ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, I would like to thank my subject teacher Mrs. Harman Shergill for giving me this
project and helping me through the completion of it, by giving tactful outlines. I have learnt a
lot through her lectures. I would also thank our library staff for providing me with resourceful
books.

Acknowledged by:
Kavita Manchanda
142/12

1
Table of Contents
1. Abstract ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3
2. Introduction-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------3-4
3. Globalization Defined-----------------------------------------------------------------------5-6
4. Framework of International Human Rights Law----------------------------------------7-10
5. Globalization, Development and Human Rights---------------------------------------10-13
6. Development Aid and Human Rights-------------------------------------------------------13
7. Trade and Human Rights------------------------------------------------------------------14-16
8. Human Rights Globalization-Connect-------------------------------------------------16-17
9. Impact of Globalization on Human Rights-----------------------------------------------17-23
Positive effects ------------------------------------------------------------18-20
Negative effects------------------------------------------------------------20-23
10. The Obstacle of Cultural Relativism-------------------------------------------------------23-25
11. Workers Rights and Globalization-----------------------------------------------------------25
12. Rights of Indigenous People-----------------------------------------------------------------25-26
13. Women Workers---------------------------------------------------------------------------------26
14. International Responses to the problems of Globalizations and Human Rights-------27-30
15. Implementations of Human Rights in the era of Globalizations-Lessons from India-30-31
16. Conclusion-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------32
17. Bibliography---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------33

2
ABSTRACT

Any search for justice is based upon identifying values, including relationships with others,
which are viewed as so critical to the well-being of humanity and the character of being human
that they are eventually institutionalized as rights. If globalization is conceived as turning the
whole world into one global village in which people are increasingly interconnected and all the
fences or barriers are removed, so that the world witnesses a new state of fast and free flow of
people, capital, goods and ideas then the world would be witnessing unprecedented enjoyment of
human rights everywhere because globalization is bringing prosperity to all the corners of the
globe. On the negative side, globalization has also threatened the basic rights of human. This
paper aims to address the impacts created by globalization and liberalization measures on human
rights. It has therefore, been concluded that policies with a human rights approach in this age of
globalization are the need of the hour as that would give values to justice and freedom.

INTRODUCTION

VASUDHAIVA KUTUMBAKAM, this world is one family, is an ancient and core part of Indian
philosophy. Strange, that globalization is often portrayed as a recent western imposition on India
and the world. Goods and people have moved across the globe for centuries, infact, far more
easily than now. Neither passports nor visas were required, and traders, pilgrims and adventurers
moved around without let or hindrance.

The word globalization is now used widely to sum up todays world order. It means the world is
increasingly integrated into one capitalist political economy operating under a neo-liberal free
market ideology. Economic globalization as witnessed in the world today is not a new
phenomenon. It has been evolving for the past several years and gaining momentum day by day.
The trend, at present, is a shift from a world economy based on national market economies to a
borderless global market economy increasingly governed by one set of rules. In this context,
globalization means global economic liberalization, developing a global financial system and a
transnational production system which is based on a homogenized worldwide law of value. 1 The
demise of the Cold War helped the emergence of a new aggressive competitive global economic

1 Mohameden Ould-Mey, Global Adjustment: Implications for Peripheral States, Third World Quarterly, 15:2, 1994

3
order. This was possible mainly due to the integration of the newly industrialized countries and
much of the developing nations. Although globalization and market liberalization have made
some progress in terms of economic growth in certain countries, it has also had many negative
impacts in developing societies.

Regional trading blocs such as the European Union and the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA) and the Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC) promote trade
liberalization. The establishment of the World Trade Organization enhancing and supporting the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and also other agreements adopted at the
conclusion of the Uruguay Round has also contributed to the trade liberalization. Going beyond
the liberalization of trade in goods, the Uruguay Round added issues of agriculture and
intellectual property to the more traditional GATT concerns. If globalization is conceived as
turning the whole world into one global village in which all peoples are increasingly
interconnected and all the fences or barriers are removed, so that the world witnesses a new state
of fast and free flow of people , capital , goods and ideas then the world would be witnessing
unprecedented enjoyment of human rights everywhere because globalization is bringing
prosperity to all the corners of the globe together with the spread of the highly cherished values
of democracy , freedom and justice.2 On the other hand if globalization is conceived as turning
the world into a global market for goods and services dominated and steered by the powerful
gigantic transnational corporations and governed by the rule of profit then all the human rights of
the people in the world, particularly in the southern part of the World would seriously be
threatened.3 So, what is it which is affecting the lives of all without any discrimination of caste,
creed, colour, sex, race, religion, language, or economic status? 4 Globalization including its
various dimensions from political to economic, social, cultural, and technological is defined
in varied ways. Giddens states globalization as something where local happenings are shaped by
events occurring many miles away. Dunning explains globalization as connectivity of

2 Thomas L. Friedman : The Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization, (Cairo : International Publishers) 1999

3 Paul L. S.J., Education for Globalization , America Press 2002 http://www.americapress.org/articles/locatelli.htm

4 Surya Deva, Globalization and its Impact on the Realization of Human Rights, extracted from C. Raj Kumar, K. Chockalingam
Human Rights, Justice, & Constitutional Empowerment, (New Delhi: Oxford University Press) 2007 at p. 239

4
individuals and institutions across the globe. The central tenet of globalization is about
movement across the natural and/or (mostly) man-made borders/barriers in a speedy, efficient
way and with minimum restrictions. This movement is ensured through the 4-Ds: deregulation,
denationalization, disinvestment and digitalization.5

GLOBALIZATION DEFINED

In its 1999 Human Rights Development Report, the United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP) defines globalization as shrinking space, shrinking time, and disappearing of borders.
Defined as such, globalization appears to be a process that is age old (goes back to the ancient
times), continuous, and irreversible. The word globalization is now widely used to sum up
todays world order. It means they increasingly integrate the world into one capitalist political
economy operating under a neo-liberal free market ideology.6 In this context, globalization
means global economic liberalization, developing a global financial system and a transnational
production system which is based on a homogenized worldwide law of value. A commonly
accepted definition of globalization includes not only economic, but also political, cultural,
social, and technological interactions across countries. In other words, globalization also
represents the spread of ideas, information, values and people, going beyond the flow of goods,
capital and services or market exchanges.

Globalization is not new,7 although its forms and the technology that spurs it have changed.
Globalization today is most often associated with economic interdependence, deregulation, and a
dominance of the marketplace that includes a shifting of responsibilities from state to non-state
actors. Economic globalization has been accompanied by a marked increase in the influence of
international financial markets and transnational institutions, including corporations, in
determining national policies and priorities. In addition, information and communications
5 Article by Ashish Bansal Globalization and human rights: Help or hindrance available at http://gedi.objectis.net/eventos-
1/ilsabrasil2008/artigos/dheh/bansal.pdf

6 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) ISSN (Online): 2319-7064

7 Statement of Rubens Ricupero, Secretary-General, UNCTAD, Financial Globalization and Human Rights: Written Statement
Submitted by the International Organization for the Development of Freedom of Education to the Commission on Human
Rights, U.N. Doc.

5
technology has emerged as a dominant force in the global system of production, while trade in
goods, services, and financial instruments are more prevalent than any time in history.

