Pax Romana Morning Session, July 30th

During their morning session, the Pax Romana interns, led by Mr Anselmo Lee and Mr Raj Kumar went over and analysed the 2 main sessions of the previous day: the Working Group on Transnational Corporations (TNC) and the plenary session on item 2 of the agenda.

The Working group on TNCs dealt with standard setting and the creation of a code of conduct fot TNCs. In their analysis of the debate that took place, the interns started by recalling the main issues that were discussed. After this general overview, they highlighted the major role NGOs play in this drafting process, by lobbying and negotiating on - according to them - missing elements. As an example, Mr. Raj Kumar recalled his intervention to include an operating paragraph on women issues.

The interns also insisted on the general disagreement that remained among members of the Working Group as well as among different NGOs on the preferrence of having rather voluntary codes of conducts or legally binding rules for TNCs. Business-related NGOs such as the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) supported the first type of standards, while the others insisted on the establishment of binding standards within the UN system.

In the second part of there discussion the Pax Romana interns started with a general overview of the interventions under item 2 (country situations). They then analyzed the significant order in which these interventions take place in this kind of sessions: 1) the statements of NGOs, who denounce human rights violations in certain countries, acting as prosecutors; 2) the state interventions, in a defensive role; and 3) the experts of the commission take the floor as arbitrators.

The interns highlighted different problems related to the discussions on item 2 in the subcomission: They insisted on the problem of selectivity and double standards regarding the countries that were named in a majority of statements concerning human rights violations in Kashmir and Iraq, while many others are not named, despite general knowledge of large-scale violations. They regretted the political dynamics that shape these discussions, and the fact that violations of civil and political rights are more easily denounced than violations of economic, cultural and social rights.

The main critic was the absence of real impact of the sub-commissions discussions on item two, and therefore its growing incredibility. If NGOs can act as watchdogs, monitoring respect for human rights standards and intervening under item 2 when these standards are violated, they cannot have a direct impact because no country resolutions can be made by the subcommission. States do face public denounciation, but this has no direct consequences for them.

By: Paula Bula, Sandrina Labbé and Isabel Deconinck

BACK