Monitoring Policy Making at the United Nations |
| ||||||||||||
NGO Documents on UN and Business
Also See GPF's Pages on:
UN Reform | UN and Business
2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2001 | 1996
Problematic Pragmatism (June 2008)
Global Policy Forum’s Jens Martens gives a critical analysis of the 2008 report by UN Special Representative for Business and Human Rights John Ruggie – “Protect, Respect and Remedy: a Framework for Business and Human Rights.” Martens calls the report “a description of the status quo” that does not leave the door open for developing new ideas on international law and corporate responsibility. Martens offers concrete steps, based on Ruggie’s recommendations, towards increasing corporate accountability, such as creating an International Advisory Center, using Security Council sanctions and strengthening national complaints mechanisms.
One day before UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon chaired the second “Global Compact Leaders Summit” in Geneva, a group of NGOs sponsored a hearing to assess the UN corporate initiative. Speakers addressed the failure of the Global Compact to hold its signatories accountable for basic human rights, as well as environmental and labor standards. The speakers also discussed how many translational corporations exploit their Global Compact memberships to advance their public relations, and oppose initiatives calling for binding international regulation and “effective independent monitoring and auditing” of corporate activity. (Global Policy Forum Europe)
This Global Policy Forum-Friedrich Ebert Foundation joint paper analyzes how UN relations with NGOs as well as the corporate sector affect international policymaking and multilateralism. The author, GPF-Europe’s Jens Martens, warns that “despite the image of greater flexibility and efficiency,” such partnerships could increase businesses’ influence in politics while impeding long-term development strategies. Martens therefore calls for a system to regulate the UN’s interaction with corporations, ensuring that profit-driven initiatives do not overshadow public interests.
23 organizations call on governments and the UN “to examine critically the Global Compact and the corporate partnership approach it represents, and to deliver real corporate accountability in a legal framework.”
A report by Corpwatch documents corporate influence on the United Nations and calls on the UN to implement measures for accountability. It looks at some of the Global Compact companies and finds evidence that they have engaged in human rights and environmental abuses. The report also offers specific steps the UN can take to hold these corporations accountable.
Global Policy Forum takes a position on corporate power and the battle over global public policy at The United Nations.2008
Business and Human Rights – Treaty Road Not Travelled (May 6, 2008)
John Ruggie, UN special representative for business and human rights, argues against legally binding rules for transnational corporations under international law - a policy that GPF has long advocated. Defending his position, Ruggie argues that it takes a long time to negotiate a treaty and governments may evoke the negotiations as a pretext to not take any action on a national level. Ruggie further argues that enforcing a treaty would be difficult, rejecting the idea of an international court for companies. (Business and Human Rights)125 Public Interest Leaders Urge UN to Withdraw Support from CEO Water Mandate (March 20, 2008)
In this letter, NGOs from all over the world ask UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to withdraw his support for the Global Compact CEO Water Mandate – an initiative between the UN and transnational corporations. The supporters of the initiative argue it will counter the global water crisis. However, NGOs say the CEO Water Mandate seeks to increase corporations’ control over water sources. Many corporations, such as Coca Cola and Nestle, have great interest in doing this, as they depend on water for the production of their products. But, the NGOs argue, water is a basic human right and its control should be in hands of local communities and elected governments. (Corporate Accountability International)2007
Global Compact Fails to Stop Corporate Human Rights Violations, Says ActionAid (July 4, 2007)
ActionAid warns that the Global Compact cannot prevent corporations from violating human rights. Aftab Alam Khan, Head of Trade from ActionAid, claims that the Compact is faulty because it does not hold any of its signatories accountable for violations. Companies like Anglo American and its subsidiaries, which have joined the Global Compact, continue to pollute rivers and abuse their employees in Ghana and South Africa. The article urges the Compact to introduce legally-binding regulations and also hold corporations responsible for their policies “with respect to gender discrimination, indigenous peoples, corporate transparency and tax avoidance.”NGOs Criticize “Blue Washing” by the Global Compact (July 4, 2007)
At the “Public Eye on the Global Compact,” a conference held parallel to the UN Global Compact Leaders Summit in Geneva, a group of NGOs raised doubts about how effectively the Compact can promote corporate social and ecological responsibility. Daniel Mittler of Greenpeace International insists that the Global Compact should disassociate itself from companies like Areva and RWE which are using their membership in the Compact to promote dangerous nuclear and coal plants as a solution to climate change. (Berne Declaration)2006
