UN to outlaw corporations' human rights abuses

[peoli]

Source: The Ecologist

The United Nations has voted to legislate against human rights abuses carried out by transnational corporations, reports Lucia Ortiz. But the resolution, proposed by Ecuador and South Africa, was opposed by the US and the member states of the EU.

The UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva has voted to start elaborating an international legally binding instrument to regulate the activities of Transnational Corporations with respect to human rights.

The resolution passed last week with 20 states in favor, 14 against and 13 abstaining at the 26th session of the UNHRC. Among those voting against were the US and EU states.

More than 80 nations and 600+ organisations support the UN resolution, which should bring about a legally binding treaty on businesses and human rights.



Read more: http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2459002/un_to_outlaw_corporations_human_rights_abuses.html

---

The US delegate stated that "this legally binding instrument will not be binding for those who vote against it", exposing the US disrespect for the democratic UN process as well as its opposition to binding rules to address corporate abuses.

[undeterred]

1. Well if corporations are "religious" and if they are "persons"

they shouldn't object to the expectation that they act like people who respect other people.

[ck4829]

2. SCOTUS 5 to UN: "Hey that's not fair!"

The US delegate stated that "this legally binding instrument will not be binding for those who vote against it".

Yeah, maybe some of us WANT our human rights superceded by corporations, stupid UN.

[LiberalLovinLug]

6. Its the same attitude of the tea baggers

"We voted against Obama and the Democrats; so even though they won by a majority of Americans, we don't recognize their right to govern us!"

[Orrex]

3. They should simply outlaw corporations' human rights.

[misterhighwasted]

4. When I started reading this post I thought,"Why would anyone vote NO to this?" then there it was..

opposed by the U.S.A.

Did I not get the memo that I no longer live in MY United States? wth?

[lark]

5. NATURALLY THE US WOULD NOT APPROVE

We are one corporation, under corporate rule for the benefit of all large corporations. Rules are for the peons (people with bodies who aren't part of the 1%) and are never applicable to the almight corporation.

Just ask the SCOTUS felonious five.

[Jack Rabbit]

7. This is good news and it is our duty as citizens make the government abide by this treaty

That is true in the United States and in EU countries.

We will not obey the TPP.

[yellowcanine]

8. "Corporations are people too!" Oh wait....Never mind.

I guess if corporations are people that means they can be prosecuted like people. Live by "corporations are people", die by "corporations are people." Thank You, SCOTUS!

[IDemo]

9. Baseball, apple pie, and human rights abuses

Nothing at all unpredictable about the US response, was there?

[tclambert]

10. Hey, you guys remember when it was the Soviet Union and Red China that opposed human rights

that the UN wanted to protect, and it was the United States of America that stood on the moral high ground by supporting human rights?
I'm not making that up. That's how the world used to work. Then corporate persons took over America and our leaders decided they liked torturing prisoners.

[Judi Lynn]

11. Inconceivable response by the US. Overt declaration of ill will toward actual human beings. n/t

[JDPriestly]

12. We need this law. I can't recommend this enough.

How can the US claim to be the defender of democracy if it votes against this law.

The reality is that the US used to be the defender of democracy but is now the defender of corporate rule.

[PatrickforO]

13. Not surprising the US voted against the resolution.

We have an absolutely odious record when it comes to oppressing people in third world countries to keep the profits flowing.

[Uncle Joe]

14. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, peoli.