.
Several participants noted a lack of any evident and tangible progress in the NAP implementation and questioned the effectiveness of the NAP because it does not have the status of a law but is merely a resolution from the Council of Ministers. They further expressed concern at the lack of a comprehensive monitoring system in place to monitor NAP and its achievement according to the key recommendations aligned with the UN Guiding Principle on Business and Human Rights, and on legal harassment and intimidation faced by human rights defenders.
In the session regarding cross border investment and multi-national enterprises, the ICJ participants led the discussion regarding challenges to hold Thai companies accountable for human rights abuses which took place abroad. The participants looked into several obstacles to accessing to justice for victims of business-related human rights abuses in the context of cross-border investment. The discussion was based on the ICJ’s work and analysis in the draft report on the human rights legal framework of Thai companies operating in Southeast Asia, which is expected to be launched in December 2020.
Comments and recommendations raised by participants on the first day were presented to representatives from the Ministry of Justice, Thailand National Human Rights Commission, Global Compact Network Thailand and UN agencies, in the public seminar on the second day. The outcomes of the discussion and recommendations will also be submitted to the NAP Monitoring/Steering Committees, chaired by Director-General of Rights and Liberties Protection Department, Ministry of Justice.
Background
On 29 October 2019, the Cabinet approved and adopted the First National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights (2019-2022), making Thailand the first country in Asia to adopt the stand-alone NAP.
The NAP emphasizes the duties of State agencies to review and amend certain laws, regulations and orders that are not in compliance with human rights laws and standards and ensure their full implementation; ensure accessibility of mechanisms for redress and accountability for damage done to affected communities and individuals; overcome the barriers to meaningful participation of communities and key affected populations; and strengthen the role of businesses to “respect” human rights on a variety of key priority issues.
The event was co-hosted with:
- International Organization for Migration (IOM)
- Community Resource Centre Foundation (CRC)
- Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
- EarthRights International (ERI)
- The Mekong Butterfly (TMB)
- International River (IR)
- Spirit in Education Movement (SEM)
- Thai Extra-Territorial Obligations Working Group (Thai ETOs Watch)
- Green Peace Thailand
- Green South Foundation
- Business and Human Rights Resource Center (BHRRC)
Further reading
Thailand’s Legal Frameworks on Corporate Accountability for Outbound Investments
Thailand: ICJ co-hosts discussion on National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights
Oct 26, 2020 | Advocacy, News
As the sixth session if the Open-Ended Intergovernmental Working Group (OEWG) working on a draft treaty convenes, the ICJ welcomes the Revised Draft treaty and calls on States to work to overcome political obstacles an make substantial progress towards completing its work on this much needed treaty.
The session, which takes place from 26 to 30 October, has before it a second Revised Draft of a Legally Binding Instrument, presented by the Chairmanship of the OEWG. The ICJ welcomes this draft as a very good basis for negotiations, though it considers that certain provisions still require revision and refinement.
The session takes place in the difficult and uncertain backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic, with its serious impacts on human rights such as the right to health and strains on the capacity of States and society to tackle its consequences.
The ICJ is especially concerned at the adverse impact of the restrictions imposed on civil society participation deriving from the rules adopted by the UN for the holding of meetings, while at the same time understanding that meetings cannot be held in the normal manner particularly given the recent increase of COVID cases in Geneva.
In general and with some exceptions, the Second revised Draft LBI reflects changes in the text, structure and organization of the draft articles that improve its potential to serve as an effective protective instrument, as well as increase its overall coherence. The ICJ considers the second Revised draft as a good starting point for negotiations which states should engage into without further delay.
Universal-ICJ comments on BHR treaty 2-Advocacy-2020-ENG (full statement in PDF)
Sep 30, 2020 | Noticias
Venezuela está sufriendo una crisis humanitaria y de derechos humanos sin precedentes que se ha profundizado debido a la negligencia del gobierno autoritario y la ruptura del estado de derecho en el país.
La Organización Internacional para las Migraciones (OIM) ha estimado que alrededor de 5.2 millones de venezolanos han dejado el país, llegando la mayoría como refugiados e inmigrantes a países vecinos.
En 2018, la Oficina del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos (ACNUDH) calificó esta situación de los derechos humanos como “una espiral descendente que no parece tener fin“.
La situación del derecho a la salud en Venezuela y su sistema de salud pública mostraron problemas estructurales antes de la pandemia, y la Alta Comisionada la describió como una “dramática crisis sanitaria y (…) un completo colapso del sistema de atención sanitaria”.
Recientemente, la ACNUDH presentó un informe al Consejo de Derechos Humanos que mencionó, entre otras cuestiones, los ataques a los derechos de los pueblos indígenas en el Arco Minero del Orinoco (AMO).
Los derechos de los pueblos indígenas y los proyectos mineros en el AMO antes de la pandemia de la COVID-19
Los pueblos indígenas han sido tradicionalmente olvidados por las autoridades gubernamentales venezolanas y condenados a vivir en la pobreza.
