Regionals Debate Prompt - Proposition

-->

BIRT multinational corporations

should be held accountable to international human rights law.

How do MNC's avoid persecution? Set statutes for contract takers to abide by in production.

Honourable judges, timekeeper, and respected members of the opposition. For too long, have multinational corporations been allowed to desecrate international human rights law. For too long, have they discarded their humanity for profits. For too long, have they exploited the fact that they provide something, that people either want, or that they need. It's time for us to tell them, that we are no longer going to tolerate that exploitation, and that's why, we on side proposition, are here today, to propose that multinational companies should, be held accountable to international human rights law.

So what are we talking about? First of all, Multinational Corporations have facilities and other assets in at least one country other than its home country. To hold Accountable is to have the moral and legal authority to bring into question the behaviour or attitude of the corporation. International Human Rights Law is as pursuant to the International Bill of Human Rights, which comprises the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

We believe, that it is in the spirit of this debate to set the parameters as being an international body, comprised of the United Nations, Non-Governmental Organizations, and other individuals concerned with the violations of international human rights law.

We believe, that in order to win this debate, we have to prove to you three things. We first have to prove, that multinational corporations, are violating international human rights law, and that if we fail to act, they will continue to desecrate those values which we hold dear. We also have to show you, that multinational corporations can indeed, be held accountable. Lastly, we will show you that our model, will indeed enforce, in principle and in practical grounds, both legal accountability and moral accountability.

Contention 1: Abuses of Human Rights & Why We Need to Act

• Time magazine article: Sweatshops in East Asia
  • In 2004, Nike systematically set up sweatshops in East Asia
    • 1. Absence of a living wage,
    • 2. Poor health/safety hazards
    • 3. Arbitrary discipline (verbal and physical)
    • 4. Fear and intimidation used when workers speak out or attempt to form a union
• Violates Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
  • Article 23, Section 1, guarantees right to just and favourable working conditions
  • Article 23, Section 4, guarantees right to form and join labour unions
  • Article 3, guarantees right to life
    • Absence of living wage doesn't provide this, more than 50% still below poverty line
• Some say better alternative;
  • We say not acceptable, we need to work to fulfill the standards set by IHR law
• According to Canadian Magazine, Dimensions, mining companies in Latin America ruined hundreds of acres of viable farm land through pollution
  • poor safety conditions have led to 10000s of cases of tuberculosis
  • consensus of local population, PEOPLE WANT CHANGE

• Won't change unless we do something about it
  • companies driven by profit
    • legally obligated to garner most profit for its shareholders
    • will set profits above adherence to human rights law
  • we want to lower their profit threshold
    • point where they still have positive gains
    • adherence to international human rights law = small decrease in profits
      • our model of accountability = larger fines for violations
    
    

Contention 2: Corporations Viewed as Singular Actors

To fully conceptualize accountability it must be made clear who is accountable, and to what degree, where that accountability arises from, towards who such accountability exists, and how such accountability is asserted.

• Corporations are accountable on two levels
  • Accountability is divided into
    • primary responsibility
      • actively involved in violating human rights
    • passive responsibility
      • it does not take action for the protection of its workers

• Accountability arises from a corporation's status of as an individual
  • legally
    • Fourteenth Amendment, added to the Constitution in 1868 to protect the rights of freed slaves, effectively made private corporations natural persons under the U.S. Constitution, and consequently has the same rights and protection extended to persons by the Bill of Rights, including the right to free speech.
    • If they are afforded the same rights and protections as individuals, they should also hold the same accountability as people
      • accountability for criminal actions
      • accountability for negligence towards the occurrence of criminal actions
  • logically
    • individuals make collective decisions for corporation
      • punishing that action punishes all who made the decision
    • corporate accountability is a check and balance
      • punishing individuals = personal punishment, corporations won't remember
    
    

Contention 3: How We'll Hold Them Accountable

Legal Accountability

IHRL is a law like any other. If you violate it, you must be punished.

• Enforced by Corporate Tribunal
  • parallel to International Criminal Court, Permanent Court of Arbitration of the Criminal Tribunal in the Hague
• Corporate Tribunal will fine more than what it takes to implement HR standards
  • minimal fines
    • makes process more efficient b/c most infringements are small

• progressive fines
  • more adequate for dealing with atrocious infringements

Moral Accountability

• Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, human rights activists
  • normative enforcement
    • condemnation, investigative journalism, raising awareness
  • practical enforcement
    • boycotts, sanctions, moratoriums

We need to be able to trust multinational companies to respect the human condition

Provide funding to NGO's such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International

My partner will extend on the specifics of Moral Accountability.

Public Pressure can create change. Questioning Nike's factories, girl started movement in US. Nike Oh Shit paid 600 hours of overdue wages. We believe that corporations should be held accountable because basic humans needs should be respected.

Therefore what we've clearly shown you, is that both on principal, and practical grounds, this motion must stand. A right without a remedy is no right at all.

SPEECH 2:

Contention 1: Extension - Morally Accountable

Contention 2: Root of the Problem

Contention 3: Race-to-the-bottom

only through applying this universally can we eliminate RTTB

Contention 4: Neo-Colonialism

corporations are here to stay

International human rights law as espoused by the United Nations Charter. Specifically the subsections regarding International Labor Laws,

ACTOR RESPONSIBLE?

Transnational corporations must be held accountable for violations against international human rights laws. They are powerful, often beyond that of the governments in which they work. Their power to manipulate and control important members of government disable government attempts to regulate the corporation or to otherwise impose any permissible laws.

ENFORCEMENT?

The measures of International Human Rights be enforced by the International Criminal Court in accordance with laws set forth by the Tribunal with the support of governments in which the corporations choose to reside.

Written for 2012 Vancouver West Regionals Debate Championships