Search Climate Insights Directory

This draft treaty proposes a comprehensive international legal framework to hold transnational corporations (TNCs) and their managers accountable for human rights violations. It argues for the supremacy of international human rights law over trade and investment agreements, establishes the responsibility of 'home states' to regulate TNCs extraterritorially, and proposes the creation of an International Court on Transnational Corporations and an International Monitoring Center. The text details specific obligations for TNCs—including bans on forced labor, protection of indigenous land rights, and environmental compliance—and mandates that states ensure access to justice and reparations for affected communities.

The Center for International Environmental Law asserts that the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement violates international law and damages US credibility as an international actor. The statement claims that this decision will not protect the coal or fossil fuel industries nor save jobs, but will instead slow the global response to climate change. It notes that other nations, specifically China and India, as well as US cities and states, will continue to pursue climate action regardless of the federal government's exit.

The document analyzes South Africa's transition from a leading 'norm entrepreneur' in Africa during the Mandela and Mbeki eras to a state currently facing a 'crisis of expectations' under President Jacob Zuma. While South Africa historically exported its model of democratic transition through mediation in Burundi and the DRC and the reform of continental institutions like the AU and SADC, it is now criticized for failing to oppose democratic reversals and human rights abuses. The brief highlights contradictions in South Africa's current approach, including its controversial withdrawal from the International Criminal Court and its reluctance to vote on country-specific human rights issues in the UN. It recommends that South Africa leverage its soft power and financial influence within the AU and SADC to regain its status as a champion of peace and governance.

ClientEarth advocates for a European Court of Justice (ECJ) Opinion on the compatibility of CETA's Investment Court System (ICS) with EU Treaties to ensure legal certainty and avoid future constitutional crises or international embarrassment.

CIEL is participating in a three-day consultation in Washington, DC, as part of a reform process started in 2012 to improve the World Bank's project loan policies. CIEL argues that the Bank has prioritised investment volume over safety and environmental protections, and is pushing for standards that guarantee compliance with international law.

The fact sheet advocates for a binding international treaty to regulate transnational corporations (TNCs), highlighting the inadequacy of voluntary corporate policies. It presents evidence of corporate-linked harms, including deforestation and forest fires in Indonesia caused by palm oil and paper companies, hazardous shipbreaking practices in Bangladesh, water rights violations by Mekorot in Palestine, and a chemical disaster in South Korea involving Reckitt Benckiser's humidifier sterilisers. The document emphasizes that TNCs often operate across jurisdictions to escape accountability, necessitating a legal framework supported by the UN Human Rights Council and various global governments.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) advocates for a legally binding UN treaty to end the systemic impunity of transnational corporations (TNCs). The submission argues that the treaty must establish civil and criminal liability for TNCs, their executives, and financiers across global supply chains. FoEI proposes the creation of an independent international court to judge environmental crimes and human rights abuses, emphasizing the need for a hierarchy where human rights obligations prevail over trade and investment agreements, specifically targeting the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism. The document highlights cases of corporate abuse in Nigeria, Brazil, Mozambique, and elsewhere to illustrate the failure of current voluntary standards and national judicial systems.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) advocates for a binding UN Treaty to end corporate impunity. The proposal emphasizes the need for direct legal obligations for transnational corporations (TNCs) and their executives, the creation of a World Court on TNCs and Human Rights, and the primacy of human rights over investment treaties. FoEI highlights systemic failures in national courts and the harmful impact of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, calling for a process free from corporate lobbying that prioritizes the rights of affected communities and environmental defenders.

The document clarifies that the outcome of the Paris climate talks will likely be a 'package' of instruments with varying legal forms, including a core legal agreement, UNFCCC decisions, and potential political declarations. It emphasizes that the legal force of the agreement is determined by its specific content and prescriptive language rather than its name (e.g., treaty, protocol, or accord). The text further explains that the agreement can contain a mix of binding and non-binding provisions and that the domestic ratification processes of participating countries will vary according to their own legal systems.

The Global Campaign to Dismantle Corporate Power and Stop Impunity argues for a legally binding UN treaty to end the impunity of transnational corporations (TNCs). The submission proposes that TNCs be held civilly and criminally liable for human rights and environmental violations, including through shared liability for subsidiaries and subcontractors. It calls for the recognition of the hierarchical superiority of human rights over trade and investment treaties, the codification of states' extra-territorial obligations, and the creation of international enforcement bodies, including a World Court on TNCs and Human Rights. The document also highlights the role of international financial institutions like the IMF and World Bank in facilitating corporate impunity through structural adjustment policies.

