Working Group on the Working Methods and Activities of Transnational Corporations

This Working Group met for its fifth session at the occasion of the 55th session of the Sub-Commission on Human Rights. The Work of the past four years has culminated in the creation of a set of draft norms on the responsibilities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises with regard to human rights.

The Expert Member's study had as a central aim to establish a body with authority to observe TNCs regarding human right's issues. After a four year, highly participatory process, involving experts, academics, non governmental organisations, governments and businesses, the draft norms were being put forward for their final submission. After this final submission, the draft norms will be submitted to the Sub-Commission on Human Rights for adoption and subsequently be presented to the Commission on Human Rights.

Mr David Wiessbordt, head of the five Expert Members responsible for producing the draft norms, presented the report to fifth working group, commenting that with the greater power held by transnational corporations should come greater responsibilities. He explained that norms on the responsibilities of TNC's must be established which the Corporations should be obliged to respect. These norms include the right to equality of opportunity and the right to a safe and healthy working environment. He highlighted that the responsibilities TNCs have as regards human rights does not dissolve the obligations of States in enforcing respect of Human Rights in their jurisdiction.

He then responded to three major criticisms levelled at the draft norms: firstly, certain lobbyists wanted the norms to be voluntary for TNCs. However, M. Weissbrodt rejected this saying that TNCs have long ignored voluntary initiatives from the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Secondly, some argued that the Working Group took "one size fits all approached to TNCs". In reply, he said that the draft norms took an inclusive definition of TNCs to cover all the aspects of their operations. The last critique involved the implementation of the norms: he answered that procedures for this included periodically evaluating and reporting on companies' activities; and putting in place provisions for reparations by corporations violating human rights.

M. Martinez, an expert of the Working Group, specified that these draft norms are not legally binding because they emanate from UN bodies that depend on the General Assembly, which itself only has power to make recommendations. M. Guissée added that any binding force of the norms is more moral and ethical than anything else. The aim of this project, he summed up, is "to protect, to respect and to implement": according to him, these three verbs reflect the philosophy of the Working Group project.

The President-Rapporteur opened the floor to observer delegations. The NGOs who took the floor were la Fédération Internationale des ligues des Droits de l'Homme (FIDH), the Lawyer's Commission for Human Rights, l'Organisation Mondiale contre la Torture (OMCT), Pax Romana, Centre Europe-Tiers Monde (CETIM) and Amnesty International (AI).

The FDIH affirmed that the obligations stemming from human rights and international law were applicable to States, to international institutions, and to private actors. To achieve this goal, the FDIH insisted that independent and transparent mechanisms of coercion must be put in place. They also demanded the putting in place of a supervising authority which would permit the Working Group to deal with individual or collective complaints.

The Lawyer's Commission for their part underlined the importance of providing norms to TNCs directly because history has shown that States are impotent to fight human rights' abuses as they are often weak domestically and cannot match the power of TNCs. The responsibility for implementation must rest with TNCs, affirmed the Lawyer's Commission.

Pax Romana, one of the instigators of this project, requested that more focus be put on the problem of migrant workers in relation with their human rights as well as on gender mainstreaming. CETIM pin pointed some unresolved problems, including the hazy definition of " other enterprises" in the norms and the problem of the penal and civil responsibility of the TNC bosses. To conclude on this point, Amnesty International stated that the draft norms were "comprehensive and authoritative" and would clarify the binding obligation of TNCs in relation to human rights. For this reason, the project has attracted the support of a large number of NGOs.

At the end of the session, the debate became very confused because of the parallel running of this Working Group and the plenary session of the Sub-Commission. Thus, the experts were present in both meetings… at the same time. To illustrate this, a 45 minute debate ensued over whether to adopt the draft resolutions at this session when in fact no one was seriously suggesting they be adopted today. At the end, nobody was able to decide when or where the next public meeting would be held… M. Martinez even suggested that "the next session takes place in the Cafeteria !"

By : Maxime Gasteen and Clément Therme.

BACK