European Coalition for Corporate Justice

URGENT ACTION: Union leaders kidnapped in India. Take action now!

Clean Clothes Campaign — 2010-08-26T07:55:57Z

Take action now to condemn the kidnapping of two trade union leaders at a Marks & Spencer (M&S) supplier factory in India and to call for their immediate and safe return. The kidnappings are part of a brutal attack against 60 workers, which took place as they arrived for work at the Viva Global factory in Gurgaon, India.

The workers were attacked by thugs brandishing hockey sticks and lathis as they arrived for their shift at 9:30am Delhi time on the 25th August 2010. One of the thugs has been identified as the labour contractor used by Viva Global to provide workers to the factory. Sixteen women were severely beaten and two workers, both trade union leaders, were kidnapped. Their whereabouts remains unknown.

The attack follows several months of campaigning by the Garment and Allied Workers Union (GAWU) to get improvements in conditions at Viva Global. Workers complained of excessive and forced overtime, low wages, a lack of water to drink and in the toilets. In June 2010 a woman was burned with acid at the factory after picking up an unmarked bottle she believed to be water to use in the toilet.

Harassment of union members, including threats of dismissal, violence and even death has been increasing at the factory in recent weeks. On Monday 23rd August Viva Global management attempted to prevent workers from entering the factory and made threats against union leaders and workers, who were warned they would be beaten or even shot if they continued their campaign.

The same day a tripartite meeting was held between Viva Global Management the Labour Department and the Garment and Allied Workers Union (GAWU). An agreement was reached that all workers would be reinstated and the threats of violence against workers would immediately cease. These events represent a serious violation of this agreement.

The Viva Global workers, along with a large number of local supporters, are now holding an ongoing demonstration outside Viva Global. The President of the union, Anannya Batterchjee has declared an indefinite hunger strike until her union colleagues are safely returned.

For more information and to Take Action, go here

WANTED: The worst corporations of the year. Call for nominations for the Public Eye Awards 2011

Public Eye — 2010-08-25T07:53:11Z

The Berne Declaration and Greenpeace Switzerland are once again on a global hunt for corporations whose social or ecological behavior stinks to high heaven. For their public naming and shaming we need relevant cases from civil society... that means you!

Whether exploitative working conditions, calculated environmental sins, intentional disinformation, or other disregard for corporate social responsibility: At the forefront of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in late January, the most evil corporate offenses will appear on the shortlist of the Public Eye Awards 2011. And those firms placed in the pillory will feel the heat: Our renowned (in)famous awards shine the international spotlight on corporate scandals and thereby help focused NGO campaigns succeed.

We are searching for well-documented cases where firms cause concrete environmental and/or social harm. This year the award categories are:

• GLOBAL AWARD (chosen by an internal panel of experts)

• PEOPLE'S AWARD (chosen via online voting at www.publiceye.ch)

Two awards, two chances: Tell us who you nominate and why this firm merits a (or maybe even both!) Public Eye Awards 2011. The easiest way is by briefly answering the following questions:

What is the corporation? How many employees? Where are its headquarters?
Which of its activities do you consider socially and/or ecologically irresponsible?
What consequences do the firm's activities have for people and environment?
What is the current state of your campaign? What are the next steps?
Where on the internet is further information about this particular case?

Participation pays: The winners will be invited by us to Davos where they can present their cases to the prominent attendees of our media conference.

Send nominations by e-mail to info publiceye.ch

ENTRY DEADLINE for nominations is September 20, 2010.

More infos at www.publiceye.ch

Outrage at Shell-funded UN report on Nigeria oil spills

Friends of the Earth Europe — 2010-08-24T07:43:00Z

LAGOS (NIGERIA) / AMSTERDAM (THE NETHERLANDS).- Friends of the Earth International is outraged by reports that a major UN investigation into Nigeria oil spills funded by oil giant Shell relies more on figures produced by oil companies and Nigerian state statistics than on community testimony and organizations on the ground who work with communities. [1]

After releasing some information last week about its ongoing investigation, which is due to be released in early 2011, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) was strongly criticised by environmental and human rights organisations. The UNEP acknowledged that its investigation relies heavily on data supplied by the oil industry and in an August 23 statement announced that no draft report currently exists.

