美国处于商业和人权的边缘

Dalia Palombo
{"title":"美国处于商业和人权的边缘","authors":"Dalia Palombo","doi":"10.1163/18719732-bja10105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe US often portrays human rights to be Western values America cherishes. But what happens when American corporations abuse human rights transnationally? While a decade ago, the US could be considered to be one of the most advanced jurisdictions in terms of business and human rights litigation, now it is no longer the case. The US Judicial, Legislative and Executive branches all appear to be behind a number of other countries in terms of ensuring that domestic corporations respect human rights and the environment transnationally. In the past decade, US courts have substantially limited the possibility of suing corporations for transnational torts; US lawmakers have failed to adopt a mandatory due diligence law of general application requiring US multinationals to oversee and prevent human rights and environmental abuses in their supply chains; and the US Government, under three separate administrations (the Obama, Trump and Biden) have consistently opposed a UN treaty initiative for the Elaboration of an international legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights. Is this negative trend reversible?","PeriodicalId":43487,"journal":{"name":"International Community Law Review","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The US at the Margins of Business and Human Rights\",\"authors\":\"Dalia Palombo\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18719732-bja10105\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThe US often portrays human rights to be Western values America cherishes. But what happens when American corporations abuse human rights transnationally? While a decade ago, the US could be considered to be one of the most advanced jurisdictions in terms of business and human rights litigation, now it is no longer the case. The US Judicial, Legislative and Executive branches all appear to be behind a number of other countries in terms of ensuring that domestic corporations respect human rights and the environment transnationally. In the past decade, US courts have substantially limited the possibility of suing corporations for transnational torts; US lawmakers have failed to adopt a mandatory due diligence law of general application requiring US multinationals to oversee and prevent human rights and environmental abuses in their supply chains; and the US Government, under three separate administrations (the Obama, Trump and Biden) have consistently opposed a UN treaty initiative for the Elaboration of an international legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights. Is this negative trend reversible?\",\"PeriodicalId\":43487,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Community Law Review\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Community Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18719732-bja10105\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Community Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18719732-bja10105","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国经常把人权描绘成自己所珍视的西方价值观。但是,当美国公司在跨国范围内滥用人权时会发生什么呢?十年前,在商业和人权诉讼方面,美国可能被认为是最先进的司法管辖区之一,但现在情况已不再如此。美国的司法、立法和行政部门在确保国内企业尊重跨国人权和环境方面,似乎都落后于许多其他国家。在过去十年中,美国法院极大地限制了起诉跨国侵权公司的可能性;美国立法者未能通过一项普遍适用的强制性尽职调查法,要求美国跨国公司监督并防止其供应链中侵犯人权和环境的行为;在奥巴马、特朗普和拜登三届政府的领导下,美国政府一贯反对联合国条约倡议,即就跨国公司和其他工商企业的人权问题制定一项具有法律约束力的国际文书。这种负面趋势是否可以逆转?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The US at the Margins of Business and Human Rights
The US often portrays human rights to be Western values America cherishes. But what happens when American corporations abuse human rights transnationally? While a decade ago, the US could be considered to be one of the most advanced jurisdictions in terms of business and human rights litigation, now it is no longer the case. The US Judicial, Legislative and Executive branches all appear to be behind a number of other countries in terms of ensuring that domestic corporations respect human rights and the environment transnationally. In the past decade, US courts have substantially limited the possibility of suing corporations for transnational torts; US lawmakers have failed to adopt a mandatory due diligence law of general application requiring US multinationals to oversee and prevent human rights and environmental abuses in their supply chains; and the US Government, under three separate administrations (the Obama, Trump and Biden) have consistently opposed a UN treaty initiative for the Elaboration of an international legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights. Is this negative trend reversible?
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: The Journal aims to explore the implications of various traditions of international law, as well as more current perceived hegemonic trends for the idea of an international community. The Journal will also look at the ways and means in which the international community uses and adapts international law to deal with new and emerging challenges. Non-state actors , intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations, individuals, peoples, transnational corporations and civil society as a whole - have changed our outlook on contemporary international law. In addition to States and intergovernmental organizations, they now play an important role.
期刊最新文献
Reflections on the Role of Fairness for the Sources of International Law The Imbalanced Geography of the Law on Use of Force in Self-Defence Government Recognition and the Dispute over the Venezuelan Gold Reserves in the Bank of England The Role of General Assembly Resolutions in the Identification of Customary International Law and the Chagos Archipelago Advisory Opinion An Indigenous Cosmovision for Earth-Centric Governance: Deconstructing the Normative Structure of International Law?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1