OECD 다국적기업 가이드라인의 이의제기 절차와 국내연락사무소의 역할
Complaint Mechanism under the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the Role of National Contact Points
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises(hereinafter ‘OECD Guidelines’), especially through the 2011 revision, is positively assessed as having contributed to the development of international regulation of corporate activities. The Guidelines provide a set of recommendations addressed to multinational enterprises operating in or from adhering countries covering issues on general policies, disclosure, human rights, employment and industrial relations, environment, combating bribery, consumer interests, science and technology, competition, and taxation. Judging from the perspective of multinational enterprises, the Guidelines remain as voluntary and non-binding principles and standards which cannot be legally enforced. However, what differentiates the OECD Guidelines from other international norms on responsible business conduct is that the Guidelines are the only government-backed international instrument with a built-in grievance mechanism. Adhering countries are obliged to establish a National Contact Point(hereinafter ‘NCP’), and interested parties can lodge a complaint with the NCPs against multi- national enterprises suspected of breaching the OECD Guidelines. Such grievance mechanism was introduced in 2000 and is operating to date. There have been, however, continuous criticisms on the impartiality, transparency, and expertise regarding the organization and operation of individual NCPs, and on the effectiveness of the complaint mechanism. These critiques are valid to a significant extent. Despite these drawbacks, the OECD Guidelines and the NCP system are considered to have positively contributed to the international efforts to enhance responsible business conduct. NCPs primarily provide a mediation and conciliation platform as a means of dispute settlement based on consensual agreement of the parties, and on top of this, conduct evaluative functions through fact finding, recommendations, and follow-up and monitoring. In other words, NCPs are assuming a role of a problem solver beyond a settlement facilitator. They clearly act as a starting point for unraveling the problems between multinational enterprises and local communities affected by corporate activities. NCPs provide the forum for interested parties to discuss all matters relating to the Guidelines, offer interpretations on substantive provisions, and make recommendations on the implementation of the Guidelines when appropriate. Moreover, through periodic roundtables and forums, peer reviews and peer learning, and continuous cooperation with various stakeholders, NCPs work towards to effectively improve the functions of NCPs. These efforts do not remain as mere attempts, but are strengthened in the OECD system. Over recent years, the Korean NCP has come under considerable criticisms due to its organization and operation, and passive manner towards specific instances involving Korean companies. As international monitoring of corporate conduct is ever more reinforcing globally, it will be hard for Korean companies to escape from the rules of the OECD Guidelines. Hence, it is necessary to reconsider the perceptions of the Korean companies, and to search for ways to improve the operation of the Korean NCP.
Abstract
The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises(hereinafter ‘OECD Guidelines’), especially through the 2011 revision, is positively assessed as having contributed to the development of international regulation of corporate activities. The Guidelines provide a set of recommendations addressed to multinational enterprises operating in or from adhering countries covering issues on general policies, disclosure, human rights, employment and industrial relations, environment, combating bribery, consumer interests, science and technology, competition, and taxation. Judging from the perspective of multinational enterprises, the Guidelines remain as voluntary and non-binding principles and standards which cannot be legally enforced. However, what differentiates the OECD Guidelines from other international norms on responsible business conduct is that the Guidelines are the only government-backed international instrument with a built-in grievance mechanism. Adhering countries are obliged to establish a National Contact Point(hereinafter ‘NCP’), and interested parties can lodge a complaint with the NCPs against multi- national enterprises suspected of breaching the OECD Guidelines. Such grievance mechanism was introduced in 2000 and is operating to date. There have been, however, continuous criticisms on the impartiality, transparency, and expertise regarding the organization and operation of individual NCPs, and on the effectiveness of the complaint mechanism. These critiques are valid to a significant extent. Despite these drawbacks, the OECD Guidelines and the NCP system are considered to have positively contributed to the international efforts to enhance responsible business conduct. NCPs primarily provide a mediation and conciliation platform as a means of dispute settlement based on consensual agreement of the parties, and on top of this, conduct evaluative functions through fact finding, recommendations, and follow-up and monitoring. In other words, NCPs are assuming a role of a problem solver beyond a settlement facilitator. They clearly act as a starting point for unraveling the problems between multinational enterprises and local communities affected by corporate activities. NCPs provide the forum for interested parties to discuss all matters relating to the Guidelines, offer interpretations on substantive provisions, and make recommendations on the implementation of the Guidelines when appropriate. Moreover, through periodic roundtables and forums, peer reviews and peer learning, and continuous cooperation with various stakeholders, NCPs work towards to effectively improve the functions of NCPs. These efforts do not remain as mere attempts, but are strengthened in the OECD system. Over recent years, the Korean NCP has come under considerable criticisms due to its organization and operation, and passive manner towards specific instances involving Korean companies. As international monitoring of corporate conduct is ever more reinforcing globally, it will be hard for Korean companies to escape from the rules of the OECD Guidelines. Hence, it is necessary to reconsider the perceptions of the Korean companies, and to search for ways to improve the operation of the Korean NCP.
