MSc thesis defence Andrea Spignoli: Negotiating Extraterritorial Obligations in Business and Human Rights

You are hereby cordially invited to the MSc thesis presentation by Andrea Spignoli on “Negotiating Extraterritorial Obligations in Business and Human Rights: Towards the End of the ‘Architecture of Impunity’?”.

Supervisors:
Otto Hospes, PAP
Nadia Bernaz, LAW

Examinor:
Katrien Termeer

Date: 22.3.2022
Time: 10.30-12.00 hours CET

MS Teams link: Click here to join the meeting

Abstract
Often, multinational companies do not face legal consequences for violations of human rights that their business activities can produce. This research aims to contribute to the debate on what type of global governance should be applied to address this problem. It does so through a comparison of stakeholders’ positions on extraterritorial obligations for states as stated in the negotiations of two international instruments for Business and Human Rights (BHR), namely the non-legally binding United Nations Guiding Principles for BHR and the United Nations Legally Binding Instrument on BHR. Through a content analysis of stakeholders’ positions and through interviews with BHR experts and stakeholders themselves, the aim of this research is two-fold. On the one hand, it challenges the idea that stakeholders are sincere about their commitment only when negotiating binding regulations. On the other hand, it contests some authors’ assertion that certain stakeholders are boycotting the treaty negotiation to preserve the governance gap that allows multinational companies to avoid the consequences of their violations. 

The findings show that the stakeholders did not change their positions significantly enough to make legal bindingness a determinant factor for them. Furthermore, a widespread opposition emerged to the idea that some stakeholders are boycotting the treaty for the suggested reason. Instead, this research argues that considerations of international politics and states-specific circumstances are the key determinants behind stakeholders’ positions and approaches.

Finally, by incorporating law and political studies, this work helps to bridge the disciplinary gap that characterizes the existing literature on BHR.