Article
Journal of Human Rights

Should Business Have Human Rights Obligations?

Format:Print

Abstract

Businesses and their managers are increasingly called upon to take on human rights obligations. Focusing on the case of multinational enterprises (MNEs), the paper argues we have reason to reject assigning human rights obligations to business enterprises and their managers. The paper begins by distinguishing business and human rights from the more general topic of corporate responsibility. Following Buchanan (2013), the paper takes the ideal of status egalitarianism to be central to human rights. Status egalitarianism holds that all members of society stand as moral equals in relation to one another and that the state has a duty to recognize and protect that equal standing both in its dealings with citizens and in their dealings with one another. To assign human rights obligations to MNEs and their managers risks undermining this ideal. The paper situates this argument in relation to the United Nations "Protect, Respect and Remedy" Framework by discussing the way in which MNEs can be complicit in state failures to protect citizens. The paper argues that avoiding complicity should be the appropriate focus of managerial responsibility.

Keywords

Human Rights; Ruggie Principles; Corporate Responsibility; Multinationals; Rights; Multinational Firms and Management; Corporate Social Responsibility and Impact

Citation

Hsieh, Nien-he. "Should Business Have Human Rights Obligations?" Special Issue on Business and Human Rights. Journal of Human Rights 14, no. 2 (April–June 2015): 218–236.