Article contents
Effective Governance through Decentralized Soft Implementation: The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 March 2019
Extract
Botnia S.A./Metsä-Botnia Oy's construction of the Orion pulp mill in Uruguay raised concerns regarding violations of national, regional, and international law with regard to social and environmental protection. On 18 April 2006, the Center for Human Rights and Environment (CEDHA), an Argentinean non-governmental organisation, submitted to Finland's National Contact Point (NCP) a “specific instance” regarding the possible non-compliance of Botnia S.A. (a Finnish enterprise) with the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (OECD Guidelines for MNEs, Guidelines) when building the envisaged pulp mill in Uruguay. According to the Center for Human Rights and Environment, Botnia S.A. violated the OECD Guidelines for MNEs especially with respect to Chapter II “General Policies”, Chapter III “Disclosure”, Chapter V “Environment” and Chapter VI “Bribery”. Specific instances concerned with related issues were filed by the Center for Human Rights and Environment with the Swedish and Norwegian NCPs against Nordea, a leading financial services group of the Nordic and Baltic Sea area, for possible financing of Botnia S.A.'s pulp mill project and against the Finnish state bank Finnvera for providing export guarantees to Botnia S.A. Other fora that have in the meantime become involved in the issue are the International Court of Justice and member institutions of the World Bank Group, the International Finance Corporation and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency.
- Type
- Thematic Studies
- Information
- German Law Journal , Volume 9 , Issue 11: Special issue - The Exercise of Public Authority by International Institutions , 01 November 2008 , pp. 1753 - 1778
- Copyright
- Copyright © 2008 by German Law Journal GbR
References
1 OECD Watch, Quarterly Case Update, spring 2007, available at: http://www.oecdwatch.org/docs/OW_quarterlycaseupdate_english.pdf, at 4–5. For the statement of the Finnish NCP on the issue see Ministry of Trade and Industry, Finland's National Contact Point's Statement on the specific instance submitted by CEDHA, an Argentinean non-governmental organization, regarding Botnia S.A./Metsä-Botnia Oy's Pulp Mill project in Uruguay, 21 December 2006, available at: http://www.oecdwatch.org/docs/CEDHA_Botnia_FinnishNCP_statement.pdf.Google Scholar
2 OECD, Working Party on the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises: Review 2000, DAFFE/IME/WPG(2000)9, 8 September 2000 (Ministerial Booklet). This document reproduces the text of the Ministerial Booklet published at the 2000 Ministerial Council Meeting containing the Declaration on International Investment and Multinational Enterprises, the Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (Part 1), the Decision of the OECD Council and the Procedural Guidance (Part 2), and Commentaries (Part 3).Google Scholar
3 OECD Watch, Quarterly Case Update, spring 2007, available at: http://www.oecdwatch.org/docs/OW_quarterlycaseupdate_english.pdf, at 4–5.Google Scholar
4 Id. at 4–5.Google Scholar
5 Id. at 4–5.Google Scholar
6 Id. at 4–5.Google Scholar
7 International Court of Justice, Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), pending case, general list no 135, further information available at: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=1&code=au&case=135&k=88.Google Scholar
8 International Finance Corporation, Orion Pulp Mill – Uruguay, available at: http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/lac.nsf/content/Uruguay_Pulp_Mills.Google Scholar
9 Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency, Projects, available at: http://www.miga.org/projects/index_sv.cfm?pid=690.Google Scholar
10 Ministry of Trade and Industry, Finland's National Contact Point's Statement on the specific instance submitted by CEDHA, an Argentinean non-governmental organization, regarding Botnia S.A./Metsä-Botnia Oy's Pulp Mill project in Uruguay, 21 December 2006, available at: http://www.oecdwatch.org/docs/CEDHA_Botnia_FinnishNCP_statement.pdf.Google Scholar
11 Id. Google Scholar
