Human Rights in Ireland

We are delighted to welcome this Guest Post from Dr. Ciara Hackett.  Ciara is a lecturer in the School of Law at NUI Galway where she also serves as Deputy Director of the LL.M in Public Law.  Her research interests include corporate social responsibility, corporate governance, globalisation and marxist theories of development.

The framework rests on three main pillars.  First is States’ duty to protect against human rights abuses by third parties, including business enterprises through appropriate policies regulation and adjudication.  The second is the corporate responsibility to respect human rights (i.e. avoid infringing on rights and address adverse impacts) and finally the need for access by victims to remedy (para. 6).

Reactions to the principles suggest that the framework is a weak formulation and does not go far enough (see here).  Addressing this framework in the context of the on-going financial crisis and indeed the particular case of Ireland raises some questions as to the effectiveness of the framework or indeed whether or not the aims are realistic.  In particular this post refers to the foundational principles of the framework: that states must protect against human rights abuse in particular through effective policies, legislation and regulations.  This requires a re-imagining of the current Irish regulatory framework for addressing the responsibilities of business.

As society endeavours to emerge from the economic crisis, governments are faced with a balancing exercise between retaining or achieving a desired competitiveness in a post recessionary era and developing regulatory structures to ensure that the same problems do not occur again.  For states like Ireland the problem is more ingrained, stemming from the nature of an economy that was for so long (and continues to be so), dependent on foreign direct investment.   Herein lies the problem: – it is one thing to say that an entity owes a responsibility to protect, respect and remedy but should they fail to do so the question as to who is going to hold them accountable needs to be raised.  With the case of Ireland, perhaps the question should be: can the government afford to hold those businesses accountable that failed to meet their responsibilities?  The pathway of the proposed Companies Consolidation Bill and specifically section 222(3) will prove interesting on this point.  If section 222 (3) meets with the same opposition as article 45 of the Companies (Auditing and Accounting Act) and ensuing backtracking, the balance as outlined above will remain firmly in favour of “competitiveness” as opposed to regulatory innovation on responsibilities and suggests that the culture of Irish dependence on foreign investment remains an integral issue in the Irish corporate landscape.

The UN Framework therefore, as well the criticisms levied as being “weak”, fails to acknowledge one particular point and that is the fact that large multinationals are more powerful and have a wider reach than the states that are supposed to regulate their activity and hold them accountable if they fail to meet their responsibilities under the “Ruggie” principles.  Irish capacity to regulate on business responsibilities has never been strong and this is reflected in the tradition of “voluntary” approaches to corporate responsibility.  In an age where there seems an increasing move away from voluntary responsibilities, coupled with the systematic limitations of the Irish regulatory structure, the Irish government is faced with a number of tough choices if it is to fully embrace “Ruggie” and reimagine the regulatory landscape in this area.  Then again, it may simply choose to avoid dealing comprehensively with the issue and instead focus on what it will perceive to be a more pressing problem for the Irish economy; competitiveness.

Discussions around Ireland and the UN Framework for Human Rights are many and include issues such as legal and policy approaches to the regulation of Irish companies for human rights; obligations of the state and companies when public functions are privatized; role of extraterritorial jurisdiction in Irish law to address violations committed overseas by Irish companies or multinationals based here, the potential role of criminal law and civil litigation together with remedies.  These issues are the focus for a one-day conference being held in NUI Galway on the 24th March, hosted by the Irish Centre for Human Rights and the School of Law (see here).

Related Posts

• November 24, 2011 -- Call for Papers: Ireland and the United Nations Framework for Business and Human Rights (0)
• March 13, 2012 -- Dealings by Irish companies in repressive countries raise concerns about business and human rights (0)