Week Nine Discussion Board
Human rights systems are built upon the state’s centrality of international law and they try to have state adhere to such rights by establishing treaty obligations with them. The role of non-state actors in conflict situations has been a thorny issue since unlike the states they are not bound under any treaty to uphold human rights in such circumstances.
Why are transnational firms, as non-state players, among the largest custodians of human rights?
As states are states are dismantling trade or tariff barriers and seeking more foreign investment, the transnational firms have the most capability to expand across many juridical and economic boundaries. As they try to exploit such opportunities, they wield a lot of power and influence in local, domestic and global markets and in international affairs. They are able to closely encounter and touch lives of people in areas they operate than any other party and this gives the firms significant potential to do good or harm. In line of their operations, these firms encounter issues related to human rights including discrimination, health and life risks, child labor and even forced labor. Others include security needs that are served by poorly disciplined security personnel. If the firms adopt good policies they may ensure humans rights are upheld but bad policies makes them accomplices to oppression and exploitation for the sale of profits.
Why is human rights abuse by multinationals majorly beyond the control of state governments?
Problems arise in the role of governments in checking the activities of transnational corporations in their jurisdiction. These includes governments failure to adopt measures that will make the firms’ compliance and the measures are mostly costly and beyond the capabilities of governments especially in developing countries. In addition, governments are cautious to implement measures that will hike labor costs and hence, make their countries less attractive in comparison with those with poor regulatory standards.
