Better Together: A Complementary Approach to Civil Judicial Remedies in Business and Human Rights

Effective civil judicial remedies are often inaccessible to victims of transnational corporations (TNCs) from economically developed states that operate in developing or emerging states. The general consensus is that local capacity development is the most practical solution. The alternative solution...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Penn State law review 2018-10, Vol.122 (48), p.1-15
1. Verfasser: Nissen, Aleydis
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 15
container_issue 48
container_start_page 1
container_title Penn State law review
container_volume 122
creator Nissen, Aleydis
description Effective civil judicial remedies are often inaccessible to victims of transnational corporations (TNCs) from economically developed states that operate in developing or emerging states. The general consensus is that local capacity development is the most practical solution. The alternative solution—opening the doors of courts to victims in other states (including TNC home states)—is often said to be illusory. At the 2017 Discussion Day on Business and Human Rights, organized by the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), one invited speaker went as far as stating that extraterritorial remedies would only result in victims’ disappointment. There is, however, an inconsistency in this argument. Extraterritorial remedies are still important in dealing with current issues. This article weighs the arguments and makes the case for a mixed approach consisting of both local and extraterritorial capacity development.
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>hal_ssoar</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_ssoar_primary_document_65829</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>oai_HAL_hal_02415640v1</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-h629-58d285d7eac461ba71dcba7da4ec61b26d33b98b7b2a19d4dcae31cecc5d3dcd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9j09rg0AQxT200DTtdxjoqQfBXV3_9GakrSlCIeQu4840blFXXA3029eQ0st7zOPHY96NtxEqUn6SJsmdd-_cdxBIJTOx8XDH88wTHO2J55anF8ihsP3Ycc_DjNMP5OM4WdQtzBYKczYdfCxktMEODitEhh2YAXaLMwM7BzgQlEuPAxzMqZ3dg3f7hZ3jxz_fese312NR-tXn-77IK7-NZearlGSqKGHUUSwaTATpVQkj1ustYwrDJkubpJEoMopII4dCs9aKQtIUbr2na61zFqd6nEy_fl-T1ctlSR2rVGYr9XylWuz-GYumLvOqvmSBjISKo-Aswl9JhF-k</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Better Together: A Complementary Approach to Civil Judicial Remedies in Business and Human Rights</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><creator>Nissen, Aleydis</creator><creatorcontrib>Nissen, Aleydis</creatorcontrib><description>Effective civil judicial remedies are often inaccessible to victims of transnational corporations (TNCs) from economically developed states that operate in developing or emerging states. The general consensus is that local capacity development is the most practical solution. The alternative solution—opening the doors of courts to victims in other states (including TNC home states)—is often said to be illusory. At the 2017 Discussion Day on Business and Human Rights, organized by the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), one invited speaker went as far as stating that extraterritorial remedies would only result in victims’ disappointment. There is, however, an inconsistency in this argument. Extraterritorial remedies are still important in dealing with current issues. This article weighs the arguments and makes the case for a mixed approach consisting of both local and extraterritorial capacity development.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1545-7877</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2574-2590</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>The Dickinson School of Law</publisher><subject>barriers to justice ; business and human rights ; Humanities and Social Sciences ; Law ; multinationales Unternehmen ; Recht ; remediation ; remedies</subject><ispartof>Penn State law review, 2018-10, Vol.122 (48), p.1-15</ispartof><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-02415640$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/65829$$DView record in SSOAR (Social Science Open Access Repository)$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nissen, Aleydis</creatorcontrib><title>Better Together: A Complementary Approach to Civil Judicial Remedies in Business and Human Rights</title><title>Penn State law review</title><description>Effective civil judicial remedies are often inaccessible to victims of transnational corporations (TNCs) from economically developed states that operate in developing or emerging states. The general consensus is that local capacity development is the most practical solution. The alternative solution—opening the doors of courts to victims in other states (including TNC home states)—is often said to be illusory. At the 2017 Discussion Day on Business and Human Rights, organized by the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), one invited speaker went as far as stating that extraterritorial remedies would only result in victims’ disappointment. There is, however, an inconsistency in this argument. Extraterritorial remedies are still important in dealing with current issues. This article weighs the arguments and makes the case for a mixed approach consisting of both local and extraterritorial capacity development.