The role of business in violations of human rights has been at the heart of international debates for decades. As early as the 1970s attempts were made at the UN by Global South nations (known as the G-77) to establish internationally-binding mechanisms to address corporate violations of human rights. Ultimately, those attempts were watered down into “codes of conduct”. In the early 1990s, the “Washington Consensus” was used to steer states to deregulate and restructure their economies in a race-to-the-bottom and place emphasis upon integrating the global economy over human rights and environmental protection. Although corporate violations existed before, it was only at this juncture that many human rights cases were brought into public view. Some litigation was pursued, but it was most often in tort, and sometimes in criminal courts. The article argues that the existing regional human rights courts have bolstered corporate human rights, while at the same time have remained on the sidelines of addressing corporate accountability. The emergent ASEAN human rights system has not yet developed a human rights court. The article suggests that there are key grassroots movements shaping human rights discourses around corporate accountability in the region and that these offer exciting prospects for an alternative approach to addressing corporate accountability in a prospective supervisory mechanism.

中文翻译：

---

企业（非）责任和人权

几十年来，企业在侵犯人权方面的作用一直是国际辩论的核心。早在 1970 年代，全​​球南方国家（称为 77 国集团）就在联合国尝试建立具有国际约束力的机制，以解决企业侵犯人权的问题。最终，这些尝试被淡化为“行为准则”。在 1990 年代初期，“华盛顿共识”被用来引导各国在逐底竞争中放松管制和重组其经济，并强调将全球经济整合到人权和环境保护之上。虽然以前存在企业侵权，但正是在这个时候，许多人权案件才被公之于众。进行了一些诉讼，但最常见的是侵权行为，有时是刑事法庭。文章认为，现有的区域人权法院在支持企业人权的同时，仍对解决企业责任问题置若罔闻。新兴的东盟人权体系尚未形成人权法庭。这篇文章表明，该地区围绕企业问责制的人权话语正在形成关键的草根运动，这些运动为在未来监管机制中解决企业问责制的替代方法提供了令人兴奋的前景。