Letter from NGO Coalition to John Ruggie (May 18, 2006)
An international NGO coalition responds to UN Special Representative on Business and Human Rights John Ruggie’s interim report on human rights and transnational corporations. In a call for more clearly defined standards to “ensure business does not infringe human rights,” the NGOs urge the Special Representative to critically analyze legal developments to increase corporate accountability. (International Network of Economic, Social & Cultural Rights)2005
A Big Deal? Corporate Social Responsibility and the Finance Sector in Europe (December 2005)
This report raises strong doubts about voluntary approaches to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). The study, which examines seven different cases and initiatives (including the UN global compact), shows that, in the absence of binding standards for corporate behavior, the finance sector consistently undermines efforts to reach development targets in both poor and rich countries. Binding standards and sanctions for transgressions could make corporations accountable for their social and environmental impact. (Corporate Responsibility Coalition)Joint NGO Submission: Consultation on Human Rights and the Extractive Industry (November 10-11, 2005)
The International Network for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights - Corporate Accountability Working Group reports on human rights abuses in the extractive industry. As companies exert an increasing amount of influence globally, governments, especially of poor countries lack the power to regulate and hold companies accountable for breaches of human rights. The Working Group recommends that the UN develop a single set of human rights standards to include companies, governments and communities, while building government capacity to make these standards enforceable.2004
Precarious “Partnerships” Six problems of the Global Compact between Business and the UN (June 23, 2004)
The Global Compact undermines efforts to hold corporations accountable to labor, human rights and environmental standards. “Instead of bringing shared values into the market, the Global Compact threatens to bring commercialism into the UN.” (World Economy, Ecology and Development Association and Global Policy Forum)The Global Compact Counter-Summit (June 23, 2004)
This counter-summit was organized to question the expansion of corporate influence at the UN. These minutes from the meeting outline the pros and cons of the Global Compact, ultimately highlighting its inefficacy and calling for its cancellation. (Global Policy Forum)Letter to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan on the Global Compact (June 4, 2004)
Human Rights First, an NGO member of the Global Compact, expresses “serious concerns” about the compact’s credibility and effectiveness. The organization calls on the UN to “implement much stronger systems of accountability, a more transparent process for evaluating company participation, and a more results-oriented approach to its work.”Flags of Inconvenience? The Global Compact and the Future of the United Nations (Spring 2004)
This research paper reviews criticism of the Global Compact’s role, effect and accountability and gives suggestions for the future. The author warns that the Global Compact may undermine the UN’s ability to mediate between competing views, ideologies and power bases. (International Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility)The UN Human Rights Norms for Business: Towards Legal Accountability (2004)
In this booklet Amnesty International answers questions about the UN Norms and their legal status. It also includes an overview of the development of the Norms and background on the drafting process.2003
Development at Risk: Rethinking UN-Business Partnerships (December 2003)
This report welcomes the idea of the UN Global Compact. However, it acknowledges that “under present arrangements, partnerships cannot make a significant contribution to development.” (South Centre and UNRISD)Membership of Nestlé in the UN Global Compact (July 10, 2003)
Geneva Infant Feeding Association/International Baby Food Action Network (GIFA-IBFAN) demands an explanation of the acceptance of transnational food manufacturer Nestlé to the Global Compact. The UN did not publicly announce Nestlé’s acceptance to the Compact despite GIFA-IBFAN’s opposition.Letter to Louise Fréchette Raising Concerns on UN Global Compact (April 7, 2003)
In this letter four major participants of the UN Global Compact express their misgivings about various aspects of its operation. The authors recommend establishing clear rules of participation, feed back and methods of accountability. (Amnesty International)The Human Rights Responsibilities of Companies (2003)
Amnesty International summarizes the UN Draft Norms of Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights, and highlights the existing UN human rights standards to which governments and corporations are accountable.2001
Global Compact with Corporations: "Civil Society" Responds (February 15, 2001)
A panel discussion at the UN, organized by the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, presents criticisms of the Global Compact.1996
Representing Business at the UN? (October 1996)
Global Policy Forum Executive Director James Paul reflects on the idea that "the UN would be somehow 'more effective' if business had an official seat at the table."