Paul Streeten has pointed out that globalization can come from above, in the form of
multinational firms, international capital flows, and world markets, or it can come from below,
reflecting the concerns of individuals and groups throughout the world. 8 It seems evident that
globalization has enhanced the ability of civil society to function across borders and promote
human rights. The past two decades have seen a shift to multi-party democratic regimes, as more
than 100 countries ended rule by military dictatorships or single parties. Pressed by an
international network of non-governmental organizations and activists, the international
protection of human rights itself can be seen as an aspect of globalization, reflecting
universal values about human dignity that limit the power of the state and reduce the sphere of
sovereignty.9

Globalization, thus, has created powerful non-state actors that may violate human rights in ways
that were not contemplated during the development of the modern human rights
movement.10 This development poses challenges to international human rights law, because, for
the most part, that law has been designed to restrain abuses by powerful states and state agents,
not to regulate the conduct of non-state actors themselves or to allow intervention in weak states
when human rights violations occur.11 An increasingly globalized civil society is likely to
respond to economic globalization by opposing liberalized trade and investment regimes that are

8 PROTECTING HUMAN RIGHTS IN A GLOBALIZED WORLD by Dinah Shelton available at

https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bciclr/25_2/06_FMS.htm

9 Prior to the founding of the United Nations (U.N.), human rights were seen largely as internal matters within the sovereignty
of the state. Early debates in the U.N. over human rights usually centered on the question of whether or not Article 2(7),
prohibiting the U.N. from intervening in matters essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of a state, excluded human rights
issues from the agenda o the organization.

10 Although there were issues such as the slave trade and war crimes that were raised during the nineteenth century and concern
for some economic and social rights emerged in the early twentieth century, most human rights law developed in the period
following World War II.

11Louis Henkin, The Age of Rights (1990).

6
not accompanied by accountability, transparency, public participation, and respect for
fundamental rights.

The Framework of International Human Rights Law

The development of human rights law in response to globalization is not new, and there is
nothing inherent in the international system that would prevent further protective measures. The
movement against the slave trade, which was largely a private enterprise, and to combat the more
indiscriminate or destructive forms of weaponry, such as gas warfare and dum-dum bullets, are
early examples of international movements to counter the negative side of international trade and
technology. Broader efforts to establish international protection for human rights can be traced to
the surge of globalization and the emergence of international markets that occurred at the end of
the nineteenth century.12 During this period, the telephone, the telegraph, and radio transmissions
first opened the world to rapid transboundary communications; the development of railroads and
steamships allowed trade to move more quickly from one market to another, while the abuses
associated with industrialization provoked efforts to improve working conditions and the
standard of living in many countries.

Efforts to avoid competitive distortions and enhance the protection of fundamental rights of
workers necessitated international labor standards. The resulting movement led to the creation of
the ILO in 1919. Unlike all subsequent international organizations, the ILO engaged all the
relevant actors in its operations from the beginning. Using a tripartite structure of representation,
the ILO ensured the participation of business, labor, and governments in developing worker
rights and minimum labor standards for member states. 13 While the standards adopted are
addressed to member states for implementation, compliance requires the cooperation of the non-

12 Jack Donnelly, Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice 64 (1989) (Modern markets also created a whole new range
of threats to human dignity and thus were one of the principal sources of the need and demand for human rights.).

13 Between 1919 and 2001, the ILO adopted 182 conventions and 180 recommendations covering basic human rights such as
abolition of forced labor, freedom of association, and elimination of child labor, as well as conventions on occupational safety
and health, industrial relations, and other conditions of employment.

7
state actors as well, because the organization primarily aims to respond through regulation to
poor treatment of labor by private industry. Such regulation is made easier by the participation of
labor and business in the law-making and supervisory procedures of the ILO.

The international protection of civil and political rights emerged later, becoming an aim of the
international community at the end of World War II in response to the atrocities committed
during that conflict. While human rights theory supports the claims of rights holders against all
others, international human rights law treats the state as the principal threat to individual freedom
and well being. In the post-World War II paradigm, the state and its agents are obliged to respect
and ensure rights. Indeed, some acts are explicitly defined as human rights violations only if
committed by state agents or those acting in complicity with them. If rights are violated, the state
is obligated to ensure domestic remedies to correct the harm are available. 14 A failure to do so
may allow the individual to bring a complaint against the state before an international tribunal.
No international procedures exist at present whereby an injured individual may directly hold
responsible the individual perpetrator of the harm.15

Despite the emphasis on state responsibility, international human rights instruments continue to
recognize human rights that are violated predominately by non-state actors, for example,
freedom from slavery and forced labor. The duty imposed in such instances, however, remains
primarily on the state to ensure the right against the slave holders and employers of forced labor.
Human rights instruments also speak to the obligations of non-state actors. The first general
international human rights instrument, the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man
(American Declaration), begins its preamble with an exhortation to all individuals to conduct
themselves with respect for the rights and freedoms of others. It clearly views individuals as
having duties towards each other. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Universal
Declaration), adopted some six months later, refers to itself as a common standard of
achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual, and every organ of
society shall strive to promote respect for, and observance of, the rights. 16 Article 1 of the

14 Dinah Shelton, Remedies in International Human Rights Law (2000).

15 https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bciclr/25_2/06_FMS.htm

8
Universal Declaration specifically refers to the behavior of individuals towards each other.17 This
is complemented at the close of the Universal Declaration with a firm statement that, nothing in
this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any state, group or person any right to
engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and
freedoms set forth herein.18 Human rights law also imposes individual responsibility for some
human rights violations19 and other acts designated as crimes under international law. These
offenses require the state where the offender is found to try or extradite the individual, and in a
few instances may allow prosecution before an international tribunal.20 More generally, Article
28 of the Universal Declaration recognizes that, everyone is entitled to a social and international
order in which the rights and freedoms set for in the Declaration can be fully realized. 21 From
this may emerge the principle that respect for human rights applies to all societal relations
locally, regionally, and globally. Thus, although positive human rights law generally addresses
state action or inaction, the theoretical and positive foundation is there to apply human rights
guarantees to non-state actors.

In recent years, the many facets and importance of the complex interplay of human rights and
globalization are reflected in the multiple studies conducted on aspects of globalization by the
human rights organs of the United Nations (U.N.). The Sub-Commission on the Promotion and
Protection of Human Rights (Sub-Commission) has undertaken studies on transnational

16 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. Res. 217A (III), U.N. GAOR, 3d Sess., at 71, U.N. Doc. A/810 (1948)
[hereinafter Universal Declaration].

17 Id. art. 1.

18 Id. art. 30.

19 Human rights treaties that call for criminalization of specific acts include the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment
of the Crime of Genocide, the U.N. Convention Against Torture, the Inter-American Convention against Torture, the Inter-
American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons, and the Internation al Convention on the Suppression and
Punishment of the Crime o Apartheid.

20For crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia and in Rwanda, the U.N. created special international tribunals, but a
permanent international court does not exist

21 Universal Declaration

9
corporations, on the impact of globalization on the enjoyment of human rights generally,22 the
impact of globalization on racism and xenophobia, the relationship between the enjoyment of
human rights and income distribution, and on human rights as the primary objective of
international trade, investment, and finance policy and practice. Beginning in 1998, the
Commission on Human Rights (Commission) established a working group on the impact of
structural adjustment programs on economic, social, and cultural rights.54 The working group is
largely composed of developing countries, with France, Germany, and Italy representing
industrialized countries among the sixteen states participating. The Commission also has
appointed an independent expert on the topic.

