商業與人權國家行動計畫：國際標準、比較分析與臺灣實踐

Business and Human Rights National Action Plans: International Standards, Comparative Analyses and Taiwan Implementations

聯合國通過「商業與人權指導原則」，並強烈鼓勵所有國家訂定商業與人權國家行動計畫，本文分析商業與人權國家行動計畫之國際標準、比較分析與臺灣實踐。 商業與人權工作小組建議各國採用「聰明組合」途徑，同時採用管制及自願兩種方式，並且兼顧國內及國際情狀及措施。不過各國比較偏好自願途徑，著重既有之架構及已完成之措施，未來之行動計畫比較不具體。各國研擬國家行動計畫之背景都是因應國際之發展趨勢，比較典型的是由跨部會委員會負責。各國的國家行動計畫並沒有完整地呈現其是依據聯合國之建議而進行，不過都有勵行與各方團體諮商之程序。有些國家依然對於企業尊重人權之責任比較猶豫，甚至沒有提出相關之行動計畫內容。同時沒有一個國家提到撥列預算以實踐其計畫內容。 而臺灣是比較特別之處境，國家行動計畫之源由是間接地因為國際獨立專家及歐洲聯盟之互動。臺灣提及擬定國家行動計畫對於企業之正面意義，應可增進企業實踐商業與人權。臺灣是由經濟部作為主要負責商業與人權國家行動計畫之機關，雖然有跨部會聯繫，但是並沒有特定跨部會任務編組。在內容部分，臺灣也是對於既有架構及已完成事項做較多之描述，未來之行動計畫內容較少，同時不是非常具體。

The UN adopted the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, and strongly encourages all states to develop Business and Human Rights National Action Plan (NAP). This article therefore reviews international standards of the Guiding Principles, comparative experiences of several NAPs and implementation in Taiwan. The UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights suggests states to adopt a ''smart mix'' approach applying both voluntary and regulatory ways and including both domestic and international issues. However, states prefer voluntary route, and their NAPs focus more on existing framework and measures completed, while future action plans are less specific. All NAPs are in response to international trends, and they are typically the responsibility of inter-ministerial committees. NAPs are not all presented in their entirety based on UN recommendations. States are incentive to consult with groups of parties. Some states remain hesitant about the responsibility of enterprises to respect human rights, and do not even propose relevant action plans. No state mentions the allocation of budget to implement its plans. Taiwan has been in a unique situation from which sources of its NAP were indirectly due to the interactions between international independent experts and the European Union. Taiwan's NAP refers to the positive implications of the development of a NAP for enterprises which should enhance their practices of business and human rights. The Ministry of Economy is primarily responsible for the NAP. Although there are inter-ministerial contacts, there is no specific task force. Taiwan also provides more descriptions of the existing structure and completed matters, but offers less future action plans.