12 Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC), TUAC Internal analysis of the treatment of cases raised with national contact points February 2001-April 2007, available at: http://www.oecdwatch.org/docs/TUAC_ListOfCases_Feb2007.pdf, at 4.Google Scholar
13 Armin von Bogdandy, Philipp Dann, Matthias Goldmann, in this issue; Benedict Kingsbury, Nico Krisch & Stewart, Richard B., Introduction: Global Governance and Global Administrative Law in the International Legal Order, 17 European Journal of International Law 1–13 (2006); Eberhard Schmidt-Aßmann, Die Herausforderung der Verwaltungsrechtswissenschaft durch die Internationalisierung der Verwaltungsbeziehungen, 45 Der Staat 315 (2006).Google Scholar
14 See (note 10).Google Scholar
15 The Ministry of Trade and Industry's decision on Botnia S.A./Metsä-Botnia Oy's pulp mill project: Metsä-Botnia has complied with the OECD Guidelines in Uruguay, 22 December 2006, available at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/17/42/38053102.pdf.Google Scholar
16 Pulp Mill Conflict: Finnish Ombudsman receives complaint in Botnia S.A. Investment conflict, 31 January 2007, available at: http://www.oecdwatch.org/docs/CEDHA_vs_BOTNIA_PR_Ombudsman.pdf.Google Scholar
17 Id. Google Scholar
18 Jennifer A. Zerk, Multinationals and Corporate Social Responsibility 248 (2006).Google Scholar
19 Id. at 248.Google Scholar
20 Ioannis N. Androulakis, Die Globalisierung der Korruptionsbekämpfung 190 (2006), Zerk (note 18), at 248.Google Scholar
21 Androulakis (note 20), at 128; Salzman, James, Decentralized Administrative Law in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 68 Law and Contemporary Problems 189, 212 (2004-2005); Zerk (note 18), at 22 et seq. Google Scholar
22 Bantekas, Ilias, Corporate Social Responsibility in International Law, 22 Boston University International Law Journal 309 (2004).Google Scholar
23 Id. Google Scholar
24 The OEEC was founded in 1948 to implement the European Recovery Program (Marshall Plan). Cf. Convention on the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (Convention on the OECD), 14 December 1960, Art. 15, UNTS Vol. 888, 180.Google Scholar
25 United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, World Investment Report, 2007, available at: http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/wir2007_en.pdf, at 3 and 24.Google Scholar
26 Convention on the OECD (note 24), Art. 5.Google Scholar
27 OECD, OECD Annual Report 2008, available at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/39/19/40556222.pdf, at 11.Google Scholar
28 Other permanent OECD bases are in Berlin, Mexico City, Tokyo and Washington D.C.Google Scholar
29 Id. at 101.Google Scholar
30 Id. at 107.Google Scholar
31 Convention on the OECD (note 24), at Art. 7.Google Scholar
32 Convention on the OECD (note 24), at Art. 6.Google Scholar
33 Convention on the OECD (note 24), at Art. 9; Council, Resolution of the Council on a new governance structure for the organisation, C(2006)78/FINAL, 24 May 2006, para. 31.Google Scholar
34 Roger Blanpain, The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Labour Relations, 1976–1979, 29 (1979).Google Scholar
35 Resolution of the Council on the Terms of Reference of the Investment Committee, C(2004)3 and CORR1, 22 April 2004; Convention on the OECD (note 24), Art. 12; Rules of Procedure of the Organisation, (C(61)21), 30 September 1962, as amended in 1962 (C(62)115(Final)) and 1970 (C(70)133(Final), rules 8(a), 9; Note by the Secretary-General, Participation of non-members in the activities of the organisation: legal aspects of the issue, C(98)211, 2 December 1998, para. 3; Resolution of the Council concerning the participation of non-members in the work of subsidiary bodies of the organisation, C(2004)132/FINAL, 5 August 2004.Google Scholar
36 See Note by the Secretary-General, Participation of non-members in the activities of the organisation: legal aspects of the issue, C(98)211, 2 December 1998; Resolution of the Council concerning the participation of non-members in the work of subsidiary bodies of the organisation, C(2004)132/FINAL, 5 August 2004.Google Scholar