Both the Commission and the Sub-Commission have adopted resolutions on globalization and
human rights. The Sub-Commission also unanimously adopted a resolution on trade
liberalization and its impact on human rights,23 in which it asked all governments and forums of
economic policy to take fully into consideration the obligations and principles of human rights in
the formulation of international economic policy. At the same time, the resolution expressed
opposition to unilateral sanctions and to negative conditionality on trade as a means to integrate
human rights into the policies and practices governing international economic matters. The
resolution requested the High Commissioner for Human Rights to cooperate with the World
Trade Organization (WTO) and its member states to underline the human dimension of free trade
and investments and to take measures to see that human rights principles and obligations are
fully taken into account in future negotiations in the framework of the WTO.

Finally, it is noteworthy that human rights law not only potentially imposes duties on non-state
economic actors, it guarantees rights essential for the furtherance of globalization. It protects the
right to property, including intellectual property, freedom of expression and communications
across boundaries, due process for contractual or other business disputes, and a remedy before an
independent tribunal when rights are violated. Furthermore, the rule of law is an essential
prerequisite to the long-term conduct of trade and investment.

22 Sub-Commission Resolution 1999/8

23 Douglas A. Irwin, Against the Tide: An Intellectual History of Free Trade 3 (1996)

10
GLOBALIZATION, DEVELOPMENT AND HUMAN RIGHTS

The relation between globalization, development and human rights raises policy and legal
questions. One such question is whether globalization of market-oriented economic system is
essential for development and protection of human rights? While searching for an answer to this
question we should analyze how we perceive the concept of development and human rights,
especially in the context of developing countries. Human rights have become an integral part of
the process of globalization in many ways. The Western countries are increasingly using their
view of human rights concept as a yardstick to judge developing countries and to deal with
economic and trade relations to extend development assistance. At the same time globalization
intensifies impoverishment by increasing the poverty, insecurity, fragmentation of society and
thus violates human rights and human dignity of millions of people.24

Development or economic development is widely perceived as a historical process that takes

place in almost all societies characterized by economic growth and increased production and
consumption of goods and services. Development is also often used in a normative sense as a
multi-valued social goal covering such diverse spheres as better material well-being, living
standards, education, health care, wider opportunities for work and leisure, and in essence the
whole range of desirable social and material welfare. But, in todays globalization, the concept of
development itself is interpreted differently and the concept of right to development is not taken
seriously.

The Preamble of the Declaration of the Right to Development, adopted by the UN General
Assembly in 1986, describes development as a comprehensive economic, social, cultural and
political process that aims at the constant improvement of the wellbeing of the entire population
and of all individuals on the basis of their active, free and meaningful participation in
development and in the fair distribution of resulting benefits. The 1990 UN Global Consultation
on the Right to Development as a Human Right, stated that the right to development is an
inalienable human right with the human being as the central subject to the right and that all the
aspects of the right to development set forth in the Declaration of the Right to Development are

24 Anthony Giddens, The consequences of Modernity, Polity, Cambridge (1990), 64, as quoted by Richard Peet et.al., The
Unholy Trinity: The IMF, World Bank and WTO, SIRD Kuala Lumpur, 1.

11
indivisible and interdependent, and these include civil, political, economic, social, and cultural
rights. It was further maintained that the right to development is the right of individuals, groups
and peoples to participate in, contribute to, and enjoy continuous economic, social, cultural and
political development, in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realized.
A development strategy that disregards or interferes with human rights is the very negation of
development.25

The right to development is of equal importance when the human rights implication on
globalization is examined - The U.N. General Assembly has recognized the Right to
Development as an inalienable right. Here, development encompasses the overall development
of all aspects-social, economic, political and cultural; of human life. But disparities in terms of
income distribution, living standards etc have totally ignored the concept of human development.
It overlooks the violent social and political forces that invariably are unleashed by extreme
poverty and the denial of other human rights. Therefore, if the forces of globalization are allowed
to operate freely surpassing the central premise of human centred development, the spectre of
massive levels of human rights violations would result in a grave social and political upheaval. 26
In sum, it could be said that all three branches of government have been conscious of their
constitutional responsibility to uphold human rights; even so, their approaches leave much to be
desired. On several occasions, they seem to have been swayed by the argument that economic
prosperity will automatically lead to a better realization of human rights at all levels.

For instance, the Indian judiciary, by and large, has been active and vigilant in safeguarding
human rights, more so since the late 1970s. At a more general level, the judiciary is aware of the
effects of globalization on the Constitution and constitutionalism. The judiciary perceives itself
as an organ with a key role to play in the emerging scenario and it argues for an economic
interpretation of the Constitution. Courts have been constantly approached to redress a specific
human rights violation or to offer a principled policy guideline. The judiciary has addressed
issues such as: the constitutionality of the government's privatization and disinvestment policies,
defacing of rocks by painted advertisements, pollution of rivers, relocation of industries out of
25 Supra note 5

26 Anil Kumar Jha, Gender Inequality and Women Empowerment, Axis Books Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, pp 51-58, 2012.

12
Delhi, lack of access to food, deaths due to starvation, use of environment friendly fuel in Delhi
buses, prohibition of smoking in public places, employment of children in hazardous industries,
rights of children and bonded labour, extent of the right to strike and bandh, right to health and
education, sexual harassment in the workplace, and female foeticide and infanticide through
modern technology.27

The aims and objectives of the so-called development models promoted by different
governments or international development agencies are not compatible with human rights
standards. A new model of development ideology is being promoted that is based on the market
and its logic. Several decades of discussion on alternative development model is withering away
and a dominant model of market-oriented development taking roots in that place. As a result of
the globalization process, more negative effects are visible now.

DEVELOPMENT AID AND HUMAN RIGHTS

It has long been accepted by the United Nations and in most international forums that
developed countries should provide aid in the form of grants and loans to the developing
countries. The General Assembly has, by consensus resolutions, called for such development aid
to reach 0.7 per cent of the GNP of developed countries. Actually less than half of that target has
been attained. For example, the United States gives only less than 0.2 per cent, instead of 0.7 per
cent.

Overseas Development Aid (ODA) presents debatable issues from the perspective of human
rights. For example, it raises the question whether aid should be directed mainly to reducing
poverty and providing social services to the needy or whether priority should be given to
economic growth and strengthening infrastructure. Another key question of a legal political
characteristic is whether the recipient government or the donor state should have a decisive
voice. The developing states emphasize their primary responsibility for development of the
country and their right to self-determination in respect of the economy and resources. Donor
countries tend to emphasize their narrow concepts of human rights as a prerequisite to sanction

27 Surya Deva, Human Rights Realization in an Era of Globalization: The Indian Experience, Buffalo Human Rights Law
Review, Vol. 12, pp. 93-138, 2006.

