Main Article Content

Authors

Globalisation has blurred the artificial borders that exist between economies and societies around the world. The activities of corporations in this globalised environment have often served as the catalyst for human rights violations; due to the lack of institutional protection, some corporations are able to exploit regulatory lacunae and the lack of human rights protection. It appears that the paradigmatic change demands an equal emphasis of rights and obligations of corporations. This article discusses and critically analyses corporate human rights obligations and the lack thereof under stabilization clauses in foreign investment contracts. First, stabilization clauses in foreign investment agreements are examined in relation to corporate obligations and responsibility for fundamental human rights. In doing so the substantive and procedural dimension of stabilization clauses is analysed. Second, using the concrete examples of the Mineral Development Agreement between Mittal Steel and the Government of Liberia Mittal Steel Agreement and of the Baku‐Tblisi‐Ceyhan Pipeline Project as case studies, this article considers an application of stabilization clauses in foreign investment contracts in relation to the fundamental human rights obligation of states and of corporations. Third, a proposal for reform in the form of a fundamental human rights clause is introduced. To be clear, the argument here is that the fundamental human rights obligations of investors, particularly of corporations, must be included in foreign investment agreements.

Jernej Letnar Cernic, European University Institute

Max Weber Postdoctoral Researcher at European University Institute.
Letnar Cernic, J. (2010). Corporate Human Rights Obligations and International Investment Law. ACDI - Anuario Colombiano De Derecho Internacional, 3, 243–273. Retrieved from https://revistas.urosario.edu.co/index.php/acdi/article/view/1738

Amnesty International UK. Human rights on the line: The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline Project. London: Amnesty International UK, 2003.

Amoco International Finance v. Iran, 15 Iran-US CTR.

Baker, M. B. Tightening the Toothless Vise: Codes of Conduct and the American Multinational Enterprise. 20 Wisconsin International Law Journal, 89, 94.

Comments to the IFC: Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline Project, Center for International Environment Law.

Cotula, L. Foreign investment contract, Briefing 4, International investment contracts. International Institute for Environment and Development, 10 June 2005.

———. Reconciling regulatory stability and evolution of environmental standards in investment contracts: towards a rethink of stabilization clauses. The Journal of World Energy Law & Business, 1(2), 2008, pp. 158-179.

———. The regulatory taking doctrine. Briefing 3. International Institute for Environment and Development, August 2007.

Doak Bishop, R. International arbitration of petroleum disputes: the development of a Lex Petrolea. YCA, 1998, 1131.

European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Striking a balance: Intergovernmental and host government agreements in the context of the BakuTbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline project, .

First Report of the International Committee of International Law on Foreign Investment.

Global Witness, Heavy Mittal? A State within a State: the inequitable Mineral Development Agreement between the

Government of Liberia and Mittal Steel Holdings NV. Report, October 2006.

Government of the State of Kuwait v. American Independent Oil Co. (AMINOIL), Award of 24 May 1982, 21 International Legal Materials (ILM), 1982, 726, and Texaco, 53 ILR, 1979.

Hardenbrook, A. The Equator principles: the private financial sector’s attempt at environmental responsibility. 40 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 197, January, 2007.

International Law Association, Committee on International Law on Foreign Investment. Final Report, 2008, 15.

International Law Association. First Report of the Committee of International Law on Foreign Investment. 2006.

Investment Treaty Arbitration, <http://ita.law.uvic.ca/documents/NorwayModel2007.doc>.

Lawson Remer, T.-E. Global Law Working Paper 01/05, Symposium “Transnational Corporations and Human Rights”. A role for the IFC in Integrating Environmental & Human Rights Standards into Core Project Covenants: case Study of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Oil Pipeline Project. NYU School of Law.

Leader, S. Human rights, risks, and new strategies for global investment. Journal of International Economic Law, 9(3), 2006.

Libyan American Oil Co. v. Socialist Peoples’s Libyan Arab Jamahirya, United States District Court, District of Columbia, January 18, 1980.

Libyan American Oil Company (Liamco) v. Government of the Libyan Arab Republic, 12 April 1977, Yearbook, 1981, 89. 62 ILR, 1977, 31.

Mann, H. International investment agreements, business and human right: key issues and opportunities. IISD, February 2008, 39.

Merents, H.-J. Lex Mercatoria: a self-applying System Beyond National Law. In: Teubner, G. (ed.). Global law without a state. Ashgate, 1997, pp. 35-39.

Methanex Corp v United States of America. Award of 3 August 2005.

Multilateral Centre for Private Sector Development Istanbul. Basic elements of a law on concession agreements, OECD and Federation of Euro-Asian Exchanges, Now Arcetal Mittal, .

OECD. Declaration on International Investment and Multinational Enterprises. 21 June 1976.

Peterson, L. E. & Gray, K. R. International human rights in bilateral investment treaties and investment treaty arbitration. International Institute for Sustainable Development, April 2003, 33, . Ruggie, J. 2008 Report.

Sachs, J. The end of poverty: economic possibilities of our time. 2005, 356.

Shemberg, A. Stabilization clauses and human rights. A research project conducted for IFC and the United Nations Special Representative to the Secretary General on Business and Human Rights. 11 March 2008, 6.

Sornarajah, M. Linking State Responsibility for Certain Harms Caused by Corporate Nationals Abroad to Civil Recourse in the Legal Systems of Home States. In: Scott, C. (ed.). Torture as Tort, Comparative Perspectives on the Development of Transnational Human Rights Litigation. Oxford - Portland, Oregon, 2001.

———. The International Law on Foreign Investment. CUP, 1994.

Stabilization clauses and human rights. A research project conducted for IFC and the United Nations Special Representative to the Secretary General on Business and Human Rights. 11 March 2008.

The ACP-EU Partnership Agreement, 23 June 2000.

The BTC Human Rights Undertaking, .

The Equator principles. Sixty-one institutions (banks) have so far adopted the equator principles, .

The MDA Agreement.

The World Investment Report 2007, “Transnational corporations, extractive industries and development”.

TOPCO v. Libya, 17 ILM, 1978.

UN Commission on Human Rights. Human rights, trade and investment. Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. UN Economic and Social Council, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/2003/9, 2 July 2003, 55.

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, South-South Investment Agreements Proliferating, U.N. Doc. UNCTAD/PRESS/ PR/2004/036 23 November 2004, <http://www.unctad.org/Templates/webflyer.asp?docid=5637&intItemID=1634&lang=1>.

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, State Contracts. UNCTAD Series in international investment agreements. United Nations, 2004, 45.

Wlodarczak, B. Stabilization clauses. Unpublished LL.M. thesis, Pallas consortium, 2006.

Wright, M. & Lehr, A. Business recognition of human rights: global patterns, regional & sectorial variations. UN Special Representative on Business & Human Rights, .

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.