Greetings from ESCR-Net,
Thank you for endorsing the joint open letter to John Ruggie, UN Special Representative on Business and Human Rights. This letter, which we attach and paste below, was sent to John Ruggie, yesterday afternoon.
Thanks to your efforts, we received a large number of endorsements in less than a week. We are very encouraged by your support, and trustful that together our voices will make a considerable impact.
Due to such broad and rapid support, we have decided to leave the endorsement process open 2 weeks more until October 25, 2007 at which point we will present the additional endorsements to the SRSG. To endorse as an organization, please send ASAP the name of your organization, country, and the name and email address of a contact person to nlusiani@escr-net.org. Or to endorse as an individual, please send your name, country, contact email, and any appropriate organizational affiliation.
Thank you again for your support, and feel free to distribute this joint open letter to encourage further endorsements.
***
Saludos a todas/os desde la Red-DESC,
Gracias por haber firmado la carta abierta conjunta a John Ruggie, Representante Especial de la ONU sobre Empresas y Derechos Humanos. La carta, que adjuntamos, fue enviada a John Ruggie ayer a la tarde.
Gracias a sus esfuerzos, recibimos un gran número de firmas en menos que una semana. Estamos muy entusiasmados por el apoyo recibido, y pensamos que nuestros esfuerzos conjuntos tendrán un impacto significativo.
Debido a tan amplio y rápido apoyo, hemos decidido dejar abierto el proceso de firmas 2 semanas más hasta el 25 de octubre, 2007 cuando presentaremos las nuevas firmas al RESG. Para firmar la carta como organización, envíe el nombre de su organización, país, y nombre y dirección de correo electrónico de un representante a la dirección de correo: nlusiani@escr-net.org. Para firmarla en forma personal, envíe su nombre, país, correo electrónico y organización a la que pertenece, si corresponde.
Muchas gracias de nuevo por su apoyo, y por favor distribuya esta carta abierta conjunta entre otras organizaciones y grupos que pudieran estar interesadas en suscribirla.
Nicholas Lusiani
Red DESC/ESCR-Net/Réseau DESC
211 East 43rd. St., Suite 906
New York, NY 10017
United States
phone:+1 212.681.1236, ext. 27
fax:+212.681.1241
www.escr-net.org
www.red-desc.org
PS: All language versions (English, French, Portuguese and Spanish) are available at our website: www.escr-net.org Only the English version is official.
_________
Professor John Ruggie
Special Representative on Human Rights and Transnational
Corporations and other Business Enterprises
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations
8-14 Avenue de la Paix
1211 Geneva 10
Switzerland
10 October, 2007
Dear Professor Ruggie,
We are writing to share our views on how you might most effectively advance the protection of human rights in the context of business activities during the remainder of your mandate as United Nations (UN) Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and other Business Enterprises.
We work to prevent the occurrence of human rights abuses involving business and to promote justice for the victims of such abuses when they occur. Our organisations and groups share your desire to see an end to human rights abuses involving business. It is in this spirit that we offer our common perspective on several issues. We point in particular to four issues that we believe deserve priority in your work, in accordance with your post as an independent expert for an international body with a global remit and an explicit and overarching human rights mandate. Namely, we hope that, in your capacity as Special Representative serving the UN Human Rights Council, you will:
· help to deepen the focus by the UN on actual situations relating to human rights and business, especially with regard to the perspective of victims so as to illustrate the scope and nature of abuses;
· analyze the factors driving the failure of states to adequately discharge their duty to protect the human rights of individuals, communities and indigenous peoples;
· assess the inherent limitation of voluntary initiatives, in order to avoid an over-reliance on such initiatives; and
· help to spread awareness of the compelling need for global standards on business and human rights to be outlined in a UN declaration or similar instrument adopted by member states.
We elaborate our views on each of these topics below and also include proposals for recommendations that might be included in your final report to the Human Rights Council.
