Differentiating the Corporation: Accountability and International Humanitarian Law

Corporations are significant global actors that are continuing to gain international legal status. Regulatory efforts have closely followed persistent claims that various forms of corporate activity are adversely affecting individual welfare and societal objectives. Such observations are perhaps mos...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Hughes, David (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Buch
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: 2021
In:Jahr: 2021
Online-Zugang: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866307444
003 DE-627
005 20250113054904.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231019s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866307444 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866307444 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Hughes, David  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Differentiating the Corporation: Accountability and International Humanitarian Law 
264 1 |c 2021 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Corporations are significant global actors that are continuing to gain international legal status. Regulatory efforts have closely followed persistent claims that various forms of corporate activity are adversely affecting individual welfare and societal objectives. Such observations are perhaps most acute during instances of armed conflict. The history of corporate misdeeds occurring within or contributing to the perpetuation of warfare is now well-documented. However, the relationship between international humanitarian law—the legal field governing the conduct of war—and corporations receives less attention than other areas of international law where the treatment of business entities have made important advancements. This article considers the particularities that affect how accountability is imposed for corporate behavior that implicates IHL. Accordingly, the article has three purposes. First, it describes the (indirect) doctrinal methods through which accountability for corporate conduct implicating IHL may be pursued. Second, it identifies structural challenges and features of the corporate form that compromise the efficacy of these methods and result in accountability gaps. Third, through a series of case studies—addressing the conduct of Blackwater in Iraq, Facebook in Myanmar, and Airbnb in the West Bank—the article categorizes disparate forms of corporate conduct that implicate IHL in previously unforeseen ways and present unidentified regulatory challenges. Collectively, the article suggests that if international law is to contribute to the process of narrowing accountability gaps, if it is to provide an agreeable and accurate vocabulary for determining standards and adjudging conduct, regulatory efforts must begin by embracing those features that differentiate the corporation from those other entities that have traditionally held international law’s attention 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/386949149.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4392950980 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866307444 
LOK |0 005 20231019043630 
LOK |0 008 231019||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE107646692 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw