商業與人權：從指導原則邁向條約草案

Business and Human Rights: Moving from Guiding Principles toward Draft　Treaty

本文討論商業與人權從指導原則至條約草案之歷史發展，同時從權利保障、國家義務、實踐及監督機制三個層面分析草案之內容。在商業與人權領域，先通過指導原則，再嘗試通過條約，並不是奇特的發展過程，難題是通過條約需要多少年難以預期。草案有細緻之規範，具備全面性條約之內涵。雖然主要跨國投資國家沒有積極支持條約可能會形成潛在危機，但是隨著多數國家更深入之思考及審酌，或許可以進一步使其普及化。所稱之企業涵蓋所有企業，也包括跨國企業，不過有疑問的是企業主體是否包括國家本身。草案規範被害人權利，但是在商業與人權領域享有什麼權利與被害人享有什麼權利兩者應該區別。草案規定國家必須建構良善之環境、保護被害人、調查人權傷害。不過被害人之定義應可限縮，而應受保護之人則可以比較廣泛。草案規定國家所應採取之措施，原則上是延續指導原則之規定。國家應建立救濟制度使被害人得以親近正義及有效救濟，不過草案忽略了企業之救濟機制。草案也規定締約國對於已經簽訂之條約，應以不減損實踐本條約之能力的方式而實踐之，而任何新簽訂之貿易及投資協議應符合人權義務。草案建立締約國大會，所設置之爭端解決機制以國際法院優先。草案也設立國際監督委員會，其基本規定是依據長期累進之內容。不過草案只規定個人申訴案件至被申訴國訪視，未包括完整的詢問程序。草案規定國家實踐機制，並有完整規範，具有相當的突破性。

"This article focuses its discussion on the historical development of business and human rights moving from guiding principles toward a draft treaty. It also analyses the drafts from three angles, namely: protection of rights, duties of the state, implementing mechanisms. Moving from guiding principles toward a draft treaty in the field of business and human rights is not unique. A difficult problem is, however, how many years are needed to pass a treaty. Drafts have included thorough rules that can be regarded as forming a comprehensive instrument. Although some transnational investment states have not supported treaty-drafting, they may support the treaty after more careful consideration. The drafts have covered all business enterprises, including transnational corporations. One question in doubt is whether the state itself is included. The drafts protect the rights of victims. However, there is a difference between rights in business and the rights of victims because of business activities. Drafts require the state to construct a good environment, protect victims, and investigate human rights abuses. It is argued that the definition of a victim may be limited, while the ambit of people to be protected may be broad. Rules of measures that states should adopt in the drafts follow those of the Guiding Principles. The state has to build up remedial systems to secure justice for victims. But the drafts ignore remedial mechanisms inside corporations. The drafts also rule that existing agreements shall be implemented in a manner that will not undermine the state’s capacity to fulfill its obligations, and that new agreements shall be compatible with the state’s human rights obligations. The drafts set up a Conference of States Parties, and recommend the International Court of Justice as the best dispute-settlement organ. An international monitoring committee is also established, the rules of which are based on the experience of other core international human rights treaties. Unfortunately, the drafts limit appeals to individual communications only, thus failing to allow for full investigation. Comprehensive rules of National Implementation Mechanisms are included in the more advanced drafts."