13
development assistance. They also emphasize the pragmatic political fact that aid is not likely to
be provided if the beneficiary states violated basic human rights. According to Nikhil Aziz,
human rights have become another arsenal of Western countries in their bid to bring recalcitrant
Third World nations to heel in their New World Order.28

TRADE AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Global trade is being liberalized and opened up in this era of globalization. A set of new rules
and regulations have been promoted through international firms like WTO and new initiatives
have been taken through the formation of regional economic trading blocs.29

With globalization, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank have received
considerable attention because of the substantial impact they can have on human rights, although
both initially resisted taking human rights into account in their operations. The General Counsel
of the World Bank at first rejected the idea that the Bank should take into account human rights
concerns, arguing a need to honor the Banks Charter and to respect the specialization of
different international organisations.30 Recently, the World Bank has begun to consider the
human dimension of its work and it has declared that the alleviation of poverty is its main
objective. The Bank has also been active in designing mechanisms to address the issue of the
debt burden, culminating in the highly indebted poor countries (HIPC) initiative.

At the same time several developed countries in the world have been trying to inter-relate trade
policy with human rights policy. Under mounting pressure from the business lobby in the
irrespective countries, several Western governments have altered their policies depending up on
their business interests. Under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) which provides for

28 Nikhil Aziz, The Human Rights Debate in the Era of Globalization: Hegemony of Discourse, Bulletin of Concerned Asian
Scholars, Vol. 27, No.4, Oct-Dec., 1995

29 Supra note. 5

30 Ibrahim Shihata, Democracy and Development, 46 Intl & Comp. L.Q. 635, 638 (1997).

14
trade benefits for developing countries, the USA has withdrawn or threatened to withdraw
preferences from some countries that violate human rights. The case of China has been
controversial, with opinion in the United States sharply divided on the desirability of
conditioning trade preferences on compliance with specified human rights. There has been strong
pressure from US business lobby against use of the Jackson-Vanik Trade Act of 1974 for denying
MFN status to China. It held that talking about political freedom is not a sound argument for
attempting to use the blunt instrument of trade sanctions to win democratic rule for China.
Keeping millions of Chinese in poverty by restricting their right to trade, in the hope of
promoting human rights, is neither logical nor moral. Likewise, depriving Americans of the
freedom to trade and invest in China violates their rights to liberty and property 31 . This is a case
of shift in policy based on convenience rather than on ideological convictions or moral
principles. On the other hand, some developed countries are pressing for trade sanctions against
states found to violate human rights, especially human rights standards that are generally based
on the Conventions and Recommendations of the International Labour Organization. They have
tended on the whole to oppose trade liberalization treaties such as NAFTA and currently WTO.
The developing countries have generally objected to such measures since they would reduce
their comparative advantage through cheap labour and constitute a major barrier to their
industrialization. From their point of view, workers rights enforced by trade barriers would
contribute to greater poverty in their countries.

The initial stride to control violations of human rights should be to prescribe international human
rights standards, particularly labour standards, in a statutory form and should directly be imposed
on private companies engaged in transnational activity. Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises
adopted by the Organization of Economically Developed Countries in 1976 provided for
observance of standards of labour relations by transnational companies. A UN Commission on
Transnational Corporations devoted about 15 years of study and negotiation on a draft Code of
Conduct for Transnational Corporations that included a general provision requiring transnational
corporations to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms in the countries where they
operate and more detailed provisions on observance of laws on labour relations and involvement
of trade unions. Multi-corporations which have gained strength in the post-globalization era are

31 Dow James A, Trade and Human Rights in China, Journal of Commerce, November 15, 1996

15
the main actors in several developed countries in formulating new foreign policies to shape a
new global order. This trend is prevalent in the emerging global order which is spearheaded by a
few hundred corporate giants, many of them bigger than most sovereign nations. By acquiring
earth-spanning technologies, by developing products that can be produced anywhere and sold
everywhere, by spreading credit around the world, and by connecting global channels of
communication that can penetrate any village or neighborhood, these institutions we normally
think of as economic rather than political, private rather than public, are becoming the world
empires of the twenty-first century.32

The impact of these global giants operations have negative impact on human rights. Virtually all
developing countries in contemporary time seek private foreign investment for development.
Such investment now greatly exceeds loans or grants from official sources. New technologies
have transformed the nature of production and facilitated re-location of firms. Nationalization,
once the centre of debate, has now virtually disappeared from the agenda of developing
countries. The human rights implications of these trends are outlined by an economist, David
Korten in the following terms:

Today the most intense competition in the globally integrated market is not between the gigantic
Transnational Corporations, but it is between governments that find themselves competing with
one another for investors by offering the cheapest and most compliant labour; the weakest
environmental, health, and safety standards, the lowest taxes; and the most fully developed
infrastructure. Often governments must borrow to finance the social and physical infrastructure
needed to attract private investors. Having pushed almost the entire social and environmental
costs of production onto the community, many firms are able to turn a handsome profit. Having
bargained away their tax base and accepted low wages for their labour, many communities reap
relatively few benefits from the foreign investment, however, and are left with no evident way to
repay the loans contracted on the .firms behalf33

Human Rights Globalization Connect

32 http://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2317&context=lawreview

33 Korten David, Sustainable Development: A Review Essay, World Policy Journal, Vol 9, p.157-190

16
 The legal relationship between globalization and human rights can be analyzed from the
perspective of economic regulation as well as that of human rights law, examining first whether
international economic law sufficiently supports or takes into account human rights concerns,
then considering the extent to which human rights law takes into account globalization and
economic interests. In respect to both inquiries, the fundamental question is whether a human
rights system premised on state responsibility to respect and ensure human rights can be effective
in a globalized world.

Impact of Globalization on Human Rights

Human rights have been on the international schema of things since the end of the World War II,
certainly since 1948, but their violation as consequence of globalization has not been adequately
scrutinized. The international bill of human rights holds states accountable for realization of
human rights. But in the contemporary era it is the private global players that are frequently the
most egregious violators of rights, and as far as there accountability is concerned they are
accountable to none. Strikes and demonstrations protesting worsening labour conditions have
become widespread, including in communally based societies where individual political action
has been rare. Political authorities often react to this strife by increasing restrictions on civil and
political rights and, at times, grossly violating basic rights, such as the right to life, in an effort to
control the labour force.

Since the early 1990s when the Indian government launched what is now known as the New
Economic Policy (NEP), there has been a debate not only about the constitutionality and
propriety of the policy but also its effects. Although it is reasonable to suggest that liberalization
was the need of the hour, the government did not consistently ensure that the realization of
human rights, especially for the poor populace, remained an important variable at the time of law
making or policy formulation. Some examples will help make this clearer34.

First, the government did not adequately control the direction of foreign investment and made
bad policy decisions in terms of investment prioritization. This results, for example, in a situation

34 Status o human rights in the Globalized Era by G. Hemalatha available at

https://www.ijsr.net/archive/v2i12/MDIwMTM1OTg=.pdf

17
where people in villages have access to Pepsi or Coca-Cola but not to safe drinking water,
adequate food, health care, electricity, roads or schools.

Second, the amendments proposed by the government in laws related to foreign investment,
trade unions, contract labour, factories, industrial disputes, and monopolistic practices, have
negative impacts on human rights, especially the human rights of labourers and women workers.

Third, the government's decision to bypass parliamentary authority to undertake international

obligations on important issues is another area of great concern, as it directly gets at the root of
parliamentary democracy.