In our globalized world business is a very powerful actor that can have both negative and positive impacts on the enjoyment by individuals, communities and indigenous peoples of their human rights. The negative impacts that businesses may have are widespread, affecting the full range of human rights, and are not limited to specific countries, industries or contexts. As you have rightly recognized, the expansion of global markets has not been matched with sufficient protection for the people and communities that are the victims of such human rights abuses. In many cases, abuses involving businesses arise in a vacuum of effective human rights protection, in which governments fail to take appropriate steps to prevent abuses and perpetrators are not held to account, and in which obstacles to justice compound the original abuses by depriving victims of their right to an effective remedy and reparation. In our view, a number of factors contribute to this state of affairs and must be addressed.
First, victims of human rights abuses by or involving companies are often voiceless in the context of debates on business and human rights. Discussions on these issues have tended to focus on abstract concepts rather than the actual impact that corporate conduct has on the human rights of individuals, communities and indigenous peoples. We believe that the perspective of the victims requires greater emphasis and elaboration in the final stage of your mandate and in your final report to the Council in 2008. It is essential that the Council’s discussions on business and human rights be grounded in the experiences of those affected by corporate human rights abuses and informed by an understanding of the nature, scale and patterns of such abuses, in order to ensure a thorough analysis of the problem and the identification of meaningful solutions.
We believe that the UN Human Rights Council should adopt a new or revised mandate for a UN special procedure (e.g., independent expert or group of experts) on business and human rights. This procedure should have a remit to research and analyze patterns of corporate human rights abuses with reference to real situations, to conduct field visits, to receive individual communications from victims of human rights abuses and human rights defenders working on their behalf, to issue recommendations to states and companies and to contribute to conceptual development within this field. Such functions constitute the core work in respect of most other thematic mandates established within the UN human rights system. We would welcome your public support for the creation of such a mandate and are hopeful that you will include this option among your recommendations to the Council. In doing so, we encourage you to make clear the pressing need for this type of mandate and to recommend that the Council act in a timely fashion to establish it.
In the interim, we believe that in the final stage of your mandate you can do much to ensure that the victims of human rights abuses involving companies have a voice at the Human Rights Council. We encourage you in particular to increase your efforts to consult with affected communities, including through visits to these communities and regional meetings. We hope that you will appropriately reflect the results of these visits and consultations in your final report, both to ensure that your own analysis of the outcome of these consultations is evident in the report and, where possible, to append relevant documents from these consultations to your final report. Our groups and organizations, which include grassroots human rights groups and indigenous peoples’ organizations, would be more than willing to meet with you and to submit further documentation about corporate abuses. We also recommend that you solicit comments and input on your draft recommendations from individuals, communities and indigenous peoples directly affected by corporate human rights abuses and from human rights organizations which have conducted primary research into such abuses. Such dialogue will serve to test whether and how these draft recommendations would positively address the situation of victims of such abuses.
Additionally, we believe it would be worthwhile to continue and deepen your analysis and reflection on the nature and scope of the human rights abuses occurring worldwide with the involvement of business, and to reflect this analysis in your final report. We welcome your coordination with other special procedures in endeavouring to collect case information based on their on-the-ground research, as well as your recent announcement that you plan to prepare a “mapping” of corporate human rights abuses in response to NGO input. In general, we believe that the usefulness, precision and legitimacy of your final report, as well as support for its recommendations, would be greatly enhanced if your conclusions and recommendations were more explicitly based on evidence, testimony and analysis of cases of alleged human rights abuses involving corporations. We also appreciate your recent efforts to gather information on access to justice issues, and believe it will be important to incorporate an examination of the practical barriers to justice, and the denial of the right to an effective remedy including reparation, encountered by victims. Many of our organizations have produced reports that address these various issues, and we will continue to make you aware of any new publications that could intersect with your work.
