This paper provides a synopsis of the human rights enforcement in Bangladesh, which marks its 50 years in 2021 since its independence. After a theoretical background on how human rights are perceived as legal and political instruments, it critically discusses human rights provisions and explores the legal and institutional frameworks on human rights enforcement in Bangladesh—(re)construed in 50 years (1971–2021). Finally, it divulges the controversies in human rights enforcement and a roadmap to address them by making some suggestions: multiple legislative, (...) administrative, and judicial reforms are required to tackle human rights abuses to ensure punishment for the abusers and restitution for the victims. The paper concludes with the notion that the positive will of the relevant stakeholders (legislature, executive, and judiciary) is the key to upholding and protecting the human rights of Bangladeshi citizens. The significance of this paper lies in exploring the complexities associated with the laws and insular national politics, which often debars the enforcement of human rights and crucially compromises Bangladesh’s ability to empower its citizens. (shrink)

In this article, we apply the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights to the private equity (PE) business model. PE firms often adopt a controversial, ‘value extractive’, business model based on high debt and extreme cost-cutting to generate investor returns. PE firms own large numbers of companies, including in many rights-related sectors. The model is linked to increased human rights risks to workers, housing tenants, and in privatized health and social care. We map these risks and analyse the (...) human rights responsibilities of PE firms. Our analysis has major implications for understandings of human rights responsibility. We argue that value extractive methods are the root cause of eventual harm to human rights, even though they may not harm rights directly. To respect human rights, PE firms must mitigate the risks of these value extractive methods. We define how human rights due diligence (HRDD) could achieve this and argue that given the extent of harm and the lack of a business case for adopting such a view of human rights responsibility, business strategy level HRDD should be a core component of forthcoming HRDD laws. (shrink)

This article explores Southern Saami reindeer herders’ experiences and contestations over state consultation and corporate dialogue during a conflict over the Øyfjellet wind energy project in Norway. Informed by a committed research approach and juxtaposition with findings from Indigenous peoples' territorial struggles in Latin-America, the article provides critical perspectives on governance practices in a Nordic-Saami green colonial context. The research draws on ethnography from a consultation meeting between Jillen Njaarke, the impacted reindeer herding community, and state authorities, as well as (...) diverse written material. The study suggests that the state- and corporate-led “dialogues” displaced the root cause of the conflict, revealed epistemic miscommunication, and perpetuated relations of domination which limited emancipatory effects for Jillen Njaarke. The premises and discourses underpinning the “dialogues” further reproduced racist notions which devalue ancestral Saami reindeer herding knowledges, practices, and landscape relations. These findings challenge dialogue as prescription of good governance and conflict resolution in a context where democracy and compliance with Indigenous peoples’ rights are perceived as high. (shrink)

One prominent argument in international law and religious thought for abolishing capital punishment is that it violates individuals’ right to life. Notably, this _right-to-life argument_ emerged from normative and legal frameworks that recognize deadly force against aggressors as justified when necessary to stop their unjust threat of grave harm. Can capital punishment be necessary in this sense—and thus justified defensive killing? If so, the right-to-life argument would have to admit certain exceptions where executions are justified. Drawing on work by Hugo (...) Bedau, I identify a thought experiment where executions are justified defensive killing but explain why they cannot be in our world. A state’s obligations to its prisoners include the _obligation to use nonlethal incapacitation_ (ONI), which applies as long as prisoners pose no imminent threat. ONI precludes executions for reasons of future dangerousness. By subjecting the right-to-life argument to closer scrutiny, this article ultimately places it on firmer ground. (shrink)

Although violence has always been in governments’ toolkit against civil society organizations (CSOs), there has been a global trend where governments set legal and logistical barriers to non-violently repress CSOs, especially INGOs (International Non-Governmental Organizations) since the mid-2000s. During this period, states present variations in CSO repression, ranging from moderate regulation to violent expulsion. Why do countries vary the repression? I argue that different levels of repression are based on governments’ perceived repression effectiveness in reducing INGOs’ threats. For better illustration, (...) I propose the effectiveness-perception framework, where repression effectiveness comes from the interaction between regime type and local trust in INGOs, while the perception of effectiveness is rooted in the domestic political structure. To conduct empirical tests, I create a latent variable, local trust, to measure threats of INGOs conditional on local communities. Relying on the sample from 1996 to 2012, I find that consolidated democracies and autocracies, compared to middling countries, are more likely to adjust the repression levels based on local trust in INGOs. I expect the finding to produce some strategy-relevant insights for INGOs’ survival in the current political environment. (shrink)

In a landmark 1994 case, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that individuals had the right to ask for Internet links that contained certain information about them to be delisted by search engines. This came to be known as the “right to be forgotten.” This paper discusses the extent to which this right is consistent with the Islamic tradition. Following an overview of some aspects of the right to be forgotten and why it is endorsed in the (...) European Union with its emphasis on privacy but not in the USA with its exaltation of free speech, the paper discusses two related issues: (1) elements in the Islamic tradition potentially conducive to endorsing a particular understanding of the right to be forgotten and (2) some possible obstacles from that tradition that could challenge the recognition of this right from an Islamic perspective. The paper concludes that despite some challenges, including Qur’anic verses and certain views, activities, and institutions, the right to be forgotten is defendable from within the Islamic tradition by reference to the principle of _satr_, which breaches that one should not seek to publicize personal information that causes harm to other people or even to oneself. The paper seeks to contribute to discussions on this new right by showing what a religious tradition such as Islam can offer to them. (shrink)