1 - Why to Analyze State Responsibility for Human Rights Violations: The Flawed Debate on Direct Human Rights Obligations for Non-State Actors

Summary

The first chapter introduces the broader debate on human rights and non-state actors. With the political and economic power of non-state actors ever increasing, the creation of directly binding international human rights obligations for non-state actors, in particular for multinational corporations, has become a popular suggestion. The chapter discusses why such direct obligations cannot be derived from the existing human rights system and weighs arguments in favor and against creating such obligations in the future. It emphasizes risks and problems that are critical but often overlooked in this context and concludes that direct human rights obligations for non-state actors neither seem feasible nor politically desirable which makes it necessary to look for alternative solutions in order to address the increasing problem of human rights violations caused by actors other than states. Due diligence obligations on behalf of states may present such an alternative.