Fourth, the government has shown undue leniency, and thus sent a wrong signal, to foreign
corporations regarding their human rights responsibility by not vigorously pursuing the
extradition of Warren Anderson, the ex-CEO of Union Carbide Corporation, against whom
criminal proceedings are pending before a court in relation to the Bhopal gas tragedy.

Human rights violations (whether of individual civil/political, economic/social, or minority

rights) as a consequence of destructive social change resulting from globalization might result, at
least in some instances, in radical shifts in a society's cultural values and norms that, in turn, may
lead to a reconfiguration of the substance of traditional or historic notions of human rights. The
outcome of this search for a revitalized identity and meaning is unpredictable. There may be a
reinforcement of an exclusive communalism with little personal autonomy or there may be a
loosening of communal ties and an expansion of individual demands based on class. The
evidence points in both directions. Clearly globalization has had a deleterious effect on the entire
complex of human rights, resulting in significant transformations in the behavior and values of
masses of humanity across the globe.35

Positive Effects of Globalization on Human Rights

On the positive side, the increasing economic gaps have alerted people to long-neglected social
and economic rights. In general, trade theory predicts a significant increase in global welfare
stemming from globalization, indirectly enhancing the attainment of economic conditions
necessary for economic and social rights.
35 Human rights and Globalization by Dr. Samir Naim Ahemad 21 April Countercurrents.org

18
 It is believed that market mechanisms and liberalized trade will lead to an improvement in the
living standards of all people. Free trade and economic freedom are necessary conditions of
political freedom, or at least contribute to the rule of law that is an essential component of human
rights.

Certainly, globalization facilitates international exchanges that overcome the confines of a single
nation or a civilization, allowing participation in a global community. There is also the
possibility that economic power can be utilized to sanction human rights violators more
effectively.36

Increased availability and more efficient allocation of resources, more open and competitive
production and improved governance could lead to faster growth and more rights.

Another noteworthy development is the increasing attention to womens rights and incorporation
of womens human rights into the human rights discourse. Trade and FDI (Foreign Direct
Investment) positively affect womens employment opportunities in developing countries, due to
their comparative advantages. In other words, developing countries have a comparative
advantage in labour-intensive goods, thus demand for female labour would increase in order to
keep price competitiveness in international trade as female wages are generally lower.

Social globalization also promotes direct personal contact among people from different countries
in the form of immigration and tourism. Personal interaction among different people can have a
positive impact on tolerance towards different lifestyles and increase acceptance of different
gender roles, sexuality, religions and ethnic backgrounds. This has the potential to enable
changes in womens role in society. Furthermore, social globalization tends to decrease cultural
gaps across countries because people are now more exposed to different cultures. As womens
rights are deeply grounded in culture and value systems cultural exposure to, and proximity with
other diverse cultures can have a positive impact in reducing discriminatory cultural practices
against women.

36 Glenda T. Litong, Making a case for human rights in the context of globalization or vice versa? http://aprnet.org/, Jun. 04,
2004. [Online]. Available: http://www.aprnet.org/index.php/conferences-aworkshop/ 45-regional-economic cooperation-
andhuman-rights-in-asia/176making-a-case-for-humanrights-in-the-context-of-globalization-or-vice-versa.

19
 Globalization has also created some economic opportunities for women. Nevertheless,
increasing participation of women in the economy, even if it is largely in the informal sector (and
in the public sphere in general) holds the potential of empowering some women.37

In addition to reducing poverty and raising the standard of living, globalization spreads
democracy. Globalization also introduces new technology into developing countries. 38 One of
the most significant positive effects of globalization is the spread of modern medicine. "With the
exception of decreased life expectancy rates in countries most ravaged by the AIDS virus..the life
expectancy in developing countries rose to 65 years in 1997, from 55 in 1970.

That substantial increase is attributable, at least in part, to improved medical care made possible
by globalization," Daniel Griswold says in the Issues & Controversies on File article,
"Globalization." Proponents of globalization say it's a positive force that is making the world a
better place because economic and social indicators like poverty rates, infant mortality and
education reflect that many people are better off than they were before globalization, even
though they are still very poor.

Negative effects of Globalization on Human Rights

Globalization has substantially contributed to the intensification of debt, poverty and economic
crisis in the developing world.

The Structural Adjustment Programs (SAP) designed and imposed by the global creditor
institutions is a typical instrument to create a favourable atmosphere for globalization, which
ultimately affects developing countries.

More money is being spent on export orientation, which results in local economies becoming
dependent on the integration with the world economy. The international lenders demand poor
economies to divert substantial resources away from sectors serving domestic needs: withdraw

37 Human rights and Globalization by Dr. Samir Naim Ahemad 21 April Countercurrents.org available at
http://www.countercurrents.org/ahmed210407.htm

38 Micheline Ishay, Promoting Human Rights in the Era of Globalization and Interventions: The Changing Spaces of
Struggle, http://www.tandfonline.com/, Aug. 17, 2006. [Online]. Available: http:// www.international.ucla.edu/media/files/45.pdf

20
all subsidies for poor people, privatize the state sector, deregulate the market, and decrease
wages. In effect, this process opens up countries to globalization.

Thus structural adjustment programs and import-export-led strategies of industrialization were

part of a political and economic restructuring process, a prelude to globalization.39

The advocates of globalization give philosophical justifications to accept export-led growth,

lower wages and living standards for workers, shrinking government budgets, and extremely
high interest rates. They say There Is No Alternative - TINA, the phrase coined by British
Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in 1980s. Powerful institutions like the International Monetary
Fund, the World Bank and the World Trade Organization raise the TINA, argument to persuade
the developing nations to qualify themselves to borrow money.

The developing countries are left into no option but to accept the liberalization and market-
oriented reforms. Under this liberalization policy production tends to be export-oriented.
Meeting the basic needs of the people become less important. State-run factories or enterprises
are often privatized to suit the needs of foreign investors. Free trade and liberalization lead to
competition and local producers, like farmers, have to suffer the consequences.

Thus, economic development with equity remains a mirage for the poor population despite a
slew of liberalization measures adopted by the government.

Globalization has created a situation where the role and importance of nation-state is becoming
irrelevant. Kenichi Ohmae, widely recognized as one of todays top business gurus, asks, in a
world where economic borders are disappearing and money flows around the globe beyond the
reach of governments, who, indeed needs the nation-state? He argues that 4Is-Investment,
Industry, Information technology and Individual consumers - make the traditional middleman
function of nation-states, and of their governments, largely unnecessary. Because, the global
markets for all the Is work just fine on their own, nation-states no longer have to play a market-
making role. In this situation multinational corporations are becoming the actors even in
international politics.

39 Amit Kumar, Human Rights and Social Welfare, Dominant Publishers and Distributors Publications, New Delhi, pp. 203-
221, 2012.

21
It is true that a few rich or middle class people have emerged in societies where transition to
market system has been introduced. China and Vietnam are typical examples. In these countries a
newly rich class has emerged as a result of globalization and market reforms. Roberto Verzola, a
social activist of the Philippines, comments that in the same way that colonization was the trend
one hundred years ago, globalization is, today.

