On the authority to exercise jurisdiction over investor-owned Carbon Majors to determine
whether they have breached their responsibility to respect human rights, the Guiding Principles
on Business and Human Rights (Guiding Principles)24 recognizes that corporations have a
responsibility to respect human rights which arises from a “global standard of expected conduct
applicable to all businesses in all situations.”25 The commentary under Principle 11 states:
The responsibility to respect human rights is a global standard of
expected conduct for all business enterprises wherever they
operate. It exists independently of States’ abilities and/or
willingness to fulfil their own human rights obligations, and does
not diminish those obligations. And it exists over and above
compliance with national laws and regulations protecting human
rights.26
The Human Rights Council unanimously endorsed the Guiding Principles in its resolution 17/4
of 16 June 2011.27 According to the Guiding Principles, corporations bear a responsibility to
respect human rights,28 and “[s]tates should set out clearly the expectation that all business
enterprises domiciled in their territory and/or jurisdiction respect human rights throughout their
operations.”29
States have obligations with respect to human rights, both within their territories and
extraterritorially, based on international law. Specifically, states have extraterritorial obligations
(ETOs) to respect, protect and fulfil human rights abroad. The Maastricht Principles on
Extraterritorial Obligations of States in the Area of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights
provide guidance and legal grounds for the effective implementation of ETOs.30 With respect to
24
United Nations Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary General
on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises, Seventeenth
Session, Mar. 21, 2011. Available at: http://www.ohchr.org/documents/issues/business/A.HRC.17.31.pdf.
[hereinafter Guiding Principles].
25
United Nations-Office of the UN High Commissioner, The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights:
An Interpretive Guide, 2012 at 13-14. Available at
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/HR.PUB.12.2_En.pdf [hereinafter Interpretive Guide].
26
Guiding Principles, supra note 24, at ¶ 11.
27
United Nations Human Rights Council, Resolution Adopted by the Human Rights Council: 17/4 Human Rights
and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises, Seventeenth Session, July 06, 2011. Available at
http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?si=A/HRC/RES/17/4.
28
Guiding Principles, supra note 24, intro ¶ 6.
29
Guiding Principles, supra note 24, ¶ 2.
30
Maastricht Principles on Extraterritorial Obligations of States in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights, 29 NETH. Q. HUMAN RIGHTS 578 (2011). Available at
http://www.maastrichtuniversity.nl/web/Institutes/MaastrichtCentreForHumanRights/MaastrichtETO Principles.htm
[hereinafter Maastricht Principles]. In 2011, a group of international legal experts developed the Maastricht
Principles on the Extraterritorial Obligations of States in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
According to the Center for International Environmental law: “The Maastricht Principles are premised on the global
and universal nature of human rights and the notion that human rights are owed erga omnes to the international
community as a whole. However, the Principles do not create new legal norms. Rather, they articulate the current
state of international law regarding ETOs, reflecting many of the conclusions drawn by international tribunals, U.N.
treaty bodies, and Special Procedures. In particular, the Maastricht Principles provide a basis for conceptualizing the
application and implementation of ETOs in order to secure more effective protection of human rights from thirdparty violations.” Center for International Environmental Law, Written Statement to Open-ended Intergovernmental
9