Second, states often fail, in the context of human rights abuses involving businesses, to uphold their obligation to protect against human rights abuses. In your last report you correctly emphasized this obligation, and the resulting need for states to regulate the activities of businesses and individual employees in order to prevent human rights abuses and to impose sanctions or otherwise adjudicate claims when abuses do occur. We welcome your plans to dedicate further attention to this critical issue in the next phase of your work and in your final report. In the time remaining under your mandate, we hope that you will advance consideration of this issue through an analysis of the actual practice of states in relation to corporate human rights abuses. Such an assessment would address some of the reasons for which states are failing to implement their duty to protect within their jurisdiction (e.g. lack of understanding, lack of capacity, lack of political will, the factors which drive such a lack of political will and any other relevant reasons). It could also delineate the consequences of such failures and do so in reference to concrete instances of abuses. In our view, such an analysis would make an important contribution to furthering understanding as to the duty of states to protect as implemented in practice, as well as suggesting steps needed to strengthen domestic accountability mechanisms as a safeguard for human rights. As such, it would provide solid grounding for any recommendations in this area, as well as providing an initial basis for additional work in the context of a new special procedures mandate.
Third, it is increasingly recognized that businesses, like other social actors, have a responsibility at a minimum to avoid causing harm to human beings’ enjoyment of their rights, yet too many businesses are failing to live up to these basic human rights responsibilities and consistently escape accountability. States have primary responsibility under international law, but this does not mean that other actors are, or should be, free from any direct responsibility for human rights. An important role of international human rights law is to limit and govern the exercise of power. International human rights law must continue to develop to account for the growing power of actors other than states to affect individuals’, communities’ and peoples’ enjoyment of their human rights.
Thus far the responsibilities of business in relation to human rights have largely been dealt with through the adoption of voluntary measures and codes of conduct, often at the company or industry level and sometimes reinforced through multi-stakeholder initiatives that include governments and nongovernmental organizations. While these approaches can play a valuable role in the context of business and human rights, such as by raising awareness and providing specific guidance on particular areas, they have inherent and serious limitations. Voluntary initiatives have a limited scope in terms of the rights they include and the sectors they cover and many “laggard” companies choose not to join any voluntary initiative. Due to their voluntary nature, they typically fail to ensure that the principles which they advocate are upheld in practice; even the relatively more robust multi-stakeholder initiatives fall far short of what is needed to ensure compliance. Moreover, these professed principles are narrowly conceived, inconsistent across different initiatives, and applied unevenly. Furthermore, these various initiatives do not require all companies to respect all human rights but allow companies to “opt in” to standards which are convenient and to “opt out” of standards which are not convenient. In these ways, they contradict the concept of human rights as minimum guarantees for the treatment of all people, and thus they do not provide an adequate basis for addressing business and human rights issues. In your final report to the Human Rights Council we ask that you specify the limits of “self-regulation” as outlined above. Diverse action is needed to improve business conduct in relation to human rights, including where appropriate the elaboration and further development of law as a means to enforce a minimum standard of business conduct. An over-reliance on voluntary approaches—particularly those that are not compatible with human rights principles—would not provide a useful way forward.
Fourth, we consider that global intergovernmental standards on business and human rights are necessary in order to strengthen the protection of human rights and provide a common framework for efforts to address business conduct. We would welcome your public affirmation of the need for such standards. Indeed it is our view that there is now a need to work with governments to build their support for the eventual negotiation and adoption of a UN declaration or similar instrument outlining standards on business and human rights. We consider that you can make an important contribution, in the remaining months of your mandate, to help raise awareness of the need for such an instrument. We hope that you will offer your public support for the initiation of a process that can ultimately lead to the adoption of an instrument at an intergovernmental level.
To that end, we offer our views as to some of the essential elements such a declaration or similar instrument should contain in order to advance human rights protection. We believe that any such instrument should take as its starting point the axiom that all humans have equal and inalienable rights by virtue of their inherent dignity and are entitled to enjoy these rights fully, recalling the fundamental principle that these rights are indivisible and interrelated. It should specify and progressively develop the state’s obligation to protect human rights in the context of economic activity in both its domestic sphere and its international action. It should also specify and progressively develop the responsibilities of business with respect to human rights by establishing a common human rights benchmark for all companies regardless of the specific sector or context in which they operate. At a minimum, it should state that all companies should respect all human rights and that in some circumstances—including the exercise of a public function—a higher standard will be appropriate. This will ensure that the instrument addresses the variety of ways in which businesses can be involved in human rights abuses, including through complicity in the actions of third parties. The instrument should also address victims’ access to justice in the context of business and human rights by affirming that all victims have the right to an effective remedy, including reparation, and that states should exercise their jurisdiction to ensure that this right is ensured and has effect.