Shell oil spills and gas flaring in Nigeria are a major human rights and environmental tragedy.

Nnimmo Bassey, chair of Friends the Earth International and director of Environmental Rights Action in Nigeria said:

"We monitor spills regularly and our observations often contradict information produced by oil companies and Nigerian regulatory agencies . If the UNEP team would ask community monitors it would avoid falling into the trap of spinning Shell's figures. The UN assessment is being paid for by Shell so we are not surprised that it tells Shell's version of the facts. But the reality is that several studies have placed the bulk of the blame for oil spills in the Niger Delta on the doorsteps of the oil companies; particularly Shell.”

Geert Ritsema Friends of the Earth Netherlands /Milieudefensie added:

“UNEP should base its findings mostly on independent sources rather than on information from the oil companies responsible for the massive oil pollution in Nigeria. Last week UNEP team head Mike Cowing repeated Shell's lies that only ten percent of oil pollution in Ogoniland was caused by equipment failures and company negligence and 90% by locals stealing oil. Yet he himself earlier stated that Shell's large scale oil pollution and performance in Ogoniland was 'unacceptable'. These figures are not even consistent with some Shell official reports which admit that 45% of all leakages from Shell facilities between 1998 and 2007 were due to poor maintenance of oil installations.” [2]

In May 2008 four Nigerian citizens and Friends of the Earth Netherlands/Nigeria filed a unique lawsuit against Anglo-Dutch oil giant Shell. The Nigerians, fishermen and farmers, suffered major damage from oil spills because of oil production by Shell. The first lawsuit hearing is expected take place in The Hague (The Netherlands) later in 2010. [3]

Oil extraction in the Niger delta started during the 1950s and was suspended in Ogoniland in the 1990s because of unrest and many oil spills there have not yet been cleaned up by Shell.

http://www.foei.org/en/media/archiv...

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Nnimmo Bassey, chair of Friends the Earth International and director of Environmental Rights Action in Nigeria, Tel: +1 347 657 42 60 (US mobile number valid only until August 28)

Geert Ritsema from Friends of the Earth Netherlands /Milieudefensie. Tel: +31-6-21829589 (Dutch mobile number)

NOTES TO EDITORS:

[1] The UN investigation is mentioned in several articles including:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environme...

http://www1.voanews.com/english/new...

[2] See Dutch tv program Zembla 'Vuile olie van Shell' of 13 June 2010 with Cowing's statements: http://zembla.vara.nl/Nieuws-detail...[tt_news]=27169&tx_ttnews[backPid]=1974&cHash=cdead045fc and see document 'Dagvaarding Goi' on the website: www.shellrechtszaak.nl , under the heading 'juridische documenten' (page 14 and 15)

[3] Court case information is online at http://www.milieudefensie.nl/englis...

Global Witness takes UK government to court for failing to list UK companies trading Congo conflict minerals for UN sanctions

Global Witness — 2010-08-12T14:02:03Z

The British government is acting unlawfully in refusing to put forward eligible UK companies and individuals trading in Congolese ‘conflict minerals' for targeted UN sanctions, said campaign group Global Witness today in an application to the High Court for a judicial review.

A number of UK companies known to have been trading in minerals sourced from the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) should have been put forward to the UN Sanctions Committee following UN Security Council (UNSC) resolutions in 2008 and 2009. By failing to adequately investigate the companies and individuals the UK government is breaching its international legal obligations, says Global Witness in the claim submitted today.

“It is a sad day when we have to sue the UK government, but we hope that this case will mark a turning point. The issues at stake have global significance for how wars are financed,” said Gavin Hayman, Campaigns Director at Global Witness. “These companies have profited from a brutal conflict, and should face UN sanctions – but sanctions are useless without a fair and clear government procedure for considering whether individuals or entities should be listed.”

UNSC Resolution 1857, passed on 22 December 2008, calls for a travel ban and asset freeze to be imposed on all individuals and entities supporting illegal armed groups in the eastern DRC through the illicit trade of natural resources. It was backed up and strengthened the following year in Resolution 1896, passed on 7 December 2009. UN Member States are encouraged to put individuals and entities forward for sanctions.

