Abstract:
Multinational corporations (MNCs) have grown to be powerful actors in the global system, with an income that surpasses the growth domestic product of many developing countries. Their conduct in Africa has been met with limited state regulation and lax law enforcement. This has not only escalated business-related human rights abuses but also made it difficult for the victims of such abuses to seek and access remedies. In response, the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) were adopted to sensitize the business sector to human rights through its three pillars, namely States’ duty to protect human rights, corporate responsibility to respect human rights, and access to remedies for victims of business-related human rights abuses. The UNGPs require businesses to take initiative on their own to respect human rights by making sure that their activities do not infringe on the rights of others. The purpose of the present study is to contend that expecting powerful MNCs to respect human rights based on ‘soft law’ without a binding legal framework with clear corporate human rights obligations is ineffectual. The power and influence of MNCs warrant the adoption of a binding legal framework with corporate human rights obligations, especially from Africa, given that the continent is an epicenter of business-related human rights abuses. In so arguing, the study assessed how three MNCs, namely AngloGold Ashanti (AGA), Golden Star Resources (GSR), and Newmont Corporation, comply with pillars 2 and 3 of the UNGPs in Ghana. The study relied on reports from the MNCs, the Wassa Community Affected by Mining (WACAM), the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ), and journal publications to understand the mechanisms employed by MNCs to comply with pillars 2 and 3 in Ghana, as well as their actual human rights impact on the ground. The study found that there is a disjuncture between the human rights commitment of MNCs and the human rights situation resulting from their activities on the ground. The finding qualified the argument that expecting the fulfilment of corporate human rights responsibility based on ‘soft law’ is futile, hence the need for a robust and binding legal framework with clear corporate human rights obligations. An African regionally binding legal framework should be adopted given that corporate-related human rights abuses are pronounced in Africa. However, it may take a long time for it to be adopted, signed, ratified and domesticated. As such, enacting and revising the legal framework at the national level is a more expeditious and effective strategy that the study recommends to enhance corporate compliance with the UNGPs in Ghana.
