“International human rights law has proven itself incapable of adequately addressing human rights violations committed by non-State actors.”
Discuss.
– The essay should be 12 page long excluding bibliography
– Double lined space in Verdana size 10 font.
– Margins 2.5cm (top/bottom, left/right)
– Referencing style should be based of the Oscola system (oxford).
– combination of case law, articles , journals, statutes etc for my referencing.
– The structure of the essay is very important. Clear and concise arguments should be made (separating the essay within a few subtitles could
also help this).
– Any conclusion reached should be backed by relevant support and the opposing side should also always be examined.
– Within the essay, use these guidelines in addition to other relevant topics that are encompassed by the question: a) how non-state actors may
impact the enjoyment of human rights. b) Explore, whether, and if so to what extent, non-state actors are bound by international human rights
law. C) consider the matter generally and with respect to the activities of transnational corporations. You could also briefly discuss: whether
non-state actors are bound by international human rights law, whether they should be so bound? Why/(not)? What are the advantages and
disadvantages of holding them to be bound?
Please always link back to the question and do not stray away from the subject matter of the question
A FEW HELPFUL SOURCES (these should not be the only sources used for information, but can provide you with a helpful array of background
regarding the subject matter) :
• Clapham, ‘Non-State Actors’ in Moeckli, Shah and Sivakumaran (eds), International Human Rights Law (Oxford: OUP, 2014), Chapter 26
• Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business
enterprises, John Ruggie, A/HRC/17/31, 21 March 2011 (containing the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United
Nations ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ Framework)
• Communication 155/96, SERAC and Centre for Economic and Social Rights v Nigeria (Ogoniland) ACHPR/COMM/A044/1, 27 May 2002 (African Commission
on Human Rights)
– • Committee Against Torture, Elmi, CAT/C/22/D/120/1998 (25 May 1999)
• Alston and Goodman (eds), International Human Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013) 1461-1503
• The website of the (former) Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and
other business enterprises contains a whole host of useful material and reports. Peruse: http://www.business-
humanrights.org/SpecialRepPortal/Home
• Clapham, Human Rights Obligations of Non-State Actors (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006)
• Jochnick, ‘Confronting the Impunity of Non-State Actors: New Fields for the Promotion of Human Rights’ (1999) 21 Human Rights Quarterly 56
• Alston (ed.), Non-State Actors and Human Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), particularly Chapters 1 and 2
• Ruggie, ‘Business and Human Rights: The Evolving International Agenda’ (2007) 101 American Journal of International Law 819
• Ratner, ‘Corporations and Human Rights: A Theory of Legal Responsibility’ (2001) 111 Yale Law Journal 443
• Human Rights Committee General Comment 31, ‘The Nature of General Legal Obligations Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant’ (2004)
• Mares, The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Foundations and Implementation (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2012)
Please do not hesistate to contact me for any questions.
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF OUR PROMOTIONAL DISCOUNT DISPLAYED ON THE WEBSITE AND GET A DISCOUNT FOR YOUR PAPER NOW!