This chapter provides an overview of key developments in the business and human rights landscape, more recent global efforts, and challenges that remain. The first half of this introductory chapter discusses the landmark policy efforts over the past forty years. Given the widespread development of voluntary or “soft law” initiatives, the second half of this chapter explores the fundamental challenge in business and human rights: the question of accountability. Even in cases of wrongdoing, jurisdictional issues, the corporate veil, and lack of political will present important challenges to holding firms accountable. This chapter tells the old narrative of corporate impunity and governance gaps; it introduces a new story that draws from systematic data and illustrative examples to explore the pathways by which victims gain access to remedy mechanisms.

This chapter covers three areas of international law that, though distinct, are interconnected. The law of statehood defines which entities qualify as states, the most important actors on the world stage and the international legal persons with the most rights, duties and functions. The law of self-determination accords rights to ‘peoples’ rather than to states, but in limited circumstances it enables peoples to create new states for themselves. That can be a way for a people to seize control of its own destiny, especially if it has been subject to colonialism or oppression. Finally, the law of territory determines the geographical borders within which many of the rights, duties and functions of states are applicable, including how those borders can change.

Under international criminal law (‘ICL’), individuals can be prosecuted and punished for conduct that is criminalised under customary international law and/or treaty. This differs from most branches of international law, which concern the rights and obligations of states. The rationale for holding individuals to account for such crimes was articulated in 1946 by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, which stated: ‘Crimes against international law are committed by [people], not by abstract entities, and only by punishing individuals who commit such crimes can the provisions of international law be enforced.’ This chapter introduces this branch of international law, citing examples involving Australia as well as many other states. The chapter gives an overview of some of ILC’s key principles and aims, andoutlines the historical development of ICL. It explains how ICL is currently being enforced, considers the core crimes in ICL and discusses individual criminal responsibility and defences.

The previous chapter described the extent of a state’s physical territory; this chapter looks at how far a state’s legal power extends. As will be seen, international law places certain limits on the right of a state to make, apply and enforce its laws – its jurisdiction – and these limits are considered in Section 6.2. International law also recognises two principal bars to the exercise of that jurisdiction: diplomatic immunity and state immunity; these are covered in Sections 6.3 and 6.4. Two other bars to jurisdiction, namely special mission immunity and the foreign act of state doctrine, are also briefly covered in Sections 6.6 and 6.7.

International humanitarian law (‘IHL’), also known as the law of armed conflict (‘LOAC’), is a branch of international law that regulates the behaviour of participants in armed conflicts and encompasses rules on the military targeting of persons and objects, the means and methods of warfare, the protection of persons and objects, and the implementation and enforcement of the law. International humanitarian law is also one of the most highly codified fields of international law, with numerous treaties adopted over the last 150 years; many of these have also attained customary status. In developing IHL, states have recognised that, while the ultimate aim of society should be to strive to prevent war, wars will nonetheless occur, and that while ‘war will always constitute suffering and personal tragedy … rules of warfare are intended to prevent unnecessary suffering that yields little or no military advantage’. This balance between humanitarian aims and military objectives serves as the basic underpinning of all the modern laws of armed conflict.