MNCs and human rights obligations

         Discourse on the promotion of human rights and investigations into human rights violations have revolved primarily around nation states. Further, international documents on human rights limit legal responsibility for violations to state parties. Perhaps, this is because rights obligations have been, from the outset, theoretically considered to fall only upon governments (i.e. the relationship between the state and individual as a contract with rights and obligations). Human rights and MNCs are traditionally considered unlikely partners. By nature, firms are not in the business of promoting human rights abroad and advocates of human rights have typically disdained corporations. However, there is a growing body of human rights literature that stresses the moral and social dimensions of MNCs. It is in this debate where it becomes necessary to address the distinction between legal rights and moral rights.

   Very few international initiatives address questions of regulating the behavior of multinational corporations. The initiatives that do exist tend to focus on the economic impact of enterprises, rather than on the corporate impact on rights. Consequently, there are basically no binding legal obligations on MNCs to promote or to protect human rights. But as we have seen from this weeks reading, MNCs have an effect on human rights in the third world. In the case of Guatemala, this effect was negative. While United Fruit, simply by following its own interests, brought jobs, capital, technology and administrative structures to Guatemala, it also aided in funneling capital to a repressive regime (what I mean is before Arbenz came to power), abused the labor force it found at its disposal and helped mastermind a coup to cement the power of a dictator. 
      But is all foreign investment inherently bad for human rights in the developing world? Possibly, rather than having an interest in subverting human rights, MNCs – particularly, high profile firms in democratic societies - may see the benefits of promoting human rights if these corporations bring with them a powerful glare of public scrutiny, which can induce changes in an increasingly global marketplace. For instance, as a result of heightened human rights activism, sharper media scrutiny and the increased communication facilitated by the Internet corporations find it difficult to sustain their old hands-off policy. Perhaps, corporations- if subjected to enough pressure – can become instruments in the promotion of human rights.