Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-fv566 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T22:29:06.227Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

b - Capital, Corporate Citizenship and Legitimacy: The Ideological Force of ‘Corporate Crime’ in International Law

from 7 - The Corporation and Ideology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2017

Grietje Baars
Affiliation:
University of London
Grietje Baars
Affiliation:
City University London
Andre Spicer
Affiliation:
City University London
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Can we imagine Shell in the dock, at the International Criminal Court? It certainly seems as if many people around the world whose health, livelihoods and environments are affected by the extractive industries, would like to see this happen. It even seems as if multinational corporations themselves (or the persons that run them) are onboard with – the idea at least – of corporate criminal liability in international law. What does this mean? Will we ever see true ‘corporate accountability’, or is corporate support for accountability mechanisms more cynical? Are multinationals using ‘corporate accountability’ in the literal sense, in order to calculate and optimize exposure to potentially risky activities and manage civil society backlash? Is support for international criminal law nothing but the deployment of ‘canned morality’ aimed at bolstering their legitimacy in an increasingly corporate-governed world, and getting angry citizens off the streets, back home onto the sofa to Netflix & chill?

One of the main responses to the corporate legitimacy backlash of the past decades has been the development of the notions of ‘corporate citizenship’ and ‘corporate social responsibility’ (CSR) and a wealth of non-binding norms on corporate behaviour culminating in UN Special Representative on Business and Human Rights John Ruggie's ‘Guiding Principles’ in 2011 (UNHCR, 2011). Frustrated by the lack of ‘teeth’ (enforceability) of these regimes – in particular when it comes to multinationals’ involvement in environmental destruction, war, displacement and other situations of grave suffering – cause lawyers, activist scholars and others have started to push for ‘corporate accountability’ through binding norms in international law. One route that is regularly debated and advocated is the creation (or, recognition and enforcement) of a norm of corporate liability in international criminal law (ICL), or what we might call ‘corporate ICL’ (CICL). This proposal rides on a trend of increasing acceptance of corporate criminal liability in domestic legal systems and massive popular support for ICL globally (Baars, 2014). A putative CICL has manifested itself in recent scholarly writing on the topic as well as in activist lawyer-led ‘weaponized CSR’ litigation and advocacy in multinationals’ home states based on claims of corporate complicity in war crimes, crimes against humanity, environmental and other crimes committed elsewhere in the world.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Corporation
A Critical, Multi-Disciplinary Handbook
, pp. 419 - 433
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anghie, A. (2007) Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Archer, J. (1973) The Plot to Seize the White House: The Shocking True Story of the Conspiracy to Overthrow FDR (Portland OR: Hawthorn Books).
Baars, G. (2007) ‘Corrie et al. v. Caterpillar: litigating corporate complicity in Israeli violations of international law in the US courts’, Yearbook of Islamic and Middle Eastern Law 2005 (6).Google Scholar
Baars, G. (2011) ‘“Reform or revolution?” Polanyian v. Marxian perspectives on the regulation of ‘the economic’, Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 62(4): 415–431.Google Scholar
Baars, G. (2012) ‘Law(yers) congealing capitalism: on the (im)possibility of restraining business in conflict through international criminal law’ PhD Thesis, UCL, http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1348306/1/1348306.pdf.
Baars, G. (2013) ‘Capitalism's victor's justice? The hidden story of the prosecution of industrialists post-WWII’, in Simpson, G. and Heller, K. (eds.), Untold Stories: Hidden Histories of War Crimes Trials (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 163–192.
Baars, G. (2014) ‘Making ICL history: on the need to move beyond prefab critiques’, in Schwöbel, C. (ed.), Critical Approaches to International Criminal Law: An Introduction (London: Routledge), 196–218.
Baars, G. (2015) ‘From the Dutch East India Company to the Corporate Bill of Rights: corporations and international law’, in Mattei, U. and Haskell, J. (eds.), Political Economy and Law: A Handbook of Contemporary Practice, Research and Theory (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Press) 260–279.
Baars, G (2016) ‘It's not me, it's the corporation: the value of corporate accountability in the global political economy’, London Review of International Law 4(1): 127–163.Google Scholar
Bakan, J. (2004) The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power (London: Constable & Robinson).
Berle, Adolf (1930–1931) ‘Corporate powers as powers in trust’, Harvard Law Review 44: 1049.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf (1932) ‘For whom corporate managers are trustees. a note’, Harvard Law Review 45: 1365.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf, and Means, Gardiner (1932) The Modern Corporation and Private Property (New York: Macmillan).