The document argues that transnational corporations (TNCs) currently operate with impunity due to a lack of binding international regulations and the dominance of trade and investment treaties over human rights. It proposes a new UN instrument that establishes the legal obligation of TNCs to respect all human rights, holds them civilly and criminally liable for violations (including through subsidiaries), and mandates that states regulate TNCs' extraterritorial activities. The proposal calls for the creation of an international court and a monitoring body to oversee implementation, while demanding that TNCs be excluded from the negotiation process to prevent undue influence.

The author contends that Germany's historical preference for non-military foreign policy and economic cooperation is no longer viable in a globalised world. Highlighting the paralysis of the UN Security Council and the rise of authoritarianism, the text calls for a more active European foreign policy. It specifically emphasizes the need for the EU to support Ukraine against Russian neo-imperialism and to maintain a value-based partnership with the United States to avoid security vacuums.

The document analyzes the ideological shift within European green parties—specifically in Belgium, France, and Germany—from a foundation of anti-militarism and nuclear disarmament in the 1980s toward a complex tension between pacifism and the 'responsibility to protect' human rights. It highlights how events such as the Kosovo conflict, the September 11 attacks, and the 2011 intervention in Libya created internal divisions between those advocating for absolute non-violence and those supporting legal military intervention to prevent massacres. The author argues that green parties must now address new complexities of modern warfare, including privatization and environmental consequences, to pursue their ultimate goals of world peace and global disarmament.

The document examines the ideological shift within European Green parties regarding the use of force, moving from 1980s antimilitarism and anti-nuclear activism toward a complex debate between strict pacifism and humanitarian interventionism based on international law.

The document defines a Green foreign policy as a holistic approach that prioritizes human rights, democracy, and environmental sustainability over narrow economic interests. It advocates for the reform of international organizations like the UN and the Bretton Woods Institutions to increase transparency and representation for the Global South. The framework emphasizes the strengthening of international law, specifically the International Criminal Court, and supports restrictive weapons export policies and UN-mandated military interventions. It also calls for a development agenda that links environmental sustainability with social inclusion and conflict prevention through the 'Responsibilities to Protect' (R2P) framework.

The February 2015 Peace & Security Council Report details the AU's efforts to manage continental security crises. Key outcomes include the authorization of a 7,500-strong Multinational Joint Task Force (MJTF) to combat Boko Haram and a new tiered funding model for the AU budget. However, the report notes significant setbacks, such as the deferral of the Commission of Inquiry report on South Sudan and deep divisions within the International Contact Group on Libya. It also highlights the high risk of election-related violence across 18 African states in 2015 and the ongoing struggle to defeat al-Shabaab in Somalia.

This guide, published by Natural Justice in December 2014, provides an overview of regional and international grievance and advocacy mechanisms available to indigenous peoples and local communities. It categorizes these tools into UN human rights systems, regional human rights systems, international and regional financial institutions, industry-specific standards, and other advocacy opportunities, detailing eligibility, processes, and potential barriers for each.

The policy brief examines the tension between national interests and human rights values in the foreign policies of emerging democracies like Brazil, India, Indonesia, and South Africa. While these states have collaborated with established democracies on specific crises in Myanmar, North Korea, and Libya, the author identifies significant cleavages driven by a preference for sovereignty, non-intervention, and economic interests. The document highlights how historical grievances against Northern hegemony and fear of reciprocal criticism of domestic records inhibit a consistent pro-human rights stance. However, it notes that transnational advocacy, the globalisation of media, and international mechanisms like the UN Human Rights Council provide pathways to pressure states toward greater accountability.

The briefing evaluates G-20 performance regarding sub-Saharan Africa across five criteria: goals, international law, administrative practice, coverage, and coordinated specialisation. It finds that while the G-20's implicit goal of a "more inclusive and sustainable global economy" aligns with African interests, the group's outputs often lack the specificity and accountability needed for meaningful impact. South Africa is noted as the sole African member, which limits broader regional representation in decision-making. The author recommends that African stakeholders use G-20 statements to advocate for action and that the G-20 adopt clearer implementation schedules to improve accountability.

The G-20 is not fully satisfying any of the five parts of the test, and therefore fails to reach its full potential as a global economic governance actor.