Durante la crisis humanitaria han sufrido nuevos abusos debido a la actividad minera y a la violencia que ocurre en sus territorios.
En 2016, el gobierno venezolano creó la Zona de Desarrollo Estratégico Nacional del Arco Minero del Orinoco a través del Decreto presidencial No. 2248, como un proyecto de megaminería enfocado, principalmente, en la extracción de oro en un área de 111.843.700 kilómetros cuadrados.
El AMO se ubica al sur del río Orinoco en los territorios amazónicos de Venezuela y abarca tres estados: Amazonas, Bolívar y Delta Amacuro. Es el hábitat de varios grupos étnicos indígenas a los que no se les consultó de manera adecuada antes de la implementación del proyecto.
El derecho a la tierra de los pueblos indígenas está reconocido en la Constitución de Venezuela. Sin embargo, como reportó la ONG Programa Venezolano de Educación- Acción en Derechos Humanos (PROVEA), las autoridades no han mostrado avances en la demarcación y protección de los territorios indígenas desde 2016.
Varias organizaciones indígenas y otros movimientos sociales han expresado su preocupación y rechazo al proyecto del AMO.
La implementación de este proyecto ha impactado de manera negativa los derechos de los pueblos indígenas a la vida, la salud y un medio ambiente seguro, saludable y sostenible.
Human Rights Watch, Business and Human Rights Resource Center, organizaciones no gubernamentales locales, movimientos sociales y la ACNUDH, han documentado la destrucción de la tierra y la contaminación de los ríos debido a la deforestación y la actividad minera, que también está contribuyendo al aumento del paludismo y otras enfermedades.
Las mujeres y los niños indígenas están entre los más afectados. La Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS) ha reportado que “[l]os pueblos indígenas que viven en la zona fronteriza de Venezuela son sumamente vulnerables a las enfermedades epidémicas”, y ha planteado una preocupación especial sobre el pueblo Warao (que vive en la frontera entre Venezuela y Guyana), y el pueblo Yanomami (que vive en la frontera entre Venezuela y Brasil).
Las mujeres y los niños también corren grandes riesgos de explotación sexual, laboral y violencia de género en el contexto de las actividades mineras. El reciente informe de la Alta Comisionada menciona que desde 2016 hay un fuerte incremento “en prostitución, explotación sexual y tráfico en áreas mineras, incluyendo a niñas adolescentes”.
La Oficina de Coordinación de Asuntos Humanitarios de las Naciones Unidas (OCHA) y el Fondo de las Naciones Unidas para la Infancia (UNICEF) han determinado una tendencia entre los adolescentes a abandonar la escuela, en particular entre los 13 y los 17 años. Los adolescentes indígenas se ven gravemente afectados, ya que muchos niños se van a trabajar en las minas.
La violencia y la delincuencia también han aumentado en el AMO. Organizaciones criminales y grupos guerrilleros y paramilitares están presentes en la zona, y el gobierno venezolano ha ampliado su presencia militar.
Los dirigentes indígenas y los defensores de derechos humanos han sido objeto de ataques y amenazas; además, persisten las denuncias de casos de desapariciones forzadas y ejecuciones extrajudiciales y arbitrarias.
Situación actual de la pandemia de COVID-19
La pandemia por COVID-19 y la falta de una respuesta adecuada han agravado la situación.
El Gobierno declaró el estado de emergencia (estado de alarma) el 13 de marzo y estableció un confinamiento obligatorio y medidas de distanciamiento social. Sin embargo, las actividades mineras han continuado sin protocolos sanitarios adecuados para prevenir la propagación de la pandemia.
El estado Bolívar, el más grande del país y que está ubicado en el Arco Minero del Orinoco, tiene entre el mayor número de casos confirmados de COVID-19 que incluye a miembros de pueblos indígenas.
La respuesta de las autoridades venezolanas a la pandemia en estos territorios no ha considerado medidas culturalmente apropiadas para las poblaciones indígenas.
Adicionalmente, aunque las autoridades establecieron un grupo de hospitales e instalaciones médicas llamados “hospitales centinela” para atender a personas con síntomas de COVID-19, estos se encuentran en las ciudades y las comunidades indígenas viven lejos de ellas.
Además, la falta de gasolina en el país agrava los obstáculos para trasladarse fácilmente a estos centros.
Las organizaciones de la sociedad civil y los líderes indígenas se quejan de la falta de pruebas de COVID-19 y de la manipulación de los datos que dan cuenta de cuál es la situación real de la pandemia.
Además, la ACNUDH reportó la detención arbitraria de por lo menos tres profesionales de la salud por denunciar la falta de equipo básico y por proporcionar información sobre la situación de COVID-19, y destacó que hay “restricciones al espacio cívico y democrático, incluso bajo el “estado de alarma” decretado en respuesta a la pandemia COVID-19″.
Para leer el artículo completo: Venezuela-COVID19 indigenous-News Feature articles-2020-SPA