Bernstein, E. (2010) ‘Militarized humanitarianism meets carceral feminism: the politics of sex, rights, and freedom in contemporary antitrafficking campaigns’, Signs 36(1): 45–71.Google Scholar
Burchard, C. (2010) ‘Ancillary and neutral business contributions to “corporate–political core crime”: initial enquiries concerning the Rome Statute’, Journal of International Criminal Justice 8(3): 919.Google Scholar
Bush, J. (2009) ‘The prehistory of corporations and conspiracy in international criminal law: what Nuremberg really said’, Columbia Law Review 109(5): 1094–1262.Google Scholar
Business and Human Rights: Trafigura Lawsuits: ‘Trafigura lawsuits (re Côte d'Ivoire)’, Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, http://business-humanrights.org/en/trafigura-lawsuits-re-côte-d'ivoire.
Canfield, G. (1914) ‘Corporate responsibility for crime’, Columbia Law Review 14: 469.Google Scholar
Chance, Clifford (2015) ‘Corporate liability’, Briefing, March, www.cliffordchance.com/briefings/2015/03/corporate_criminalliability.html.
Coffee, J. (1981) ‘No soul to damn: no body to kick: an unscandalized inquiry into the problem of corporate punishment’, Michigan Law Review 79(3): 386.Google Scholar
Cook, W. W. (1891) The Corporation Problem: The Public Phases of Corporations, Their Uses, Abuses, Benefits, Dangers, Wealth, and Power, with a Discussion of the Social Industrial, Economic, and Political Questions to Which They Have Given Rise (London and New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons).
Cutler, A. C. (2003) Private Power and Global Authority: Transnational Merchant Law in the Global Political Economy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Danielsen, Dan (2005) ‘How corporations govern: taking corporate power seriously in transnational regulation and governance’, Harvard International Law Journal 46(2): 411–425.Google Scholar
Danielsen, Dan (2006) ‘Corporate power and global order’, in Orford, Anne (ed.), International Law and Its Others (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 85–99.
Dodd, E. M. (1932) ‘For whom are corporate managers trustees?’, Harvard Law Review 45: 1145.Google Scholar
Dubber, Markus D. (2013) ‘The comparative history and theory of corporate criminal liability’, New Criminal Law Review: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal 16(2): 203–240.Google Scholar
Edgerton, H. (1927) ‘Corporate criminal responsibility’, Yale Law Journal 36: 827.Google Scholar
EU Report (2016) European Parliament Committee on Foreign Affairs, Draft report on corporate liability for serious human rights abuses in third countries (2015/2315(INI)), 18 March 2016.
Farrell, N. (2010) ‘Attributing criminal liability to corporate actors: some lessons from the international tribunals’, Journal of International Criminal Justice 8(3): 873–894.Google Scholar
Ferrando, T. (2015) ‘Law, land and territory in global production: a critical legal chain approach’, PhD Thesis, Sciences-Po.
Fleming, Peter, and Jones, Marc T. (2013) The End of Corporate Social Responsibility: Crisis and Critique (London: Sage).
Ford Foundation: Business and Human Rights partnership (2013) ‘Ford grants $6 million to seven organizations to reshape the global human rights movement’, 13 November, www.fordfoundation.org/the-latest/news/ford-grants-6-million-to-seven-organizations-to-reshape-the-global-human-rights-movement/.
French, D., Mayson, S., and Ryan, C. (2014) Mayson, French and Ryan on Company Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Gallagher, K. (2010) ‘Civil litigation and transnational business: an alien tort statute primer’, Journal of International Criminal Justice 8: 745–767.Google Scholar
Glasbeek, H. (2010) ‘The corporation as legally constructed site of irresponsibility’, in Pontell, H. and Geis, G. (eds.), The International Handbook of White-Collar and Corporate Crime (New York: Springer), 248–278.
Global Movement for a Binding Treaty: Statement: ‘Enhance the international legal framework to protect human rights from corporate abuse’, www.treatymovement.com/statement/.
Gray, G. (2006) ‘The regulation of corporate violations: punishment, compliance and the blurring of responsibility’, British Journal of Criminology 46: 875.Google Scholar
The Guardian (2012) ‘MPs attack Amazon, Google and Starbucks over tax avoidance’, 3 December, www.theguardian.com/business/2012/dec/03/amazon-google-starbucks-tax-avoidance.
Harvey, David (2004) ‘The new imperialism: accumulation by dispossession’, Socialist Register 40: 63.Google Scholar
HMRC (2015) Tackling Offshore Tax Evasion: A New Corporate Criminal Offence of Failure to Prevent the Facilitation of Tax Evasion: Summary of Responses, December 2015 (London: HMRC).