Today global corporations have replaced the colonial powers. In developing countries, global
corporations are allowed to feast on natural resources, human resources, and national wealth.
They displace farmers from their land, workers from their jobs, and communities from their
roots. They are responsible for the breaking up of communities and the destruction of the
environment to serve the human and raw material requirements of global production for the
global market.40

The consequence is the collapse of food security and the emergence of global environmental
crises, which in the end may turn out to be even worse than colonization. Even the peoples of
developed countries suffer from the profit-hungry rules of global corporations today, which
virtually rule the world. Massive investments by reason of industrialization have is placed
communities in the form of demolitions of "squatters", uprooting indigenous peoples from their
ancestral domains and depriving subsistence farmers of genuine agrarian reform in favour of
industrial or development sites.41

The immediate manifestation of the seeming incongruence of the value of economic efficiency
vis-a-vis human rights is what is known as development aggression, i.e. where "economic
decisions take little or no account of human and environmental costs, that are planned and
implemented from the top and without participation of those concerned, and that are imposed on
people either by force or by depriving them of the necessary information and means to make a
real choice."

No doubt that the widespread violation of human rights is related to the widening gap between
the rich and the poor, both on the global and on the local levels. International Statistics prove that
40 Supra note 34

41Shelton, Dinah, Protecting Human Rights in a Globalized World, http://www.bc.edu, 2002, [Online] Available:
http://www.bc.edu/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/jo urnals/ bciclr/25_2/06_FMS.htm.

22
half the world nearly three billion people live on less than two dollars a day; the wealthiest
nation on earth has the widest gap between rich and poor of any industrialized nation; the top
fifth of the worlds people in the richest countries enjoy 82% of the expanding export trade and
68% of foreign direct investment while the bottom fifth, barely more than 1%. This leads to an
increasing feeling of deprivation and injustice among the populations of the different countries of
the world. The deprived are exposed daily, if not every minute to images and evidences of the
huge gap in standards of living between the rich and the poor.

Some consequences of these deprivations of human rights are social and political unrest and even
violence and counter violence. It also leads to an increasing resort to suppression and to chaos.
What matters more are the loss of human lives and the loss of constructive contributions which
all the deprived could have offered to the economic, social, scientific and cultural advancement
of humanity if they were granted their basic human rights. Ultimately, racism, prejudices, and
discrimination are negatively associated with justice and implementation of human rights. The
non-state actors namely the media, corporations, international organizations like the World Bank
and the WTO have emerged as pseudo-centres of regulatory and control mechanisms in social
and economic activities. This pseudo-centrism has been in turn created by globalization thereby
loosening the actual control mechanisms of the government.42

THE OBSTACLE OF CULTURAL RELATIVISM

The concept, which today is the chief obstacle to globalization of human rights, is cultural
relativism. Its tenets need to be addressed and refuted if globalization of human rights is to
prosper. A universal moral philosophy affirms principles that protect universal, individual human
rights of liberty, freedom, equality, and justice everywhere, giving human rights an absolute and
global foundation. By contrast, cultural relativists, in their most aggressive conceptual stance,
argue that there are no human rights absolutes, that the principles that we may use for judging
behavior are relative to each particular society, that there is infinite cultural variability, and that
all cultures are morally equal or valid. Relativism thus shifts the touchstones by which to
measure the worth of human rights practice. To suggest that fundamental rights may be

42 R.K.Sapru, Public Policy: Formulation, Implementation and Evaluation, Sterling Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 2006,
pp. 280-288.

23
overridden or adjusted in the light of cultural practices is to challenge the underlying moral
justification of a universal system of human rights and put an end to globalization of human
rights. The defects in the relativist position are substantial, indeed compelling. First, one does not
have to probe deeply to realize that there is a universal cultural receptivity to such fundamental
rights as freedom from torture, slavery, arbitrary execution, due process of law, and freedom to
travel. Moreover, any observer of state practice can cite numerous examples where repression,
which an authoritarian government excuses as cultural identity, turns out not to be a cultural
tradition at all when a democratic government replaces the authoritarian one. Further, there are
many examples of peoples of like cultures living virtually side by side, where one state
condemns human rights abuses and a counterpart state creates abuses. Thus, most human rights
abuses are not legitimately identified with the authentic culture of any society, only with
authoritarian rulers of that society. Second, cultural relativists often incorrectly perceive the
attributes of cultural communities. Cultural relativists tend to look at cultures from a static,
romanticized perspective in which traditional societies are defined as unchanging holistic
entities, unaffected by human history or the dynamics of cultural change. But as anthropologists
acknowledge, culture is flexible and holds many possibilities of choice within its framework. The
dynamism of culture normally offers its members a range of development options, or is willing
to accommodate varying individual responses to its norms, while preserving legitimate values of
authentic tradition. To recognize values held by a given people at a given time in no way implies
that these values are a constant or static factor in the lives of current or succeeding generations of
the same group. Third, the dynamics of change have been accelerated in this technological,
communicative age with the result that many closed societies, once exposed to individualist
benefits, seek to incorporate those values and interests in their culture. In fact, individualist
values have a great appeal to all cultures once the values are perceived. Fourth, there is still
another factor which, in part, renders moot the conflict between universalist and relativist theory.
Even as theorists have continued to quarrel with each other, fundamental human rights principles
have become universal by virtue of their entry into international law as jus cogens, customary
law, or by convention. In other words, the relativist argument has been overtaken by the fact that
human rights have become hegemonic and therefore essentially global by fiat. 43

43 Howard-Hassman,E-Rohda Can Globalization Promote Human Rights available at

http://www.psupress.org/books/SampleChapters/978-0-271-03691-5sc.html

24
Human rights violations (whether of individual civil/political, economic/social, or minority
rights) as a consequence of destructive social change resulting from globalization might result, at
least in some instances, in radical shifts in a society's cultural values and norms that, in turn, may
lead to a reconfiguration of the substance of traditional or historic notions of human rights. The
outcome of this search for a revitalized identity and meaning is unpredictable. There may be a
reinforcement of an exclusive communalism with little personal autonomy or there may be a
loosening of communal ties and an expansion of individual demands based on class. The
evidence points in both directions. Clearly globalization has had a deleterious effect on the entire
complex of human rights, resulting in significant transformations in the behavior and values of
masses of humanity across the globe.

WORKERS RIGHTS AND GLOBALIZATION

The competitive pressures of the new international economy have had negative effects on the
rights of workers. Low labour costs and low labour standards are important elements in the
choice of location of branches or subsidiaries of transnational corporations or choice of suppliers
for industrial development. Textiles and other goods produced more cheaply in developing
countries are taking over markets in the developed world. Governments thus have little or no
incentive to improve working conditions on the contrary, their competitive advantage depends
on these conditions. Developing countries oppose the linking of labour standards to trade issues,
pointing out that such linkages would take away their competitive advantage through cheap
labour and low labour standards. This argument is quiet understandable since it is essential to
increase the trade of developing countries, however in such case, the cost falls on the most
vulnerable elements in the developing countries: unskilled or semi skilled labourers whose rights
to organize labour unions, to engage in colletive bargining or to protest against unsafe working
conditions are denied.44

RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLE

44 Human Rights Watch World Report, 1999, www.hrw.org/hrw/worldreport99/asia/malaysia.htm, reports that as a result of the
economic decline in Malaysia, the state deported more than 30,000 migrant workers, many of whom experienced police brutality
when they were detained. In the same report Human Rights Watch notes that the Chinese government, concerned about increased
worker unrest, took measures including detentions and imprisonment, to stop activities in support of labour rights.

