AYŞE ELİF YILDIRIM CREATING INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR CORPORATE HUMAN RIGHT ABUSES Final Thesis to obtain the degree of Doctor of Law with the specialty in Public International Law Supervisor: Professor Doutor André Ventura, Professor Auxiliar da Faculdade de Direito da Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa December 2019 DECLARATION OF ANTI-PLAGIARISM In accordance with Article 8 of Regulamento do 3º Ciclo de Estudos Conducente ao Grau de Doutor em Direito, I solemnly declare that I am the exclusive author of the work hereby presented, the content of which is original. I further declare that all external sources and citations used for this work are duly referred and identified. I also understand that the use of non-identified external elements within an academic work amounts to a serious ethical and disciplinary breach. Ayşe Elif Yıldırım 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First of all, I would like to thank Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Faculty of Law for giving me a place at the faculty to pursue this doctoral research and Fundação a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) for financially supporting me. Secondly, I would like to thank my supervisor, Prof. André Ventura, who was out of ordinary. I feel really lucky that he took a leap of faith in this project, pursued the role of supervision and allowed me to find my own voice during the process. I genuinely believe I could not have asked for a better supervisor and I believe this project would not be the same without his guidance. Thirdly, I would like to thank Prof. Jeremy Sarkin for providing me with very useful commentary on writing and Prof. Teresa Pizarro Beleza for making me feel at home, and always be available when I needed. I cannot finish my acknowledgements without mentioning my colleagues Ram Bhandari, Lulu Jia, Hoda Hedayatzadeh, Fatima Cordeiro, Guilherme Berriel, Carla Valeiro, Nevin Alija and Daniel Gomes for accompanying me during lunch breaks and international dinners, as well as my ELSA family who still keeps me sane after all these years, and my Turkish friends Rengin Cise Vermin, Mahcemal Seyhan, Murat Ozmen, Burcu Filiz, Mustafa Murat Arat. Another mention goes to my musical heroes Hans Zimmer and Tuomas Holopainen, and Starbucks ECI (together with its staff) that tirelessly provided necessities during the writing process. Last but not least, I cannot thank my family enough who have supported me from kilometres away, day and night. You are my rock and this one is definitely for them. This doctoral research has been supported by FCT with the contract number: PT/BD/128314/2017 2 ABSTRACT It is a known fact that businesses are drivers of economic development, social welfare and technological advancement. However, they also became responsible for many physical human sufferings, human rights violations or system ‘hacks’ that effects the future of societies. We are facing a problem of compliance with international human rights standards by these private entities and compensating the human rights victims of these abuses becomes a pressing legal issue. On the other hand, the current international law-making structure is not allowing any regulation to evolve in a manner that is beneficial for all the stakeholders and state legislators are very limited to their territorial borders. The problems appear to have high complexities, sometimes root itself in theoretical discussions of legal scholarship. This study aims to look into the international and national efforts to fill in these legal lacunas by analysing the history, the current regulatory framework and the status of the discussions on business and human rights. It aims to pinpoint the main blockages hindering the process of solving problems of the field. It arrives to the solution that state systems can only offer solutions to a certain extent, an over-arching legal regime at the international level should be taken into consideration more seriously and creation of international legal accountability might pose monumental changes in the way we are thinking about international law. KEYWORDS Public International Law, Business and Human Rights Law, Binding Treaty Negotiations on Business and Human Rights, Corporate Human Rights Abuses, International Legal Accountability 3 RESUMO É sabido que as empresas são os motores do desenvolvimento económico, do bem-estar social e do progresso tecnológico. Mas também se tornaram responsáveis por muito sofrimento humano físico, violação de direitos humanos, ou adulterações do atual sistema que irão afetar o futuro das sociedades. Estamos perante um problema de cumprimento dos padrões internacionais de direitos humanos por estas entidades privadas e a compensação das vítimas por violação de direitos humanos torna-se uma questão jurídica. Por outro lado, a atual estrutura legislativa internacional não está a permitir que as normas evoluam de maneira benéfica para todos os stakeholders, assim como os legisladores nacionais são limitados às suas fronteiras territoriais. Os problemas aparentam ser de alta complexidade, às vezes enraizados em discussões teóricas da academia jurídica. O presente estudo tem como objetivo observar os esforços nacionais e internacionais para preencher tais lacunas jurídicas, por meio da análise histórica, do atual quadro normativo e do status das discussões sobre empresas e direitos humanos. A finalidade é apontar os principais obstáculos que impedem o processo de solução de problemas em campo. O trabalho conclui que os sistemas estatais podem oferecer somente soluções até certo ponto, sendo necessário considerar de forma mais séria a adoção de um regime jurídico internacional abrangente e a criação de um sistema de responsabilização jurídica, o que pode provocar mudanças monumentais na maneira em que se pensa o direito internacional. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Direito Internacional Público; Empresas e Direitos Humanos; Negociação Vinculativa de Tratados sobre Empresas e Direitos Humanos; Abuso de Direitos Humanos por Empresas; Responsabilidade Jurídica Internacional. 4 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations ATS Alien Tort Statute BHR Business and Human Rights The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination CEDAW Against Women CSR Corporate Social Responsibility EBT Elements of a Binding Treaty ECHR European Convention on Human Rights ECOSOC United Nations Economic and Social Council ECtHR European Court of Human Rights ETO Extraterritorial Obligations EU European Union FDI Foreign Direct Investment GATT General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade ICJ International Court of Justice ILO International Labour Organization IMF International Monetary Fund IOE International Organization for Employers ISO International Organization for Standardization MNE Multinational Enterprise 5 NAP National Action Plan NCPs National Contact Points NGO Non-Governmental Organization NPR National Public Radio OBE Other Business Enterprises OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development The Open-ended Intergovernmental Working Group on OEIGWG Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with Respect to Human Rights SRSG Special Representative to the Secretary-General TNCs Transnational Corporations UN United Nations UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development UNCTC United Nations Centre on Transnational Corporations UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UDHR Universal Declaration on Human Rights UNGPs United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights UK United Kingdom US United States WTO World Trade Organization 6 Table of Contents LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................................... 5 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 11 1. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS ................................................................................................................... 11 2. DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM ............................................................................................................. 14 3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................................ 17 4. SCOPE OF THE STUDY ............................................................................................................................. 23 5. METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................................... 24 6. SOURCES .................................................................................................................................................... 26 6.1. Literature .............................................................................................................................................. 26 6.2. Case-Law .............................................................................................................................................. 26 6.3. Judiciary Texts ...................................................................................................................................... 26 6.4. Empirical Data ..................................................................................................................................... 27 6.5. Other Sources ....................................................................................................................................... 27 7. OVERVIEW