Huisman, W., and van Sliedregt, E. (2010) ‘Rogue traders: Dutch businessmen, international crimes and corporate complicity’, Journal of International Criminal Justice 8: 803–828.Google Scholar
Ireland, P. (2002) ‘History, critical legal studies and the mysterious disappearance of capitalism’, Modern Law Review 65(1): 120.Google Scholar
Klein, N. (2007) The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism (London: Allen Lane).
Knox, R. (2009) ‘Marxism, international law and political strategy’, Leiden Journal of International Law 22: 413.Google Scholar
Knox, R. (2016) ‘Valuing race? Stretched Marxism and the logic of imperialism’, London Review of International Law 4(1): 81–126.Google Scholar
Koskenniemi, M. (2007) ‘The fate of public international law: between technique and politics’, Modern Law Review 70(1): 1.Google Scholar
Kyriakakis, Joanna (2007) ‘Australian prosecution of corporations for international crimes: the potential of the Commonwealth Criminal Code’, Journal of International Criminal Justice 5(4): 809–826.Google Scholar
Lamble, S. (2013) ‘Queer necropolitics and the expanding carceral state: interrogating sexual investments in punishment’, Law and Critique 24(3): 229–253.Google Scholar
Lamble, Sarah (2014) ‘Queer investments in punishment: sexual citizenship, social movements and the expanding carceral state’, in Haritaworn, J., Kuntsman, A. and Posocco, S. (eds.), Queer Necropolitics (London: Routledge), 151–171.
LeBaron, Genevieve, and Roberts, Adrienne (2010) ‘Toward a feminist political economy of capitalism and carcerality’, Signs 36(1): 19–44.Google Scholar
López, C. (2013) ‘The “Ruggie process”: from legal obligations to corporate social responsibility?’, in Deva, S. and Bilchitz, D. (eds.), Human Rights Obligations of Business (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 58.
Madlingozi, T. (2010) ‘On transitional justice entrepreneurs and the production of victims’, Journal of Human Rights Practice 2(2): 208.Google Scholar
Marchand, R. (1998) Creating the Corporate Soul: The Rise of Public Relations and Corporate Imagery in American Big Business (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press).
Marx, K., and Engels, F. (1952) Manifesto of the Communist Party (Moscow: Progress Publishers).
Mason, Paul (2015) Post-Capitalism: A Guide to Our Future (London: Allen Lane). McBarnet, D., et al. (eds.) (2007) The New Corporate Accountability: Corporate Social Responsibility and the Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Meeran, Richard (2011) ‘Tort litigation against multinational corporations for violations of human rights: an overview of the position outside of the united states’, City University of Hong Kong Law Review 3(1): 1–41.Google Scholar
Mégret, F. (2010) ‘In search of the “vertical”: an exploration of what makes international criminal tribunals different (and why)’, in Stahn, C. and Herik, L. J. van den (eds.), Future Perspectives on International Criminal Justice (The Hague: TMC Asser Press), 178.
Miéville, C. (2005) Between Equal Rights: A Marxist Theory of International Law (London: Pluto).
Moon, Jeremy, Crane, Andrew, and Matten, Dirk (2005) ‘Can corporations be citizens? Corporate citizenship as a metaphor for business participation in society’, Business Ethics Quarterly 15(3): 429–453.Google Scholar
Nader, R. (1965) Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-In Dangers of the American Automobile (New York: Grossman).
Ormerod, D. (2011) Smith and Hogan's Criminal Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Pashukanis, E. (1978) Law and Marxism: a general theory (London: Ink Links).
Petrig, Anna (2013) ‘The use of force and firearms by private maritime security companies against suspected pirates62(3) International and Comparative Law Quarterly 667–701.Google Scholar
Plomp, Caspar (2014) ‘Aiding and abetting: the responsibility of business leaders under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court30(79) Utrecht Journal of International and European Law 4.Google Scholar
Ramasastry, Anita (2002) ‘Corporate complicity: from Nuremberg to Rangoon: an examination of forced labor cases and their impact on the liability of multinational corporation’, Berkeley Journal of International Law 20: 91–159.Google Scholar
Ramasastry, Anita (2015) ‘Corporate social responsibility versus business and human rights: bridging the gap between responsibility and accountability’, Journal of Human Rights 14: 237–259.Google Scholar
Riwal, (2010) ‘Inval Nederlands bedrijf wegens hulp bij bouw muur Israel’ [‘Raid at Dutch company because of complicity in building the wall in Israel’ – author's translation], NRC 14 October, http://vorige.nrc.nl//economie/article2631653.ece/Inval_Nederlands_bedrijf_wegens_hulp_bij_bouw_muur_Israel.