25
The international community has become concerned over violations of the rights of indigenous
peoples in recent years, after many years of neglect. The United Nations Working Group on
Indigenous Peoples has drafted a declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples, which is being
examined by a working group of the UN Commission on Human Rights and will eventually
come before the General Assembly for adoption. The decade from 1994-2003 has been declared
the UN Decade for Indigenous Peoples.

The violation of the rights of the indigenous has been taking place for centuries, the recent
emphasis on economic development and international competitiveness has resulted in new
onslaughts on their rights. The link between the rights of indigenous peoples and globalization
was demonstrated by coming into effect of North American Free Trade Agreement of 1994, for
the uprising by Indians in Chiapas, Mexico, drawing attention to the violation of their economic
and social rights.

Oil, Uranium, minerals and timber are found throughout the world on indigenous lands, and
prospectors and entrepreneurs have been permitted to encroach on them in the name of economic
development.45 Indigenous lands in many parts of the world have been trespassed upon in pursuit
of traditional medicines which are then brought in international pharmaceutical markets.
Economic development has resulted in serious violations of the right to health, the right to
healthy environment, the right to life and the cultural rights of the indigenous peoples.

WOMEN WORKERS

Although unskilled workers in general are victims of globalization, the situation of women
workers deserves meticulous attention. On the one hand, globalization has increased
opportunities for women. Women have entered the workforce through jobs in export processing
zones or through becoming migrant domestic workers, jobs that are mostly produced by
globalization. Their work has significantly contributed to family income and to sense of
independence and freedom for women workers. But, these jobs have also led to social disruption
of the family and expose women to exploitation, at times even to violence and sexual abuse. As a
faction of society which lacks power and status in society, their human rights are frequently

45 See Centre for Economic and Social Rights, Rights Violations in the Ecuadorian Amazon, Health and Human Rights, 1,
(1), 83.

26
violated. Women migrant workers are often drawn from the poorer segments of the society of
their own communities and are thus already in a situation of vulnerability. Their vulnerability is
increased during their stay at foreign places as they are regarded as a form of cheap and
exploitable labour, their passports are sometimes confiscated and, alone in a foreign country
whose laws and customs they do not know, they are unable to find recourse against abuses.

International Responses to the Problems of Globalization and

Human Rights

Globalization has led to an increased concern about the responsibility of all international actors
to ensure the promotion and protection of human rights. International institutions and scholars
have responded with various proposals for strengthening the international regime. First, human
rights activists and institutions have begun to posit the primacy of human rights law. The
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) has emphasized that, the realms
of trade, finance and investment are in no way exempt from these general principles [on respect
for human rights] and that international organizations with specific responsibilities in those areas
should play a positive and constructive role in relation to human rights. The CESCR also asserts
that competitiveness, efficiency, and economic rationalism must not be permitted to become the
primary or exclusive criteria against which governmental and inter-governmental policies are
evaluated. Second, state responsibility for failing to control the actions of private parties has
received considerable attention in the case law of international tribunals 46 and the work of the
U.N. Third, international law is increasingly regulating non-state behavior directly. Fourth,
private market mechanisms such as codes of conduct or consumer purchasing schemes have
sought to influence corporate behavior. Finally, restructured international governance
mechanisms are bringing a variety of international actors together to achieve common goals.

46 Inter-Am. C.H.R., Velasquez Rodriguez Case, Judgment of July 29, 1988, Ser. C, No. 4, 15977, available
at http://www.corteidh.or.cr/sericing/C_4_Eng.html (last visited Mar. 11, 2002). See generally,Dinah Shelton, Private Violence,
Public Wrongs, and the Responsibility of States, 13 Fordham Intl L.J. 1, 1 (1990).

27
In respect to intergovernmental organizations, the theoretical basis for insisting that they adhere
to human rights standards in their programs derives from their international legal personality.
International organizations are entities created by states delegating power to achieve certain
goals and perform specified functions. While not states, and not having the full rights and duties
of states, international organizations take on rights and duties under international law. It would
be surprising if states could perform actions collectively through international organizations that
the states could not lawfully do individually.47 In other words, if states cannot confer more power
on international organizations than they themselves possess, international organizations are
bound to respect human rights because all the states that create them are legally required to
respect human rights pursuant to the U.N. Charter and customary international law.

In its 1998 comment on globalization, the CESCR called for a renewed commitment to respect
economic, social, and cultural rights, emphasizing that international organizations, as well as
governments that have created and managed them, have a strong and continuous responsibility to
take whatever measures they can to assist governments to act in ways that are compatible with
their human rights obligations, and to seek to devise policies and programs that promote respect
for those rights.48 The CESCR addressed itself in particular to the IMF and the World Bank,
calling upon them to pay enhanced attention to human rights, including through encouraging
explicit recognition of these rights, assisting in the identification of country-specific benchmarks
to facilitate their promotion, and facilitating the development of appropriate remedies for
responding to violations. The WTO also should devise appropriate methods to facilitate more
systematic consideration of the impact upon human rights of particular trade and investment
policies. The CESCRs recent General Comment on the right to food concerns food security
within the context of globalization. It draws attention to the responsibilities of private actors,
aside from the obligation of states parties to regulate appropriately their conduct, in the
realization of the right to adequate food. The comment goes on to stipulate that, [t]he private
business sectornational and transnationalshould pursue its activities within the framework of

47 Commission on Human Rights, Effects of Structural Adjustment Policies and Foreign Debt on the Full Enjoyment of All
Human Rights, Particularly Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/RES/2000/82 (2000).

48 Commission on Human Rights, Globalization and its Impact on the Full Enjoyment of All Human Rights, U.N. Doc.
E/CN.4/RES/2001/32 (2001)

28
a code of conduct conducive to respect of the right to adequate food, agreed upon jointly with the
Government and civil society. Furthermore, it calls upon the IMF and the World Bank to pay
attention to the protection of the right to food in drawing up lending policies, credit, and
structural adjustment programs. This approach by a treaty-based mechanism, focusing on the
responsibilities of multilateral organizations as well as private actors in protecting human rights,
is a significant step in international law.49

International conferences also have called on international financial institutions to pay greater
attention to human rights, through promotion and through assisting in the development of
benchmarks to monitor compliance and remedies to respond to violations. In particular, social
safety nets should be defined by reference to these rights and enhanced attention should be
accorded to such methods to protect the poor and vulnerable in the context of structural
adjustment programs. Social monitoring and impact assessments, similar to that done for the
environment, are recommended to international financial institutions and to the WTO. Labor
unions have called for including core labor standards in the future WTO work program.50

The U.N. Declaration Against Corruption and Bribery in International Commercial Transactions
encourages social responsibility and ethical behavior, calling on partners to international
transactions to observe the laws of the host countries, and take into account the impact of their
activities on economic and social development and protection of the environment and human
rights.

Codes of conduct for human rights often result from pressure on companies to divest from
countries with widespread and systematic human rights violations. Consumer boycotts and
labeling initiatives such as Rugmark provide a means for persons concerned with labor
conditions and human rights to use their purchasing power to influence corporate policy.
Effective mobilization of international consumer pressure can substitute for regulation. A writer
in the Economist has observed that, a multinationals failure to look like a good global citizen is

49 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Dec. 9, 1948, 78 U.N.T.S. 277 (entry into force
Jan. 12, 1951).

