Search results

The purpose of this article is to discuss the role that law plays for corporate social responsibility (CSR) in substance, action and reporting, including whether CSR functions as informal law.

The theoretical point of departure is based in legal science. Through a discussion of various contexts of CSR in which law and legal standards feature, the article questions the conception that CSR is to do “more than the law requires”. CSR is discussed with the triple bottom line as a point of departure, focussing on social (esp. labour and human rights) and environmental dimensions.

It is argued that CSR functions as informal law, and that important principles of law function as part of a general set of values that guide much action on CSR. Furthermore, it is argued that aspects of law in the abstract as well as in the statutory sense and as self‐regulation influence the substance, implementation and communication of CSR, and that the current normative regime of CSR in terms of demands on multinational corporations may constitute pre‐formal law.

Through its discussion, observations and examples of the role played in CSR by law in the abstract as well as the statutory sense, by international, supranational and national soft and hard law and documents, and by public regulation as well as corporate self‐regulation, the paper is of value to corporate managers, public regulators, NGOs and individuals with an interest in CSR, including as an aspect of corporate governance.

The article aims to reflect the present legal position in regard to the upsurging human rights violations by powerful multinational corporations in India and the need of controlling it. This is one area of law which needs to be addressed at the earliest, at an international level by many stake-holders such as companies, legislature, judges, human rights activists and students.

Doctrinaire research methodology using secondary sources.

Human rights violations in corporate arena is upsurging. Lack of good governance mechanisms and vigilances are reasons. Progressive laws are sought at both international and national which can maintain the balance between international and national endeavours to control such issues.

This is not much highlighted issue and hence is updated to various legislations across the world which talks about this issue.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of evolving developments in international, regional and EU law including the UK and Turkish jurisdictions for the liability of corporate businesses for modern forms of exploitative labour practices described as the modern forms of slavery.

In the first part, this paper outlines international, regional and EU instruments, UK and Turkish jurisdictions in relation to modern forms of slavery. The second part reviews legal frameworks for corporate liability for modern forms of slavery.

Slavery, slavery-like practices or some other exploitative practices are prohibited by numerous international law instruments starting from 1904. Apart from old forms of defined exploitative practices, multiple relevant current exploitative practices, called contemporary or modern forms of slavery exist all over the world. Under various international or regional conventions signatory States have been held responsible for exploitative practices by the international or regional courts or supervisory bodies, yet businesses were largely overlooked as a participating partner in the global movement to eradicate modern forms of slavery. For many years, multi-national businesses have engaged with various voluntary international corporate social responsibility initiatives in response to demands to operate in a socially responsible manner. There is a growing global recognition of the role corporate businesses can and should play in tackling crime and exploitative practices. A number of initiatives at the international and EU level and the introduction of the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act, (2010 – effective from 2012), the UK Modern Slavery Act 2015, the French Act on Due Diligence of Corporations and Main Contractors 2017 (loi sur le devoir de vigilance), the Australian Commonwealth Modern Slavery Act 2018, the Dutch Child Labour Due Diligence Act 2019, (which is due to come into effect in mid-2022), reflect this recognition.

This paper argues that it is important for companies to use available tools, participate in joint initiatives and advocate for binding international and regional instruments and effective national legislation and action – all aimed at ending business involvement in modern forms of slavery.

Aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoints practical implications from cutting‐edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context.

Multi‐national corporations have often been stereotyped in the popular media and entertainment industries because of their perceived indifference to, and abuse of, basic human rights and corruption. However, as Karin Buhmann points out in her article, “Corporate social responsibility: what role for law? Some aspects of law and CSR”, the reality is much different. Buhmann examines the motivations and driving forces behind corporate social responsibility (CSR), articulating in the process how corporations are held to internal and external standards of practice where the law does not necessarily regulate their behavior.

Provides strategic insights and practical thinking that have influenced some of the world's leading organizations.

The briefing saves busy executives and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy‐to‐digest format.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse how the liabilities arise in the UK-based parent company for wrongdoings of its overseas subsidiaries, especially under law of tort.

Qualitative methods have been used in this paper, using both primary and secondary data, i.e. Books, case Laws, legislations, international laws and journal articles.

The English Courts are, now, more broadly accepting the allegations against the UK-based parent companies for the actions of its subsidiaries, especially by improving the access to the remedy in the UK for foreign victims of corporate related harms, though concern remains in the case of criminal liabilities. Additionally, in case of the civil litigations, the early settlement of a dispute is also causing pressure to the victim by liming the wider deterrent effect.

This paper will help the lawyers and academic in the field of international corporate law, especially in the tortious claim of an overseas victim in the UK Court. Moreover, this paper identifies the lack of proper legislative guidance in this field.