Extensive evidence from Global Witness, the UN Group of Experts and others, shows that British companies have supported armed groups by purchasing minerals from areas under their control in the DRC. Despite this, the UK government has never put any of them forward for sanctions.

“The link between natural resources and conflict in the Congo is well known. Armed groups controlling the trade in minerals like tin and tungsten use the money to buy guns and fund their violent campaign against civilians. The UN resolutions recognised that companies sourcing directly or indirectly from the region are part of the problem. But in spite of our frequent appeals, the UK government has steadfastly refused to act, which left us no choice but to take them to court,” said Hayman.

Global Witness believes that the reasoning used by the UK government in refusing to put forward these parties for listing is flawed. A response received from the UK government reveals the absence of a fair and clear procedure for listing individuals and entities for UN sanctions.

The government argues that the UN resolutions do not have retroactive effect, and therefore any evidence gathered before the first resolution was passed (in December 2008) cannot be used to make a case for sanctions. Global Witness believes that this is wrong. Retrospective evidence is sufficient to indicate reasonable grounds for ongoing concern – unless there is strong evidence to the contrary – to suggest that companies previously sourcing from armed group areas may well be continuing to do so.

The UK government also argues that the evidence of sanctions violations contained in the November 2009 report of the UN Group of Experts on the DRC is insufficient to justify listing. This is despite the fact that the 2009 report from the UN Group of Experts names UK company AMC's Thailand-based smelting arm, THAISARCO, as sourcing from armed groups through their supply chains. The report also names UK national Ketan Kotecha, director of Afrimex, as working with a trading house alleged to have pre-financed the FDLR rebel group. The government has never explained why this expert evidence is insufficient.

Either way, the UK government has failed to independently verify if AMC continues to trade conflict minerals from the DRC regardless of suspicions of on-going violations.

When the 2009 UN Group of Experts report came out, the UK government altered its position on retrospective evidence, saying instead that they didn't think the evidence in the Group's report was good enough. But they did not explain why.

The UK government has also said that AMC no longer purchases minerals from eastern DRC and so no action is required. However, given the company's history of indirectly sourcing minerals from armed groups, Global Witness has real concerns. Without a robust procedure by which the government can investigate whether or not AMC (or indeed other UK companies) indirectly purchases conflict minerals or intends to, Global Witness is unsure how the government can make such categorical statements. Global Witness has certainly seen no evidence upon which such statements could reasonably be made.

Global Witness is seeking a mandatory order requiring the new coalition government to revisit their predecessors' decision and put forward for sanctions UK nationals and companies violating the terms of the UN resolutions. An application will be made to the court for a protective costs order and permission to proceed based on the unlawful and unreasonable conduct.

/ Ends

For more information contact: Seema Joshi on +44 0207 492 5890 or +44 07912517126; Blanka Geszti on +44 0207 492 5846; or Amy Barry on +44 0207 492 5858 or +44 07980 664397.

Notes:

1) The UK Government is currently one of the largest donors of funding assistance to the DRC and is a permanent member of the UN Security Council.

2) UNSC Resolution 1857 extended the financial and travel measures provided for in Resolution 1807 (2008) to “individuals or entities supporting the illegal armed groups in the eastern part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo through illicit trade of natural resources.” UNSC Resolution 1896 renewed these sanctions.

3) In 2008, Afrimex was found in breach of the OECD Guidelines for sourcing from two comptoirs with links to the RCD-Goma rebel group and for making ‘tax' payments to the same group.

4) The Amalgamated Metal Corporation (AMC) Group includes four UK-based entities: AMCO Investments Ltd; Amalgamated Metal Corporation Plc; Amalgamated Metal Investment Holdings Ltd; and British Amalgamated Metal Investments Ltd.

5) An arms embargo against armed groups in eastern DRC was first put in place in July 2003. From 2003 to 2009, UN sanctions have continued to be in place and its terms extended.

6) For information on how the minerals of the DRC have fuelled the conflict read Global Witness' reports “Faced with a gun, What Can You Do?” and “Do No Harm, Excluding Conflict Minerals from the Supply Chain.”