As you are aware, care must be taken to ensure that a process aimed at the elaboration and adoption of a declaration or other such instrument as indicated above will in fact serve the purpose of strengthening human rights protection. The process must be directed toward the elaboration, through an intergovernmental process, of an authoritative instrument. It also must be informed by properly researched and documented case studies which give due weight to the experience and perspectives of the victims of abuse, and thus serve to establish why action is needed. There are real risks that, unless these and other conditions are in place, an initiative to set standards could be counterproductive. For example, a poorly conceived process might result in international standards that fail to meet the needs of victims because they lack the requisite legitimacy and authority, do not gain sufficient political support, or are substantively limited in coverage (e.g. address only certain human rights, or certain industries, or specific contexts). However, with the requisite care, these dangers can be avoided, and we believe that such an instrument, negotiated and adopted at the inter-governmental level, would provide a clear reference point on business and human rights through the outlining of credible and legitimate standards agreed by states. Again, we are hopeful that you will support efforts to initiate such a process and in particular we would ask you to include a clear statement of the need for such an instrument among the recommendations in your final report.
We look forward to discussing our proposals with you at the earliest opportunity.
Yours sincerely,
ORGANIZATIONAL ENDORSEMENTS
ORGANIZATION
COUNTRY
1
ActionAid International
International
2
Alliance for Holistic and Sustainable Development of Communities
India
3
Amnesty International
International
4
Amnistía Internacional-Uruguay
Uruguay
5
Applied Research Institute-Jerusalem (ARIJ)
West Bank, Palestine
6
Asamblea de Unidad Cantonal de Cotacachi
Ecuador
7
Asian Indigenous Women’s Network (AIWN)
Philippines
8
Asociación Ambientalista EcoLaPaz
Argentina
9
Asociación Civil por la Igualdad y la Justicia (ACIJ)
Argentina
10
Asociación de Yachachiq Solidaridad Colectiva para el Desarrollo
Perú
11
Asociación Kunas Unidos Napguana
Panamá
12
Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos (APRODEH)
Perú
13
BanglaPraxis
Bangladesh
14
Boro Women’s Justice Forum
India
15
Bretton Woods Project
USA
16
Broad Initiatives for Negros Development (BIND)
Philippines
17
Center for Minority Rights Development
Kenya
18
Centre for Organisation, Research & Education (CORE)
India
19
Centro de Apoyo al Trabjador, A.C.
México
20
Centro de Derechos Económicos y Sociales (CDES)
Ecuador
21
Centro de Derechos Humanos “Fray Bartolomé de Las Casas” A.C.
México
22
Centro de Derechos Humanos “Tepeyac del Istmo de Tehuantepec,” A.C.
México
23
Centro de Derechos Humanos “Ñu´u Ji Kandii”, A.C.
México
24
Centro de Derechos Humanos y Ambiente (CEDHA)
Argentina
25
Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS)
Argentina
26
Centro de Estudios Nacionales de Desarrollo Alternativo (CENDA)
Chile
27
Centro de Reflexión y Acción Laboral (CEREAL)
México
28
Centro Feminista e Información y Acción (CEFEMINA)
Costa Rica
29
Centro Mujeres A.C.
México
30
Centro Regional de Derechos Humanos “Bartolomé Carrasco Briseño,” A.C.
México
31
Coalición de Organizaciones Mexicanas por el Derecho al Agua (COMDA)
México
32
Colectivo Ciudadano “Piura vida y Agro Godofredo Garcia Baca”
Perú
33
Comisión de Derechos Humanos, La Voz de los Sin Voz A.C.