The purpose of this paper is to bring to the fore that soft laws should be taken very seriously because they have demonstrated their importance in helping to reduce corruption and money laundering. Liberalisation of the markets and globalisation, undoubtedly, enabled the increase in the volume of commercial and economic interactions among natural and legal persons. As a result, the generation of profits and losses are noticeable. However, it became evident that some of the actors involved in corruption endeavour to dock the regulatory radars by way of laundering their illicit wealth. It is as a result of this, that the authorities reacted to checkmate this by way of fashioning out legislations that have cross-border and national characteristics. However, it was as a result of the inadequacies noticeable in the Conventions and their inability to contain the malaise that the soft laws surfaced to fill the lacunae to help dampen the momentum of corruption and money laundering. These significant soft laws include but not limited to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), Organisation of Economic Development and Cooperation (OECD), Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS), Wolfsberg Group (WG) and International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). Although reservations were raised as to the composition of their decision-making apparatus, it is evident that countries still adhere to their pronouncements by way of adaptation, and they have made significant contributions in reducing corruption and money laundering.

This paper relies on primary legal documentations such as but not limited to the Financial Action Task Force, Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development, Wolfsberg Group, International Chamber of Commerce, the United Nations Convention on Corruption 2003, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act 1977 and the United Kingdom Bribery Act 2010.

There is undoubtedly glaring indications that soft laws have made very significant impact to slow down the level of corruption and money laundering in many polities. It is evidently clear that most countries usually adapt the nuances of these laws into their domestic legislations in order not to be frozen out from the financial and economic activities of the dominant wider members. Evidentially, some of these countries may have been excluded from the core decision-making apparatus of the organisations with particular reference to mostly the developing countries. On the whole, the soft laws are a welcome relief in view of the impact that they have made.

This paper is addressed to policy makers who are concerned on the negative implications of the scourge of money laundering and corruption. They should continue to inculcate the emissions that usually come from soft laws when formulating their policies in planning for economic growth.

The originality of this paper lies on the fact that it is essential that we awaken the importance of soft laws in containing the malaise as it has become evident that excuses have been made that it was forced on some of the recipient participants.

The purpose of this study is to highlight the unquantifiable importance that the UK Bribery Act (UKBA) has invigorated into commercial interactions of both natural and legal persons. This repealed all previous anti-corruption and bribery legislation in the UK. It has brought enhanced circumspection into how businesses are to be conducted with the emphasis being placed on adhering to level playing dimensions amongst the participants. The “Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Pressure” can be rightly attributed to be a galvanizing ingredient that helped to propel the enactment. The UK is, perhaps, now seen as a global leader as far as anti-bribery matters are concerned with the incorporation of robust restraints glaringly introduced into the Act that has demonstrated positive emissions.

This study relies on both the primary and secondary legal documents in the analysis. These documents include but not limited to the Holy Bible, UKBA 2010, OECD Bribery Convention 1997, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act 1977 and case law. It is doctrinal in outlook.

There is a conspicuous indication that the Act has jolted commercial organisations to be very careful in the way they conduct their businesses in order not to fall foul of the Act. Compliance has improved tremendously. It should not be ruled out that the Act can still be tinkered with given the reactions that it has generated since coming into force.

This study gives the policymakers an enhanced hope to be able to plan for economic growth in the knowledge that the Act is there to act as a buffer against bribery that will eventually, depending on the quantum, could lead to money laundering. This is a negative to the economy.

The originality of this study is embedded on the fact that the emissions that the Act has introduced should be acknowledged and adhered to irrespective of the negatives that may be attributed to the Act.

Purpose – To argue for the use of corporate social irresponsibility (CSI) proves far more useful in assessing arms makers’ limits of responsibility in a different way altogether. By focusing on the negative ‘externalities’ – that is impact on society – we are able to examine the practice in the context of constitutive and regulatory norms (i.e. the accepted rules), as opposed to norms that are merely evaluative (i.e. moral) or practical (i.e. what's possible).

Methodology/approach – This chapter examines the investment policies, practices and procedures of a handful of Australian pension and sovereign wealth funds in relation to investment in the development and production of cluster munitions – a class of weapon banned under international law since August 2010.

Findings – The chapter finds that the negative externalities inherent in armaments manufacturing demand that institutional investors view such firms through a ‘CSI lens’, especially when tasked with identifying and developing strategies to account for emerging social norms such as the prohibition of cluster munitions.

Practical implications – The investor is advantaged by having at its disposal a roadmap for managing – though not necessarily predicting – emerging social norms. This is so for ethical, responsible and mainstream investment approaches, although is most readily compatible with investors who have pre-established exclusionary policies as well as effective implementation procedures.

Social implications – A CSI approach to investment in cluster munitions as outlined in this chapter benefits society by inducing economic actors, such as pension and sovereign wealth funds, to direct their capital in such a way as to minimize humanitarian and environmental harm.

Originality/value of chapter – Proponents of the social responsibility of business and investment have seldom assessed the makers of conventional armaments such as machine guns, attack helicopters and battle tanks. Fewer still have attempted to devise and implement such programs within firms. Simply put, the prevailing argument is that arms makers and their financers are not capable of being socially responsible.