Globalisation and Human Rights, blessing or plague ?

Globalisation is mostly associated with the rapid expansion of trade and capital accross national boundaries in the period after World War II. It is a worldwide movement towards economic, financial, trade, and communications integration. The effect of globalisation on the enjoyment of Human Rights can be of two types : On the one hand, it can encourage economic and social development and thus have positive resonance on the effectiveness of Human Rights. On the other, it can be the means of abuse and depravation of the most basic rights. Economic growth does not automatically lead to a better protection of human rights (1) and we can see that globalisation is increasing the gap between the North and the South. Multinational Companies are the main actors in this process : they are registered in the former but operate mostly in the latter. Regarding the Fashion Industry, the large majority of brands order their merchandise to developing or underdeveloped countries.

The impacts of these corporations activities are considerable.

Firstly, powerful multinational companies exert a pressure on States to lower national Standards of protection (2). Let’s take the example of Bangladesh. In November 2014, the country raised its minimum wage, but the measure was proved futile as it wasn’t implemented by factories which do not even face any legal sanctions (3). The country’s justice is indeed corrupted, and it is almost impossible for workers to enforce their rights (4). On the same pattern, it has been reported that the factory management takes steps to prevent the formation of trade unions, a right however protected under the Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining ILO Conventions, which Bangladesh ratified in 1972 (5). Quoting the United Nations, “Corporations have a presence in vital sectors and are thus in a position to block any moves towards the respect for and protection of Human Rights“(6).

Secondly, the competition between companies, to offer cheaper and cheaper prices, lowers social and environmental standards. Their power to invest forces developing countries, competing themselves for foreign direct investment, to lower their standards (7).

However, States are not the only source of human rights violations. Companies can themselves, directly or indirectly, be involved in such. The best example regarding the fashion industry is the sadly well-known Rana Plaza tragedy, involving global brands such à Inditex, Primark, Auchan, Benetto, C&A…. (8).

Nonetheless, we can legitimately wonder if corporations can be held responsible for these Human Rights violations. Indeed, it is, at first glance, the role of States to protect its population’s rights. But when States themselves are competing for corporations to invest on their territory, can we still consider that the powers are balanced ?

 

REFERENCES :

(1) Nicola Jägers, Corporate Human Rights Obligations : in search of accountability, INTERSENTIA 2002, p6

(2) ibid

(3) Bangladesh garment Factories failing to pay minimum wage, The Express Tribune (24 January 2014) <http://tribune.com.pk/story/662841/bangladesh-garment-factories-failing-to-pay-minimum-wage/> Accessed on 5 January 2016.

(4) U4 Expert answer, ‘Overview of corruption within the justice sector and law enforcement agencies in Bangladesh’ Transparency International, <http://www.transparency.org/files/content/corruptionqas/316_Judiciary_and_law_enforcement_Bangaldesh.pdf>

(5) War on Want, Sweatshops in Bangladesh <http://www.waronwant.org/sweatshops-bangladesh> Accessed on 5 January 2016

(6) UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub2/1998/6, 10 june 1998, para 7.

(7) Supra note 1 p9

(8) http://www.cleanclothes.org/safety/ranaplaza/who-needs-to-pay-up