México
34
Comisión Ecuménica de Derechos Humanos (CEDHU)
Ecuador
35
Comisión Independiente de Derechos Humanos de Morelos
México
36
Consejo Intersectorial de Gestión Ambiental y Manejo de Recursos Naturales
Ecuador
37
Contribution of the Communities and Churches to the Human Transformation (COSCCET)
Democratic Republic of Congo
38
Coordinación Latinoamericana Red Mujer y Hábitat (CISCSA)
Argentina
39
Coordinadora Zonal de Intag
Ecuador
40
Corporate Accountability International
USA
41
Derecho, Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (DAR)
Perú
42
EarthRights International
Thailand/USA
43
Ebgan, Intervention Center Toward Human Development in the Cordillera
Philippines
44
Ecological Society of the Philippines
Philippines
45
Education and Research Association for Consumers
Malaysia
46
El Centro de Derechos Humanos “Victoria Díez”, A.C.
México
47
Environics Trust
India
48
ESCR-Net Corporate Accountability Working Group
International
49
Espacio Derechos Económicos, Sociales y Culturales
México
50
Federação de Órgãos para Assistência Social e Educacional (FASE )
Brazil
51
Federation of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Asia (FITPA)
India
52
Focus on the Global South
India, Phillipines, Thailand
53
Fondo de Seguridad Social de la Mujer y la Niñez
Panamá
54
FoodFirst Information and Action Network (FIAN) – México
México
55
Forest Peoples Programme
UK
56
Foro Ciudadano de Participación por la Justicia y los Derechos Humanos
Argentina
57
Forum for Indigenous Perspectives and Action (FIPA)
India
58
FORUM-Asia
Asia
59
Foundation for a Sustainable Society, Inc.
Philippines
60
Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC)
Philippines
61
Frente de Defensa de la Amazonia: Asamblea de Afectados por Texaco
Ecuador
62
Friends of the Earth International
International
63
Fundación Pachamama
Ecuador
64
Fundación Paz Mundial
Chile
65
Grupo de Trabajo Racimos de Ungurahui
Perú
66
Grupo Iniciativas Urbanas (GIU)
Perú
67
Habitat International Coalition / Housing and Land Rights Network-Middle East and N. Africa
Egypt
68
Habitat International Coalition-Latin America
Latin America
69
Hermanas Franciscanas Misioneras de la Inmaculada Concepción
Perú
70
Human Rights Council of Australia, Inc.
Australia
71
Human Rights Program, Universidad Iberoamericana de Puebla
México
72
Human Rights Watch
International
73
Indian Confederation of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples North East Zone (ICITP-NEZ)
India
74
Indigenous Peoples Links (PIPLinks)
International
75
Indignación, Promoción y Defensa de los Derechos Humanos, A.C.
México
76
Instituto Mexicano para el Desarrollo Comunitario, A.C. (IMDEC)
México
77
Instituto para el Desarrollo Económico y Social de América Central (IDESAC)
Guatemala
78
Instituto Pro Bono
Brazil
79
Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA)
Latin America
80
International Accountability Project
USA
81
International Alliance of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples of the Tropical Forests Foundation
Thailand
82
International Baby-Food Action Network-Latin America and the Caribbean
Argentina
83
International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
International
84
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
International
85
International NGO Forum on Indonesian Development (INFID)
Indonesia
86
Jus Semper Global Alliance
International
87
Maori Business, Victoria Management School, Victoria University of Welllington
New Zealand
88
Movimiento de Integración y Liberación Homosexual (Movilh)
Chile
89
Movimiento de los Afectados por Represas de Brazil (MAB)
Brazil
90
Movimiento Unificado de Minorías Sexuales (MUmS)
Chile
91
National Economic and Social Rights Initiative
