View previous stories
	The vast majority of companies still haven’t thought seriously about human rights issues by Mary Robinson Realising Rights   May 2009   "The vast majority of companies still haven’t thought seriously about human rights issues. That is a central challenge ahead." - Mary Robinson.   Sixty years ago, the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, calling on member countries to abide by its 30 articles. Today, companies around the world are expected to respect all human rights. In the Spring 2009 issue of Leading Perspectives, Business for Social Responsibility speaks to Mary Robinson about about the role of multinationals in protecting human rights, how to make voluntary initiatives even stronger, and why every company should adopt a human rights policy.   Extract: The mission of your organization, Realizing Rights, is to put human rights standards “at the heart of global governance and policy-making.” How are we doing in “realizing human rights” globally, 60 years after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)?   I see a mixed picture. On the one hand, there is a positive story to tell. We shouldn’t underestimate the impact of the human rights movement globally. The Universal Declaration has been a rallying point for people around the world in the struggle for social justice and democracy. The declaration and the body of international human rights law developed over the past six decades have helped bring about real changes in national legislation, regulations, and policies in every region—which, in turn, has contributed enormously to the protection of fundamental rights.   But as we all know, having a law on the books isn’t enough. We continue to see massive rights violations around the world in conflict zones; in the widespread discrimination against women and minorities, which remains all too common; in the lack of respect for basic labor standards in the workplace; and in the grinding poverty that traps billions in unspeakable conditions. We’ve also seen how the actions of many governments as part of the so-called "war on terrorism" have undermined respect for human rights and the rule of law over this decade. So there is much to be done to address the gaps between the commitments made by governments to protect human rights and the realities on the ground in all countries. We all have to do a better job of bridging those gaps.   Would you say that business, especially multinational corporations, has done its share in this effort?   Coming to terms with what a major corporation’s appropriate responsibilities for human rights should be in today’s world has certainly generated a great deal of debate. What is clear is that society’s expectations of major corporations are changing. We’ve seen this through campaigns targeting specific companies, through the rapid growth of socially responsible investment funds, and through the expansion of more equitable trade, which seeks to ensure that workers are treated fairly.   These trends suggest that people feel major corporations haven’t done enough to be part of the solution and have contributed to human rights abuses through their actions or inactions. There is a growing global movement that is demanding greater accountability—not just for corporations, but also for governments, international organizations, and other influential actors. But these trends also highlight the complexities involved in implementing the full range of human rights covering civil and political liberties as well as economic and social protections.   There is a growing sense among people around the world that governments just aren’t willing, or in many cases aren’t able, to live up to the obligations they’ve made. That means governments need to be pressured more than they have been to date to take effective action and fulfill their human rights commitments. But it is also true that in a significant number of countries and on a range of complex issues, governments need help from others—business included. It should go without saying that we don’t want business to replace the legitimate role of government. But there are questions to be addressed about what the appropriate responsibilities should be for different societal actors in an increasingly interconnected world. That’s a subject which deserves much greater attention today.. Visit the related web page
	Jubilee warns of another 1980s debt crisis by IRIN / UN News   June 2009   Jubilee warns of another 1980s debt crisis. (IRIN)   The Jubilee Debt Campaign is calling for an immediate US$400 billion debt cancellation for developing countries to avoid returning to a 1980s-style crisis.   In the era of the "credit crunch", where bail-outs and stimulus packages are often quoted in trillions of US dollars, Nick Dearden, a Jubilee director based in London, said debt cancellation would enable the world''s 100 poorest countries to fight poverty and relieve some of the devastating effects of the global recession on their economies.   To put it in perspective, Dearden said, the US government''s bail-out of one insurance company, American International Group (AIG), could have wiped out the entire debt of all sub-Saharan Africa countries.   The Jubilee report, A New Debt Crisis - Assessing the Impact of the Financial Crisis on Developing Countries, warned that even before the effects of the global slowdown began to be felt, the World Bank had calculated that 38 of 43 indebted countries "required substantial debt cancellation" to meet the needs of their people.   The Jubilee 2000 campaign for a one-off cancellation of the unpayable debts of the poorest countries, under a fair and transparent process, began in 1996 and led to a commitment by developed countries to write off $100 billion of poor country debt.   Dearden said pronouncements in 2005 by leaders of the developed world had created an impression that the debt of developing nations would be cancelled, but this had not occurred.   "Today developing countries'' debt stocks stand at a staggering US$2.9 trillion, and every day the poorest countries pay the rich world almost US$100 million in debt repayments," the Jubilee report said.   