Ruggie, John (2008) ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy: A Framework’, A/HRC/8/5, www.reports-and-materials.org/sites/default/files/reports-and-materials/Ruggie-report-7-Apr-2008.pdf.
Ryngaert, C. (2008) ‘Litigating abuses committed by private military companies’, European Journal of International Law 19: 1035–1053.Google Scholar
Ryngaert, C. 2007 ‘Universal tort jurisdiction over gross human rights violations under international law’, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law: 3–60.
Schwöbel, C. (ed.) (2014) Critical Approaches to International Criminal Law: An Introduction (London: Routledge).
SCOTUS blog (Kiobel page), www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/kiobel-v-royal-dutch-petroleum/.
Shamir, R. (2004) ‘Between self-regulation and the Alien Tort Claims Act: on the contested concept of corporate social responsibility’, Law and Society Review 38(4): 635.Google Scholar
Shamir, R. (2010) ‘Capitalism, governance and authority: the case of corporate social responsibility’, Annual Review of Law and Social Sciences (6): 531.Google Scholar
Simester, A., et al. (2010) Simester and Sullivan's Criminal Law: Theory and Doctrine, edn. (Oxford: Hart).
Soederberg, Susanne (2010) Corporate Power and Ownership in Contemporary Capitalism: The Politics of Resistance and Domination (London: Routledge/RIPE Series in Global Political Economy).
Sommer, A. (1991) ‘Whom should the corporation serve? The Berle–Dodd debate revisited sixty years later’, Delaware Journal of Corporate Law 16(1).Google Scholar
Stessens, G. (1994) ‘Corporate criminal liability: a comparative perspective’, International and Comparative Law Quarterly 43(3): 493.Google Scholar
Stewart, J. (2014) ‘The turn to corporate criminal liability for international crimes: transcending the Alien Tort Statute’, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 47 (9 February).Google Scholar
Subedi, S. P. (2008) International Investment Law: Reconciling Policy and Principle (Oxford: Hart).
Tallgren, I. (2002) ‘The sensibility and sense of international criminal law’, European Journal of International Law 13(3): 561.Google Scholar
Therborn, G. (2012) ‘Class in the twenty-first century’, New Left Review 78 (November–December).Google Scholar
Thompson, Robert C., Ramasastry, Anita, and Taylor, Mark B. (2009) ‘Translating unocal: the expanding web of liability for business entities implicated in international crimes’, George Washington International Law Review 40: 841–902.Google Scholar
Tombs, Steve, and Whyte, David (2015) The Corporate Criminal. Why Corporations Must Be Abolished, Key Ideas in Criminology (Abingdon: Routledge).
Traidcraft, (2015) ‘Two-thirds of British business leaders agree’, press release, 27 November 2015.
Van Apeldoorn, Bastiaan, and de Graaff, Naná (2012) ‘Corporate elite networks and us post-Cold War grand strategies from Clinton to Obama’, European Journal of International Relations, 12 June.
UNHCR Resolution (2011) A/HRC/17/31 UN Special Rapporteur for Business and Human Rights Final Report, Annexing the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, 21 March.
UNHCR (2014) A/HRC/RES/26/9 Elaboration of an International Legally Binding Instrument on Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with Respect to Human Rights, adopted 26 June.
UNHCR (2015) Draft Report of the Open-ended Intergovernmental Working Group on Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with Respect to Human rights, 10 July.
Weber, M. (1982) General Economic History (Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Books), 225.
Weiner, Joseph (1964) ‘The Berle–Dodd dialogue on the concept of the corporation’, Columbia Law Review 64(8): 1458–1467.Google Scholar
Whyte, D. (2007) ‘Hire an American!’ Tyranny and corruption in occupied Iraq’, Social Justice 34(2), 153–168.Google Scholar
Whyte, D. (2003) ‘Lethal regulation: state-corporate crime and the United Kingdom government's new mercenaries’, Journal of Law and Society 30(4): 575–600.Google Scholar
Whyte, D. (ed.) (2009) Crimes of the Powerful: A Reader (Milton Keynes: Open University Press).
Whyte, D. (2010) ‘The neo-liberal state of exception in occupied Iraq’, in Chambliss, W. and Michalowski, R. (eds.), State Crime in the Global Age (Collumpton: Willan).
Wormser, M. (1931) Frankenstein, Incorporated (New York: McGraw-Hill).

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×