참고문헌 (30)
- 국가인권위원회, "한국 NCP 설치·운영 개선 권고", ~ (2011)
- Backer, Larry Catá, "Rights and Accountability in Development(RAID) v Das Air and Global Witness v Afrimex: Small Steps Toward an Autonomous Transnational Legal System for the Regulation of Multinational Corporations", Melbourne Journal of International Law, 10(1) (2009)
- Cernic, Jernej Letnar, "Global Witness v. Afrimex ltd: Decision Applying OECD Guidelines on Corporate Responsibility for Human Rights", ASIL Insight, 13(1) (2009)
- Davarnejad, Leyla, "In the Shadow of Soft Law: The Handling of Corporate Social Responsibility Disputes under the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises", Journal of Dispute Resolution, 2011(2) (2011)
- Olsen, Birgitte Egelund, "Strengthening the Enforcement of CSR Guidelines: Finding a New Balance between Hard Law and Soft Law", Legal Issues of Economic Integration, 41(1) (2014)
- Holbrook, James R., "Advanced Negotiation and Mediation: Concepts, Skills, and Exercises" (2013), West Academic Publishing
- Luxembourg NCP, "Final Statement on the Specific Instance raised by FoE and SDI against ArcelorMittal Liberia" (2014)
- Menkel-Meadow, "Carrie et al, Mediation: Practice, Policy, and Ethics" (2006), Aspen Publishers
- National Contact Point Norway, "Procedural Guidance for Handling Complaints", ~ (2013)
- NCP Mediation Manual, "prepared by the Consensus Building Institute, sponsored by the NCPs from Norway" (2012), The Netherlands and the U.K
- Annual Report on the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises 2014: Responsible Business Conduct by Sector, "OECD", ~ (2014)
- Annual Report on the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises 2013: Responsible Business Conduct in Action, "OECD", ~ (2013)
- OECD, "Decision of the Council on the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises", C(2000)96, FINAL, pp.2011, ~
- OECD, "OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises: Recommendations for Responsible Business Conduct in a Global Context", ~ (2011)
- OECD, "OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises: Responsible Business Conduct", ~ (2014)
- OECD, "OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises", 2003 Annual Meeting of the National Contact Points (2003)
- OECD Watch, "Assessment of NCP Performance in the 2013-2014 Implementation Cycle", OECD Watch Submission to the 2014 Annual Meeting of the National Contact Points (2014)
- OECD Watch, "Performance of National Contact Points and the Implementation of the OECD Guidelines in the 2012-2013 Implementation Cycle", OECD Watch Submission to the 2013 Annual Meeting of the National Contact Points (2013)
- OECD Watch, "Submission to the joint meeting of the OECD Working Party on Responsible Business Conduct and the NCPs", ~ (2014)
- Ochoa Sanchez, "The Roles and Powers of the OECD National Contact Points Regarding Complaints on an Alleged Breach of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises by a Transnational Corporation", Nordic Journal of Inter- national Law, 84 (2015)
- Oshionebo, Evaristus, "The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises as Mechanisms for Sustainable Development of Natural Resources: Real Solutions or Window Dressing", Lewis and Clark Law Review, 17(2) (2013)
- Robinson, Scott, "International Obligations, State Responsibility and Judicial Review under the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises Regime", Utrecht Journal of International and European Law, 30(78) (2014)
- Simons, Penelope, "The Governance Gap: Extractive Industries, Human Rights, and the Home State Advantage" (2014), Routledge
- The Netherlands National Contact Point OECD Guidelines for Multi- national Enterprises, "Final Statement on the Specific Instance notified by Lok Shakti Abhiyan, KTNC Watch, Fair Green and Global Alliance and Forum for Environment and Development", ~ (2013)
- UN Human Rights Council, "Human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises", A, RES, pp.17, 4[DOI]
- UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, "Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework", HR, 11, pp.04, 2011[DOI]
- U.K. Department for Business Innovation and Skills, "U.K. National Contact Point Procedures for Dealing with Complaints Brought under the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises", ~ (2014)
- U.K. NCP, "Final statement following agreement reached in complaint from WWF International against SOCO International PLC", ~ (2014)
- U.K. NCP, "Initial assessment by the UK National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, Complaint from WWF International against SOCO International PLC", ~ (2014)
- U.S. NCP, "Public Statement: CLEC", ERI and ASR, 2013