Abstract
This chapter is about a concept that everyone takes for granted, both in socio-etic and legal contexts, but which, at closer scrutiny, is very problematic both in theory and in practice – the concept of human rights. In theory, this is problematic because of the relativists’ challenge; in practice – because of laws that are either non-existent, or unenforceable. The two sides of the argument, therefore, are – a philosophical analysis of the concept of human rights, and an investigation of their impractical nature, using a legal case – the Khulumani litigation. The third section of the paper is dedicated to finding a middle ground between the two, which can also provide a solution to the dilemma of having to choose between human rights’ universality and their practical feasibility – namely, the area of non-legal remedies and ‘sentimental’ (i.e. relativistic) rather than ‘rational’ (i.e. universal) grounds for human rights. As long as general opinion on whether we care about whose cars and computers an abusive regime uses, while engaging in human rights abuses, is that we do, it is important to try and find such grounds to bridge theory and practice. (This paper was prepared for and presented at the EBEN Research Conference on Philosophical Foundations of Business Ethics, in Copenhagen, October 2015, and it benefited a lot from the discussions we had there. I would like to thank the conference organisers, the members of my workshop team, and in particular Kristian Hoyer-Toft and Jane Ellis, for their valuable comments.)
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The ATS asserted that “[t]he district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.” 28 U.S. Code 1350 (Alien Tort Claims Act)
- 2.
The Kiobel case against Shell consists of accusations of complicity in torture, killings and other abuses of Ogoni people in the Niger Delta. In 2002, Shell was sued in US federal court by Esther Kiobel, the wife of Dr Kiobel – an Ogoni activist, member of the Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP) and eleven other Nigerians. At the time, MOSOP was campaigning against the environmental damage caused by oil extraction in the Ogoni region of Nigeria and for increased autonomy for the Ogoni ethnic group. Several members of MOSOP, including Dr Kiobel, were illegally detained in 1994, held in military custody, and then tried by a special court established by the military government. Eventually, they were convicted of murder and executed. The accusation was that Shell, through its Nigerian subsidiary, provided transport to Nigerian troops, allowed company property to be used as staging areas for attacks against the Ogoni, provided food to soldiers, and paid them to undertake criminal acts. In 2013, the US Supreme Court dismissed the case, thereby restricting the application of the Alien Tort Statute in cases involving allegations of abuse outside the US. This triggered a series of dismissals in other human rights related cases, such as the 2000 Rio Tinto case. For a detailed analysis of the consequences of the US Supreme decision in the Kiobel case on transnational litigation of corporate human rights abuses since 2013, see Marullo and Zamora Cabot (2016).
References
Alien Tort Claims Act. http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/torts3y/readings/update-a-02.html. Accessed 30 Oct 2015.
Berlin, I. 2002. The power of ideas. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Berlin, I., and R. Jahanbegloo. 2000. Conversations with Isaiah Berlin. London: Phoenix Press.
Binding Treaty (2014) and Debate the Treaty (2015). http://business-humanrights.org/en/binding-treaty and http://business-humanrights.org/en/about-us/blog/debate-the-treatyrespectively. Accessed 30 Oct 2015.
Business & Human Rights Centre. 2013, December 27. U.S. judge dismisses apartheid claims against 2 German companies. http://business-humanrights.org/en/us-federal-court-dismisses-apartheid-claims-against-daimler-rheinmetall-court-declines-to-dismiss-claims-against-ford-ibm. Accessed 30 Oct 2015.
Business and Human Rights Resource Centre. 2015. Apartheid Reparations Lawsuits (re. So. Africa). http://www.business-humanrights.org/. Accessed 30 Sept 2015.
Corporate Responsibility Network. www.corporateresponsibilitynetwork.com. Accessed 20 May 2016.
Habermas, J. 2001. The inclusion of the other: Studies in political theory. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Intergovernmental Working Group on Transnational Corporations and Human Rights. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/WGTransCorp/Pages/IGWGOnTNC.aspx. Accessed 1 June 2016.
Ishay, M.R. 1997. The human rights reader: Major political essays, speeches, and documents from the bible to the present. New York/London: Routledge.
Marullo, M.C., and F.J. Zamora Cabot. 2016. Transnational human rights litigations: Kiobel’s touch and concern: A test under construction. HURI-AGE, vol. 1. Business & Human Rights Resource Centre. http://business-humanrights.org/en/paper-assesses-impact-of-us-supreme-court-kiobel-decision-on-transnational-litigation-of-corporate-human-rights-abuses-since-2013. Accessed 1 June 2016.
National Action Plans. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/NationalActionPlans.aspx. Accessed 1 June 2016
Pogge, T. 2008. World poverty and human rights, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Sen, A. 2001. Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
The Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework. 2011. United Nations. New York and Geneva. https://www.unglobalcompact.org/library/2. Accessed 25 September 2015.
The Human Rights and Business Dilemmas Forum. 2015. Cumulative human rights impacts. http://hrbdf.org/dilemmas/cumulative-impacts/?h=Kiobel#.VjM8U5YnzIU. Accessed 30 Oct 2015.
The UN Global Compact. 2000. https://www.unglobalcompact.org/. Accessed 28 Oct 2015.
The UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative on Business and Human Rights. 2015. http://business-humanrights.org/en/un-secretary-generals-special-representative-on-business-human-rights. Accessed 30 Oct 2015.
Wells, C. 1993. Corporations and criminal liability. Oxford: Clarendon.
Wolf, S. 1985. The legal and moral responsibility of organizations. Nomos 27: 267–286.
Working Group and Transnational Corporations and Other Business. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Business/Pages/WGHRandtransnationalcorporationsandotherbusiness.aspx. Accessed 1 June 2016.
Young, I.M. 2005. Responsibility and global justice: A social connection model. Anales de la Catedra Francisco Suarez 39(2005): 709–726.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pascal, AM. (2017). Who Cares Whose Cars? A Philosophical Analysis of Business and Human Rights. In: Rendtorff, J. (eds) Perspectives on Philosophy of Management and Business Ethics. Ethical Economy, vol 51. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46973-7_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46973-7_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-46972-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-46973-7
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)