7) FDLR stands for Forces démocratiques de libération du Rwanda, a Hutu militia whose members are alleged to include perpetrators of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda.

8) Global Witness is represented by Leigh Day & Co Solicitors and Doughty Street Chambers on this claim.

Switzerland's home state duty to protect against corporate abuse

Berne Declaration and others — 2010-07-20T11:09:00Z

This study focuses on Switzerland's implementation of its duty to protect against corporate human rights and environmental abuse. The study's objectives are to review and assess the national Swiss legislation and policies and to outline the main areas that may need reform and to map the options available to ensure full compliance of Switzerland with its international obligations.

This report was commissioned by a coalition of the leading nine Swiss NGO (Berne Declaration, Greenpeace, Amnesty International, Fastenopfer, Bread for all, Alliance Sud, Ask!, Gesellschaft für bedrohte völker and SwissAid) working in the field of corporate accountability and researched by the International Commission of Jurists. Its objectives are the clarification of existing legal frameworks and the needed national reforms to improve Switzerland's duty to protect the human rights of people under its jurisdiction as a home state of transnational corporations and other enterprises.

The Context: Switzerland is a state party to most of the universal and European international instruments on the protection of human rights, labour rights and the respect for the environment. Treaties concerning the protection of human rights and labour rights impose a wide range of obligations on States to respect and/or ensure respect for (depending on the formulation of each treaty), including to prevent, prohibit and bring an end to third party abuse of rights. In some cases, it will require holding those third parties legally responsible. Some provisions in certain treaties have been considered as imposing obligations of extraterritorial reach (i.e. Convention Against torture, CRC and Geneva Conventions).

The study takes into account Professor John Ruggie's framework based on three pillars: the primary duty of States to protect people against violations of their rights by third parties, including businesses; secondly, the responsibility of corporations to respect all human rights; thirdly, the need to enhance access to remedies (judicial and non judicial) by victims of rights violations by companies. It also takes into account developments and proposals made at the European level (such as those made by ECCJ) calling for clearer duties of corporations, access to justice and mandatory reporting.

This study was researched and drafted by Carlos Lopez and Simone B. Heri at the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ). The contributions and views of the following persons are gratefully acknowledged: Prof. Christine Kauffman, Prof. Anne Petitpierre, Me. Josephine Boillat (Poncet, Amadruz et Associées, Law firm), Me. François Membrez (Weber, Membrez Bruchez, Advocats), Hannah Ellis (CORE-UK), Filip Gregor (ECCJ), Prof. Gilles Carbonnier, Prof. Guido Pallazzo, Prof. Eva Maria Belser, and ICJ staff. Elizabeth Umlas edited the study.

Its content, however, can only be attributed to the members of the coalition of Swiss NGOs.

To download the study go here

You can also contact:

Oliver Classen Berne Declaration oliver.classen evb.ch +41 44 277 70 06

AND

Danièle Gosteli-Hauser Amnesty International dgosteli amnesty.ch +41 31 307 22 18

Corporate Accountability for Human Rights Abuses: A Guide for Victims and NGOs on Recourse Mechanisms

FIDH — 2010-07-08T13:05:00Z

The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) is pleased to announce the publication of a guide for victims and NGOs on recourse mechanisms in cases of corporate-related human rights violations. The guide -produced in the context of the ECCJ campaign "Rights for people, Rules for business"- was launched on the 7th of July in Amsterdam on the occasion of a public debate on corporate justice held in collaboration with the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre and OECD Watch and with the participation of experts such as Olivier De Schutter, UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food, author of the guide's foreword and former FIDH Secretary General and Katherine Gallagher, Attorney of the Centre for Constitutional Rights and FIDH Vice-President.

In all parts of the world, human rights and environmental abuses are taking place as a result of the direct or indirect action of corporations. In Latin America, union leaders are being shot for publicly claiming their rights in many countries such as Mexico, Colombia, Guatemala and El Salvador. From the Philippines to Peru, indigenous peoples' right to be consulted in relation to investment projects in the extractive industry continues to be ignored. Twenty years after the Bhopal tragedy, in which toxic gases leaked from a pesticide plant owned by the Union Carbide Corporation, thousands of surviving victims are still awaiting fair compensation and the plant site has still not been cleaned up.