50 https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bciclr/25_2/06_FMS.htm

29
increasingly expensive in a world where consumers and pressure groups can be quickly
mobilised behind a cause. Such marketplace regulation has been criticized as lacking in the
accountability and transparency that normally accompany the formation of laws.51

The final approach concerned with enhancing human rights in a globalized world is one that has
broad implications for global governance generally. It seeks to enhance non-state participation in
international organizations and other fora concerned with international regulation. While
international organizations other than the ILO have limited participation for non-governmental
entities, efforts are being made to develop more collaborative efforts between state and non-state
actors within the framework of international organizations.

IMPLEMENTATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE ERA OF

GLOBALIZATION: LESSONS FROM INDIA

As far as implementation of human rights in India is concerned, the Indian Judiciary has been
doing a commendable job from last three to four decades. In fact, it was the Supreme Court of
India, well before the adoption of liberal economic policies of 1991, foreseen the impact of
liberalization / privatization / globalization on fundamental rights guaranteed under the
Constitution of India.52 The Judiciary was aware of, that, liberal economic policies could
seriously affect the fundamental rights of the weaker sections of the society and they cannot
survive under such economic policies. The Supreme Court of India, time and again, kept on
redressing specific human rights violation, issues discussed were constitutionality of the policy
of privatization,53 disinvestment,54 pollution of rivers,55 deaths due to starvation,56 right to strike

51 Development Assistance Committee of the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, Final Report of the
Ad Hoc Working Group on Participatory Development and Good Governance, at 1, OECD Doc. OCDE/GP/93/191
(1997), available at http://www.oecd.org/dac [hereinafter OECD, Working Group].

52 M.C. Mehta v. Union of India AIR 1987 SC 1086

53 Delhi Science Forum v. Union of India (1996) 2 SCC 405

54 Balco Employees Union v. Union of India AIR 2001 SC 350

30
and bandh,57 employment of children in hazardous industries, 58 right to health59 and many more
such issues which concerned or were directly or indirectly concerned to basic rights of an human
being. And in majority of these cases, the Supreme has been able to secure justice victims of
violations of human rights due to globalization. Besides, the Apex Court of India has tried to
create a balance between the need for development and the protection of human rights.

Now coming to the role played by Legislature wing of the State, the Government of India
framed major economic policies in 1991 to attract global corporate world to India. Since 1991,
there have been discussions on not only constitutionality of such policies but also its
consequences. It is to be believed that the policy of liberalization was a much needed one, but, it
seems that the government could not ensure that realization of human rights, especially of the
poor people, is to remain a cardinal factor at the time of law making or decision taking process.
For instance, the government could not satisfactorily control the course of foreign investment
and made some bad policy decisions in terms of investment prioritization. 60 Like people in
villages have access to soft drinks but not to clean drinking water, food, etc. Also, it seems that
the amendments proposed by the government in laws related to foreign investment, trade union
and contract labour beard a negative impact on human rights, especially of labourers and women
workers.

On the other hand, government took some initiatives as well to protect human rights from being
violated by framing some policies like, corporate social responsibility to protect environment,

55 Almitra H.Patel v. Union of India AIR 2000 SC 1256

56 Kishen Pattnayak v. State of Orissa 19889 Supp (1) SCC 258

57 CPM v. Bharat Kumar AIR 1998 SC 184

58 M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu AIR 1997 SC 699

59 Parmanad Kataria v. Union of India AIR 1989 SC 2039

60 Robert McCorquodale & Richard Fairbrother, Globalization and Human Rights Human Rights Quarterly 21 (1999) at p.
742-50

31
social security scheme for unorganized sector, minimum environment norms for large scale
urban projects and various other schemes as well.

In all, it is submitted that all the wings of the State have done enough for their responsibility for
protection and safeguarding of human rights against the global economic pace. But still, there is
lot of gap that is to be filled up in absolute realization of human rights. The State, at times, has
shown its greed for economic prosperity by contending that it will automatically lead to
realization of human rights at all levels, but in this course they have been caught in the trap of
global corporate giants. Therefore, India has to rethink about its economic policies in order to
safeguard human rights from the negative impacts of globalization.61

CONCLUSION

Globalization has its winners and losers. It creates both help and hindrance in realization of
human rights. With the expansion of trade, market, foreign investment, developing countries
have seen the gaps among themselves widen. The imperative to liberalize has demanded a
shrinking of State involvement in national life, producing a wave of privatization, cutting jobs,
slashing health, education and food subsidies, etc. affecting the poor people in society. In many
cases, liberalization has been accompanied by greater inequality and people are left trapped in
utter poverty. Meanwhile, in many industrialized countries unemployment has soared to levels
not seen for many years and income disparity to levels not recorded since last century. The
collapse of the economies of the Asian giants is an example of this.

Globalization has created centers of power that are alongside, even in competition with the
power of states. Accountability for human rights violations and prevention of future ones must

61 http://archive.unu.edu/unupress/sample-chapters/GlobalizationHumanRights.pdf

32
today and in the future take into account these non-state actors: the media, corporations, and
international organizations such as the WTO and the World Bank. States and their agents are no
longer the only or sometimes even the key actors responsible for ensuring that human rights and
freedoms are guaranteed. As recent international developments have shown, there are multiple
avenues to respond to this problem. The first is to strengthen the state and to insist on its
responsibility for ensuring that non-state actors do not commit human rights violations.

The Human Development Report of 1997 revealed that poor countries and poor people too often
find their interests neglected as a result of globalization. Although globalization of the economy
has been characterized as a locomotive for productivity, opportunity technological progress, and
uniting the world, it ultimately causes increased impoverishment, social disparities and violations
of human rights. Globalization as a concept is neither pro human rights nor anti human rights, it
could offer opportunities for promotion of human rights as well as abridgement of human 14
rights, at national and international scene. Now we are to decide that whether globalization
should be boon for human rights or bane!

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Web-Links:

http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2263&context=ilj
http://archive.unu.edu/unupress/sample-chapters/GlobalizationHumanRights.pdf
http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1559&C=1398

https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bciclr/25_2/06_F
MS.htm
http://www.americapress.org/articles/locatelli.htm

http://gedi.objectis.net/eventos-1/ilsabrasil2008/artigos/dheh/bansal.pdf
http://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2317&context=lawreview
https://www.ijsr.net/archive/v2i12/MDIwMTM1OTg=.pdf
http://www.oecd.org/dac

33
 http://www.corteidh.or.cr/sericing/C_4_Eng.html
http://www.psupress.org/books/SampleChapters/978-0-271-03691-5sc.html

Books Referred :

Robert McCorquodale & Richard Fairbrother, Globalization and Human Rights Human
Rights Quarterly 21 (1999)
R.K.Sapru, Public Policy: Formulation, Implementation and Evaluation, Sterling
Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 2006
Amit Kumar, Human Rights and Social Welfare, Dominant Publishers and Distributors
Publications, New Delhi
Nikhil Aziz, The Human Rights Debate in the Era of Globalization: Hegemony of
Discourse, Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, Vol. 27, No.4, Oct-Dec., 1995
C. Raj Kumar, K. Chockalingam Human Rights, Justice, & Constitutional Empowerment,
(New Delhi: Oxford University Press) 2007

34