Evaluating the effectiveness of four Asia-Pacific national human rights institutions by reference to Ruggies's third pillar

Samantha Taylor

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

The Protect, Respect and Remedy Framework ( Framework ) and its associated guiding principles seeks to provide guidance for the human rights responsibilities of business. The Framework rests on three pillars, first - the states duty to protect human rights, second - the responsibility of business to respect human rights and third- the states responsibility to provide remedies for human rights abuses by business. This Article focuses on the third pillar - the states duty to provide a remedy. The guiding principles operationalizing the Framework suggest state-based non-judicial grievance mechanisms should form the foundation of a wider system of remedies and further suggest criteria for determining the effectiveness of such mechanisms. This Article considers four Asia-Pacific national human rights institutions as examples of state-based non-judicial grievance mechanisms and evaluates their effectiveness to remedy human rights abuses by business, by reference to the effectiveness criteria set out in the guiding principles.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)44 - 64
Number of pages21
JournalJournal of the Philosophy of International Law
Volume5
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Cite this

@article{eda1a985b12b4e9ca74cfe445401fa3e,
title = "Evaluating the effectiveness of four Asia-Pacific national human rights institutions by reference to Ruggies's third pillar",
abstract = "The Protect, Respect and Remedy Framework ( Framework ) and its associated guiding principles seeks to provide guidance for the human rights responsibilities of business. The Framework rests on three pillars, first - the states duty to protect human rights, second - the responsibility of business to respect human rights and third- the states responsibility to provide remedies for human rights abuses by business. This Article focuses on the third pillar - the states duty to provide a remedy. The guiding principles operationalizing the Framework suggest state-based non-judicial grievance mechanisms should form the foundation of a wider system of remedies and further suggest criteria for determining the effectiveness of such mechanisms. This Article considers four Asia-Pacific national human rights institutions as examples of state-based non-judicial grievance mechanisms and evaluates their effectiveness to remedy human rights abuses by business, by reference to the effectiveness criteria set out in the guiding principles.",
author = "Samantha Taylor",
year = "2014",
language = "English",
volume = "5",
pages = "44 -- 64",
journal = "Journal of the Philosophy of International Law",
issn = "1746-1863",
number = "2",

}

Evaluating the effectiveness of four Asia-Pacific national human rights institutions by reference to Ruggies's third pillar. / Taylor, Samantha.

In: Journal of the Philosophy of International Law, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2014, p. 44 - 64.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluating the effectiveness of four Asia-Pacific national human rights institutions by reference to Ruggies's third pillar

AU - Taylor, Samantha

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - The Protect, Respect and Remedy Framework ( Framework ) and its associated guiding principles seeks to provide guidance for the human rights responsibilities of business. The Framework rests on three pillars, first - the states duty to protect human rights, second - the responsibility of business to respect human rights and third- the states responsibility to provide remedies for human rights abuses by business. This Article focuses on the third pillar - the states duty to provide a remedy. The guiding principles operationalizing the Framework suggest state-based non-judicial grievance mechanisms should form the foundation of a wider system of remedies and further suggest criteria for determining the effectiveness of such mechanisms. This Article considers four Asia-Pacific national human rights institutions as examples of state-based non-judicial grievance mechanisms and evaluates their effectiveness to remedy human rights abuses by business, by reference to the effectiveness criteria set out in the guiding principles.

AB - The Protect, Respect and Remedy Framework ( Framework ) and its associated guiding principles seeks to provide guidance for the human rights responsibilities of business. The Framework rests on three pillars, first - the states duty to protect human rights, second - the responsibility of business to respect human rights and third- the states responsibility to provide remedies for human rights abuses by business. This Article focuses on the third pillar - the states duty to provide a remedy. The guiding principles operationalizing the Framework suggest state-based non-judicial grievance mechanisms should form the foundation of a wider system of remedies and further suggest criteria for determining the effectiveness of such mechanisms. This Article considers four Asia-Pacific national human rights institutions as examples of state-based non-judicial grievance mechanisms and evaluates their effectiveness to remedy human rights abuses by business, by reference to the effectiveness criteria set out in the guiding principles.

M3 - Article

VL - 5

SP - 44

EP - 64

JO - Journal of the Philosophy of International Law

JF - Journal of the Philosophy of International Law

SN - 1746-1863

IS - 2

ER -