New Internationalist

Protect human – not corporate – rights

Flags of agreement [Related Image]
Free trade agreements allow powerful interests to assert their rights ahead of fundamental human rights. under a Creative Commons Licence

Today, 10 December, has been recognized as Human Rights day since 1950. The day marks the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948. The UDHR reportedly gave strength to Mandela during his many years of imprisonment. The text is impressive – it affirms the fundamental rights of people everywhere, without discrimination; it recognizes that individuals and governments have a duty to defend the rights of others in global solidarity with humanity.

Certainly, the UDHR was a step forward in the struggle to protect human rights. It led to the creation of many other legally binding instruments such as the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998. It also inspired the movement that has recently emerged in Latin America to recognize and protect the rights of nature, as an alternative to market-based climate deals pushed by so many governments and businesses.

Most people are familiar with the provisions of Universal Declaration as they relate to civil and political rights  – like the right to family life or to be treated equally and fairly in court. Fewer are aware that the Universal Declaration also contains economic, social and cultural rights – like the right to work and to be paid a decent wage, the right to a standard of living adequate for health and wellbeing, including adequate food, healthcare and housing; and the right to social security.

Right now the US and the European Commission are – behind closed doors and on behalf of all their citizens – negotiating a profoundly undemocratic free trade deal known as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership or TTIP. A lobby group called TheCityUK is pushing hard for an agreement that will be most favourable to business interests in the City of London. Transnational companies are demanding deeper ‘rights’ to make profit without ‘barriers’. All of this is done in the name of ‘free trade.

What are these barriers that investors are concerned about? To answer that, let’s examine how similar trade agreements work in practice:

Vattenfall, a Swedish energy company, is suing Germany for US$5.1 billion in lost profits following Germany’s decision to phase out nuclear power. This will result in the closure of two Vattenfall plants. Vattenfall is asserting its rights under the Energy Chater Treaty.  

The tobacco giant Philip Morris is suing Australia and Uruguay in lost profits, in the case of Uruguay it is demanding US$2000 million, following the decision by these nations to discourage smoking and to impose plain packaging of cigarettes. Philip Morris is claiming rights under bilateral investment treaties.

Lone Pine Resources, a US mining company, is suing Canada for US$250 million compensation and lost profits following the decision by the province of Quebec to impose a moratorium on fracking. Lone Pine is relying on rights it claims under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).  

These are just a few shocking examples. What these agreements do is subject human rights to corporate rights. Powerful interests asserting their rights to ‘property’ above fundamental human rights is nothing new but the US-EU free trade agreement is striking in its breadth and depth. It will entrench corporate rights at the international level much deeper than ever before. It is the most audacious attack by capital on human rights and society. It will have a chilling effect on legislators and it will cost the public purse when transnational corporations challenge national laws designed to protect human rights and the environment.

In Britain, people may first notice this in relation to the National Health Service (NHS).The US-EU free trade agreement will turn the NHS into a transnational investment opportunity, making its privatization effectively permanent. Given that $164 billion is spent on the NHS each year, it represents quite a prize for investors. Our right to healthcare guaranteed by the Universal Declaration will take second place to the right of companies to secure contracts and make profits for themselves and their shareholders.  

Rights-based organizing is valuable and necessary but we need to demonstrate that we reject the notion of human rights as a marginal concern, subservient to the interests of capital. We need to make real the vision in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We need a movement which includes direct action to stop the US-EU free trade agreement. A Stop TTIP Occupy working group has just been set up – join forces with us.

Melanie Strickland is a solicitor and member of Occupy Law UK.

Comments on Protect human – not corporate – rights

Leave your comment


  • Maximum characters allowed: 5000
  • Simple HTML allowed: bold, italic, and links

Registration is quick and easy. Plus you won’t have to re-type the blurry words to comment!
Register | Login

  1. #1 mike 15 Dec 13

    Next time you go to the ballot box to vote for a political party left wing or right wing regardless, consider this the people you vote for will not be representing you, they have received their campaign funds from large corporations and regardless of their ideological stance or election rhetoric they have been paid to represent the corporations and represent them they will, so effectively all you have achieved is a change of facilitator, not someone to represent you. You may have noticed the political class are predominantly from the same social class and background, attend the same elite schools and continue to socialise with each other during periods of both opposition and government, more importantly you may notice that many of them acquire directorships or other high remuneration positions within the corporations once their political careers are over. The electoral system and party politics has become an elaborate stage show designed to convince the population that they are living in a participatory democracy, which could not be further from the truth, The populous may be allowed some influence over peripheral or trivial matters just to present some facade of participation, but the major decisions have already been made and agreed upon. You may be preoccupied defending welfare, health and education but in the eyes of the corporations so long as the state supplys a steady stream of functionally compliant, moderately educated, functionally healthy workers to administer the mechanisms of their organisations they will not directly interfere, but they will ensure that these functions are of no cost to them relying in stead on the state self funding from taxes acquired from the workforce as they have access to mechanisms to avoid contribution. In summary, democracy is a sham we are well and truly living behind the veil in a functioning Corpocracy. Your vote counts for less than you imagine.

  2. #2 carolyn treadwell 16 Dec 13

    Protection of human rights; To put right what went wrong! and our liberty others died for, Winston Churchill vowed 'never again!' Regarding the state's rights over the voice of people! (like in Nazis Germany)Such disastrous consequences and suffering upon humanity must still be feared when any ruling power doesn't prompt the protection of human rights!

Subscribe to Comments for this articleArticle Comment Feed RSS 2.0

Guidelines: Please be respectful of others when posting your reply.

Get our free fortnightly eNews


Videos from visionOntv’s globalviews channel.

Related articles

Popular tags

All tags

New Internationalist Blogs

New Internationalist hosts several different blogs, from the Editor's Blog to the Majority World Blog, the Gaza Blog to the Books Blog

New Internationalist Blogs