Yet, victims of corporate-related abuses still struggle to obtain justice and as a result, impunity prevails

The guide has been produced in the context of the ECCJ campaign Rights for people, Rules for business which is ongoing until the end of 2011. With it, FIDH seeks to provide a practical tool for victims and their representatives, NGOs and other civil society groups (unions, peasant associations, social movements, activists) to seek justice and obtain reparation for victims of human rights abuses involving multinational corporations.

The guide is comprised of five sections. Each examines a different type of instrument, including intergovernmental mechanisms, legal options, mediation mechanisms such as the OECD national contact points, complaints mechanisms stemming from financial support received by companies and mechanisms that can be explored according to voluntary commitments taken by companies.

FIDH hopes it will encourage the actors involved to share and exchange strategies on the outcomes of using these mechanisms and help to ensure victims of human rights violations can obtain justice.

The guide will be made available in French and Spanish. With an upcoming online interactive version, it is meant to be a dynamic tool that is accessible and that can be updated and improved.

Click here to download the guide.

Hard copies are available upon request. Please contact Geneviève Paul at gpaul fidh.org for more information.

Public Panel Debate: Corporate Justice? In search of effective remedies for victims of corporate-related abuse

FIDH — 2010-07-07T15:30:00Z

On the occasion of the launch of FIDH's guidebook “Corporate Accountability for Human Rights Abuses: A guide for Victims and NGOs on Recourse Mechanisms” and OECD Watch report “10 Years On: Assessing the contribution of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises to responsible business conduct”

With the participation of:

Olivier De Schutter, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Professor of Law at the University of Louvain (UCL) and at the College of Europe (Natolin)

Katherine Gallagher, Staff Attorney, Centre for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and Vice-President of FIDH

Joris Oldenziel, Senior Researcher, SOMO and Coordinator of OECD Watch

Menno Kamminga, Professor of Public International Law at Maastricht University, former Legal Adviser of Amnesty International and Trustee of Business & Human Rights Resource Centre

Moderator : Marleen Van Ruijven, Senior Policy Officer, Amnesty International Netherlands

Location: Felix Meritis, Keizersgracht 324 Amsterdam, Netherlands Snacks and refreshments will be served

RSVP to Geneviève Paul at gpaul fidh.org

Pressure FIFA: Soccer Ball Stitchers Need Your Support!

Clean Clothes Campaign — 2010-06-08T07:19:53Z

Make your voice be heard today to put pressure on FIFA. New research reveals that workers stitching soccer balls in Pakistan, India, China and Thailand continue to experience alarming labour rights violations.

On June 7th, 2010 the International Labour Rights Forum released a detailed report "Missed the Goal for Workers: the Reality of Soccer Ball Stitchers" highlighting industry wide labour rights violations. In particular, ILRF's research identified some FIFA licensees in Pakistan with connections to child labour, poverty wages and extensive use of temporary labourers.

Problems highlighted in the report are:

* child labour still exists in the Pakistani industry especially within home-based work.

* gender discrimination of female home-based workers, being paid the least and facing the constant thread of losing their jobs due to pregnancy;

* overtime working hours as in one Chinese factory, where workers were found to work up to 21 hours a day every day for an entire month;

* the lack of proper drinking water or medical care facilities, and even toilets, as found in Indian stitching centres.

About 75% of the over 200 workers interviewed in Pakistan were not permanent workers and therefore didn't have access to benefits and social security.

Over the past decade, regular reports of violations of human rights in soccer ball production have been presented to key players in the industry including global brands and FIFA.

The CCC is shocked that after all of these years, low wages and other labour rights violations are still the norm and not the exception in the industry. Please remind FIFA that they are responsible for their sport, and that as fans worldwide get excited about the games, the public expects the soccer ball industry to finally live up to its promises.

Send a letter to FIFA now! Thanks for your support.

Take action now at: http://www.cleanclothes.org/campaig...