</description><subject>barriers to justice</subject><subject>business and human rights</subject><subject>Humanities and Social Sciences</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>multinationales Unternehmen</subject><subject>Recht</subject><subject>remediation</subject><subject>remedies</subject><issn>1545-7877</issn><issn>2574-2590</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9j09rg0AQxT200DTtdxjoqQfBXV3_9GakrSlCIeQu4840blFXXA3029eQ0st7zOPHY96NtxEqUn6SJsmdd-_cdxBIJTOx8XDH88wTHO2J55anF8ihsP3Ycc_DjNMP5OM4WdQtzBYKczYdfCxktMEODitEhh2YAXaLMwM7BzgQlEuPAxzMqZ3dg3f7hZ3jxz_fese312NR-tXn-77IK7-NZearlGSqKGHUUSwaTATpVQkj1ustYwrDJkubpJEoMopII4dCs9aKQtIUbr2na61zFqd6nEy_fl-T1ctlSR2rVGYr9XylWuz-GYumLvOqvmSBjISKo-Aswl9JhF-k</recordid><startdate>20181023</startdate><enddate>20181023</enddate><creator>Nissen, Aleydis</creator><general>The Dickinson School of Law</general><scope>1XC</scope><scope>BXJBU</scope><scope>IHQJB</scope><scope>VOOES</scope><scope>RS5</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20181023</creationdate><title>Better Together: A Complementary Approach to Civil Judicial Remedies in Business and Human Rights</title><author>Nissen, Aleydis</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-h629-58d285d7eac461ba71dcba7da4ec61b26d33b98b7b2a19d4dcae31cecc5d3dcd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>barriers to justice</topic><topic>business and human rights</topic><topic>Humanities and Social Sciences</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>multinationales Unternehmen</topic><topic>Recht</topic><topic>remediation</topic><topic>remedies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nissen, Aleydis</creatorcontrib><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>HAL-SHS: Archive ouverte en Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société</collection><collection>HAL-SHS: Archive ouverte en Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société (Open Access)</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL) (Open Access)</collection><collection>SSOAR (Social Science Open Access Repository)</collection><jtitle>Penn State law review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nissen, Aleydis</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Better Together: A Complementary Approach to Civil Judicial Remedies in Business and Human Rights</atitle><jtitle>Penn State law review</jtitle><date>2018-10-23</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>122</volume><issue>48</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>15</epage><pages>1-15</pages><issn>1545-7877</issn><issn>2574-2590</issn><abstract>Effective civil judicial remedies are often inaccessible to victims of transnational corporations (TNCs) from economically developed states that operate in developing or emerging states. The general consensus is that local capacity development is the most practical solution. The alternative solution—opening the doors of courts to victims in other states (including TNC home states)—is often said to be illusory. At the 2017 Discussion Day on Business and Human Rights, organized by the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), one invited speaker went as far as stating that extraterritorial remedies would only result in victims’ disappointment. There is, however, an inconsistency in this argument. Extraterritorial remedies are still important in dealing with current issues. This article weighs the arguments and makes the case for a mixed approach consisting of both local and extraterritorial capacity development.</abstract><pub>The Dickinson School of Law</pub><tpages>15</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1545-7877
ispartof Penn State law review, 2018-10, Vol.122 (48), p.1-15
issn 1545-7877
2574-2590
language eng
recordid cdi_ssoar_primary_document_65829
source Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; HeinOnline Law Journal Library
subjects barriers to justice
business and human rights
Humanities and Social Sciences
Law
multinationales Unternehmen
Recht
remediation
remedies
title Better Together: A Complementary Approach to Civil Judicial Remedies in Business and Human Rights
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T07%3A06%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-hal_ssoar&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Better%20Together:%20A%20Complementary%20Approach%20to%20Civil%20Judicial%20Remedies%20in%20Business%20and%20Human%20Rights&rft.jtitle=Penn%20State%20law%20review&rft.au=Nissen,%20Aleydis&rft.date=2018-10-23&rft.volume=122&rft.issue=48&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=15&rft.pages=1-15&rft.issn=1545-7877&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Chal_ssoar%3Eoai_HAL_hal_02415640v1%3C/hal_ssoar%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true