USA
92
National Federation of Indigenous People in Indonesia (AMAN)
Indonesia
93
Network Movement for Justice and Development
Sierra Leone
94
Observatorio de Políticas Públicas de Derechos Humanos en el Mercosur
Latin America
95
Organización Indígena Kus-Kurá Sociedad Civil
Costa Rica
96
Oxfam International
International
97
Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum
Pakistan
98
Philippine Partnership for the Development of Human Resources in Rural Areas (PhilDHRRA)
Philippines
99
Physicians for Social Justice (PSJ)
Nigeria
100
Proyecto de Derechos Económicos Sociales y Culturales, A.C. (ProDESC)
México
101
Red “Agua, Desarrollo y Democracia”
Perú
102
Red de Género y Economía
México
103
Red Nacional de Organismos Civiles de Derechos Humanos “Todos los derechos para todas y todos”
México
104
Red Puentes
Latin America
105
Rencontre pour la Paix et les Droits de l’Homme (RPDH)
Democratic Republic of Congo
106
Rights and Accountability in Development (RAID)
UK
107
SOMO: Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations
Netherlands
108
Task Force Detainees of the Philippines (TFDP)
Philippines
109
Tebtebba-Indigenous Peoples’ International Centre for Policy Research and Education
Philippines
110
Terra de Direitos
Brazil
111
UBUNTU World Forum of Civil Society Networks Secretariat
International
112
Umeedenao Citizen Community Board
Pakistan
113
Unión de Comunidades Indígenas de la Zona Norte Del Istmo-Ucizoni
México
114
Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organisation (UNPO)
International
115
Western Shoshone Defense Project
USA
116
Women’s Environment and Development Organization (WEDO)
USA
117
World Adivasi Council
India
SOCIAL RESPONSIBLE INVESTMENT ENDORSEMENTS
ORGANIZATION
COUNTRY
118
Adrian Dominican Sisters
USA
119
Aquinas Associates
USA
120
Boston Common Asset Management
USA
121
Catholic Foreign Mission Society of America (AKA Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers)
USA
122
Catholic Health East
USA
123
CHRISTUS Health
USA
124
Dominican Sisters of Houston
USA
125
Executive Committee of the Racine Dominicans
USA
126
Marianists International
USA
127
Midwest Coalition for Responsible Investment
USA
128
Northwest Coalition for Responsible Investment
USA
129
Sisters of Charity of the Blessed Virgin Mary
USA
130
Sisters of St. Francis of Assisi
USA
131
Ursuline Sisters Leadership Team
USA
INDIVIDUAL ENDORSEMENTS
INDIVIDUAL
COUNTRY
ORG. AFFILIATION
132
Frederica Barclay
Perú
133
Danwood Mzikenge Chirwa
South Africa
Lecturer in Law-University of Cape Town
134
Shane Darcy
Ireland
Transitional Justice Institute, University of Ulster, N. Ireland
135
Carlos Gaio
Brazil
Human Rights Lawyer
136
Paulina Garzón
Ecuador/USA
137
Giovanna Beatriz Gederlini Ramírez
Chile
138
Chris Grove
USA
City University of New York
139
Valerie Heinonen
USA
Consultant, Corporate Social Responsibility
140
Councilor Peter Lavina
Phillippines
Alternate Forum for Research in Mindanao (AFRIM)
141
Sister Rosaire Lucassen
USA
142
Margarita Percovich
Uruguay
Senator, Republic of Uruguay
143
Azra Talat Sayeed
Pakistan
144
Agnes Schneider, OP
USA
Wisconsin Dominicans
145
Barbara Rose Johnston
USA
Center for Political Ecology
146
Bess Rothenberg
USA
Associate Director, Center for the Study of Human Rights, Columbia University
147
Clemilda Silva
Brazil
Irmãs Escolares de Nosssa Senhora
148
Dominique Smeets
Belgium
Membre du Groupe Entreprises d’AI (Section Amnesty Vlaanderen)
149
Stella Storch, OP
USA
CSA Justice Coordinator, Congregation of Sisters of St. Agnes
150
Tamara Vidaurrázaga
Chile
Amnesty International, Chile
151
Saskia Walzel
Germany/UK
Acona Ltd (Associate Partner, corporate responsibility consultant)