Re. Attacks against defenders of economical, social and cultural rights in Guatemala

CIFCA, FIDH, OBS, OMCT — 2010-05-27T07:40:00Z

Mr. Herman Van Rompuy Permanent President of the European Union Mr. Jose Luis Rodríguez Zapatero Spanish Presidency of the European Union Ms. Catherine Ashton High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Mr. Karel de Gucht and Ms. Benita Ferrero Waldner Trade Commissioners of the European Commission C.C. Member States of the European Union

Furthermore, we deplore the lack of any effective replies by the Guatemalan State Authorities with regards to the investigation and persecution of those responsible. Moreover, we would like to draw the attention to the series of alarming violations suffered by human rights defenders and trade unionists due to their involvement in protests and denunciations against the affiliations of European transnational enterprises in the energetic field, notably the Spanish company Unión FENOSA in the Department of San Marcos...

Press Release: New Rules for Business needed at World Economic Forum meeting

European Coalition for Corporate Justice — 2010-05-11T08:47:36Z

Business leaders and European lawmakers meeting today at the 'World Economic Forum on Europe' in Brussels are being urged to make companies accountable for the harm they cause people and the environment around the world.

Delegates at the 'World Economic Forum' (WEF) meeting are discussing whether and what European rules are needed for business. The European Coalition for Corporate Justice (ECCJ) and Public Eye [1] are asking the European Commission for clearer rules to protect citizens and the environment. A petition calling on the EU to hold companies accountable is being launched today at www.rightsforpeople.org [2]

The global economic crisis has demonstrated the dangers of missing and weak regulation, especially for the activities of transnational corporations. Moreover, European consumers continuously express their desire to buy goods that are produced in ethically acceptable ways. ECCJ and Public Eye are gathering support from EU citizens for legislation that ensures:

companies operating in the EU are legally accountable for any harm they cause to people and the environment around the world

companies disclose accurate information about their impacts on people and the environment

non-EU citizens who suffer due to the operations of European companies have access to justice in Europe.

Paul de Clerck of ECCJ says: "The European Commission claims it supports human rights and sustainable development around the globe but to be credible it must introduce rules to hold companies accountable for the harm they cause beyond Europe's borders. Commission officials are hearing from business leaders at the World Economic Forum on Europe - they must also listen to the voices of concerned citizens and people whose lives are affected by these companies."

Oliver Classen of Public Eye on Davos adds: "Human rights violations and environmental abuses are still far too often side effects of business as usual. The WEF offers no solution to this problem. On the contrary, as the mother of all corporate lobbyists it is part of the problem. For the sake of its credibility, the European Union shouldn't cooperate with this highly questionable institution."

Particularly in the global south, companies too often behave unacceptably – from employing children to destroying rainforests. In many places around the world where European companies cause harm, the victims do not have any chance to get justice.

French oil company Total, as just one example, operates in Burma in cooperation with the military government. The oil company's revenues are used by the military to continue the suppression of the Burmese population. Total has not been held accountable for this, despite EU sanctions against Burma.

More cases of corporate misbehaviour will be denounced and illustrated in the campaign 'Rights for People, Rules for Business' which starts today and runs until the end of 2010 in at least 13 European countries.

***

For more information please contact:

Paul de Clerck of ECCJ, +32 494 38 09 59, paul milieudefensie.nl

Daniel Morrison of ECCJ, +32 (0) 2 893 1022, campaign corporatejustice.org

Oliver Classen, Coordinator of the Public Eye on Davos, +41 44 277 70 06, oliver.classen evb.ch

***

Notes

Public Eye on Davos is the counter event to the Annual Meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF). Conferring 'worst of' awards to the most irresponsible companies, it demands legally binding rules for transnational corporations. Public Eye is a joint project of Berne Declaration, a development policy organisation, and Greenpeace Switzerland. www.publiceye.ch

[1] The European Coalition for Corporate Justice (ECCJ) is the largest civil society network devoted to corporate accountability in the EU. ECCJ represents more than 250 civil society organisations from all over Europe. www.corporatejustice.org

[2] The campaign Rights for People, Rules for Business will collect signatures from EU citizens in support of legislation to make European companies accountable for their negative impacts. Citizens will have the opportunity to read stories about corporate misconduct by visiting an online photo exhibition. In November a speaker tour of witnesses of corporate violations will be organised in five European countries and on November 10, 2010 a European-wide action day on corporate accountability will take place.