The debt crisis afflicting the developed world was in many ways a mirror image of the debt albatross developing countries had been unable to shake in the past few decades, the report commented.   In the aftermath of World War II and the onset of decolonization, banks freely lent money to newly independent states; spurred by the geo-political concerns of the Cold War, governments often put a higher premium on political influence than financial prudence.   "The situation was dramatically intensified in the 1970s, when cheap money flooded the financial markets and banks lent it on to poor countries without regard for what it was being spent on and whether it could be repaid," the report said.   "The change in the economic situation from the late 1970s, with rising interest rates, deflation and falling commodity prices, caught developing countries in a spiralling debt trap."   By 2005, Nigeria - then Africa''s largest oil exporter - had amassed a $30 billion debt from loans totalling $8 billion, made by military governments in the 1970s. The Paris Club, a group of rich creditor countries, cancelled $18 billion, leaving the now democratic country liable for $12 billion in debt repayments, Jubilee said.   In the current financial crisis the export markets of developing countries have collapsed and foreign capital has been withdrawn - resulting in rapidly depreciating exchange rates between local currencies and the dollar, the usual currency for debt repayments - while risk aversion has raised borrowing costs.   "Private capital flows to developing countries could fall to around US$165 billion in 2009. This is less than half the US$466 billion of 2008, and down 82 percent on the peak year of 2007," Jubilee pointed out.   Recession in developed countries was also leading to a possible decrease in aid funding and lower export demands, as well as a smaller volume of remittances - $305 billion in 2008, about three times global aid levels.   Developing countries have become net food importers, making them even more vulnerable than they were a few decades ago. "A food trade surplus of US$1.9 billion in the 1970s was transformed into a US$17.6 billion deficit in 2000 and a US$9.3 billion deficit in 2004," Jubilee noted.   "Jubilee Debt Campaign estimates that at least US$400 billion should be cancelled for around 100 countries if they are to be able to pay for essential services for their people without having to tax those below the poverty line."   Zambia - a case in point   The money saved by cancelling $6.6 billion of Zambia''s debt in 2005 - leaving it with about $2.1 billion outstanding - has been used to eliminate or reduce school and health fees, fund agricultural projects and infrastructure development, Jubilee said. About two-thirds of Zambians live on $1 or less day.   The collapse of the copper price - affecting about three-quarters of Zambia''s foreign currency earnings - and international investors shying away from large-scale infrastructural projects, are pushing the country towards an unpalatable future.   The World Bank uses the ratio of a country''s export earnings to debt as an indicator of its debt sustainability. "With Zambia''s export levels now plummeting, there is a real danger its debts will become unsustainable once more," Jubilee said.   "A rough calculation would now put Zambia''s debt-to-export ratio at around 300 percent. This is more than double the 150 percent threshold considered sustainable by the World Bank."   May 2009   UN expert urges countries to acknowledge shared responsibility for debt relief, by Cephas Lumina.   An independent United Nations expert has stressed the need for creditor and debtor nations to work closely and openly to promote responsible financing and ensure the fair and transparent management of foreign debt.   “In order to adequately and fairly address the current debt situation in low- and middle-income developing countries, the shared responsibility of debtors and creditors and the obligation of international cooperation must be fully acknowledged,” stated Cephas Lumina, the UN Human Rights Council’s Independent Expert on foreign debt and human rights.   He noted that the link between debt and human rights is clear. “Excessive debt burdens impede progress towards the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] and pose a significant challenge to the realization of human rights by undermining the human rights obligations of States,” he stated.   “Rigorous, transparent and participatory debt audits which examine the impact of debt on the full enjoyment of human rights can be an important step in this process,” he added.   Mr. Lumina recently visited Norway and Ecuador (28 April to 8 May) to draw lessons from their experiences in tackling the issue that may be beneficial for other countries, including the process of conducting a national debt audit, which Ecuador completed last year.   According to a news release issued today, Mr. Lumina found wide support, both in Ecuador and Norway, for a fair and transparent debt arbitration mechanism, under UN auspices, to address foreign debt.   “Such a mechanism would need to be guided by the principles of inclusivity and equity, in which the interests of both creditors and debtors would be respected,” the release noted.   In addition, the absence of an internationally accepted definition of illegitimate debt was cited by both government and civil society as an obstacle in the efforts to systematically address the debt issue on a global level, it added.   Mr. Lumina welcomed initiatives to elaborate the concept of illegitimate debt and encouraged debtor and creditor countries to re-assess the impact of their financing decisions on the ability of debtor countries, especially the poorest, to achieve their development objectives and to design national policies that would enhance their capacity to fulfil their human rights obligations.   “I also encourage debtor and creditor countries alike to support rigorous, transparent and independent examinations of national debt portfolios to assess the impact of debt on countries’ ability to fulfil their human rights obligations,” he stated, adding that such efforts should be undertaken while keeping in mind the importance of the broader context of responsible financing.
	View more stories