37 Rules of Procedure of the Organisation, (C(61)21), 30 September 1962, as amended in 1962 (C(62)115(Final)) and 1970 (C(70)133(Final), rules 22(a), 18(a)(iii); Resolution of the Council on the Terms of Reference of the Investment Committee, C(2004)3 and CORR1, 22 April 2004.Google Scholar
38 Resolution of the Council on the Terms of Reference of the Investment Committee, C(2004)3 and CORR1, 22 April 2004 Art. 3; Ministerial Booklet (note 2), Council Decision, chapter II, Procedural Guidance chapter II, Commentary on the implementation procedures of the Guidelines, chapter II.Google Scholar
39 The Investment Committee: Strategy and Organisation, Mandate of the Working Party of the Investment Committee, DAF/INV(2004)1, 20 September 2004, para. 1(i).Google Scholar
40 Ministerial Booklet (note 2), Procedural Guidance chapter I D (stipulating reporting duties of NCPs to the Investment Committee) and Commentary on the Implementation Procedures, para. 3 (stipulation of reporting duties of the Investment Committee to the Council).Google Scholar
41 BIAC was constituted in 1962 as an independent organisation with the task to represent business and industry in the work of the OECD and to express opinions on questions of common interest. TUAC is one of the oldest international trade union groupings with direct consultative status with an international organisation. It was founded in 1948 to allow European trade unions to play a full role in the administration of the Marshall Plan by the OEEC and vis-à-vis the European Recovery Program. With the creation of the OECD in 1961, TUAC was officially accredited with consultative status by the OECD, representing the organized workers of OECD member countries. TUAC maintains a permanent Secretariat in Paris. Cf. Labour/Management Programme (LMP) Final Reports, 2002, available at: http://www.oecd.org/document/61/0,2340,en_2649_201185_1944829_1_1_1_1,00.html; Homepages of BIAC and TUAC are available at: http://biac.org/and http://www.tuac.org/en/public/index.phtml; Blanpain (note 34), 36, 40.Google Scholar
42 Ministerial Booklet (note 2), Council Decision, chapter II 1. The “exchanges of view” can also be requested by BIAC and TUAC. Individual MNEs also have the opportunity to express their views concerning the Guidelines, but only on issues involving their interests. Cf. Ministerial Booklet (note 2), Council Decision, chapter II, paras. 1–5.Google Scholar
43 See Dubin, A. Laurence & Nogellou, Rozen, Public Participation in Global Administrative Organizations, working paper, presented at the 3rd global administrative law seminar, Viterbo, 15–16 June 2007, at 26.Google Scholar
44 For example, a seminar held by TUAC on the European Works Councils and the OECD Guidelines for MNEs, available at: http://old.tuac.org/statemen/communiq/TUAC%20training%20En.pdf.Google Scholar
45 Homepage of OECD Watch, available at: http://www.oecdwatch.org/.Google Scholar
46 Ministerial Booklet (note 2). Previous revisions were carried out in 1979, 1982, 1984 and 1991. See OECD, The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises 7 (1994); Blanpain (note 34), at 34.Google Scholar
47 Ministerial Booklet (note 2), at Commentaries.Google Scholar
48 Convention on the OECD (note 24), at Art. 5a); Ministerial Booklet (note 2), at Introduction.Google Scholar
49 Ministerial Booklet (note 2), at OECD Guidelines on MNEs.Google Scholar
50 Id. at OECD Guidelines on MNEs, chapter I, para. 3.Google Scholar
51 Id. at OECD Guidelines on MNEs, chapter I, paras. 4, 5.Google Scholar
52 Id. at OECD Guidelines on MNEs, Foreword.Google Scholar
53 Id. at OECD Guidelines on MNEs, Foreword, chapters IV, V, IX.Google Scholar
54 Id. at Commentary on the OECD Guidelines for MNEs, paras. 19–29.Google Scholar
55 Id. at Commentary on the OECD Guidelines for MNEs, paras. 19–29.Google Scholar
56 Id. at Commentary on the OECD Guidelines for MNEs, paras. 30–42.Google Scholar
57 Id. at Commentary on the OECD Guidelines for MNEs, paras. 43–47.Google Scholar
58 Id. at Commentary on the OECD Guidelines for MNEs, paras. 48–52.Google Scholar
59 Id. at Commentary on the OECD Guidelines for MNEs, para. 52.Google Scholar
60 Commission of the European Communities, Directorate-General for Employment and Social Affairs, Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility: Green Paper, COM (2001) 366 final, 18 July 2001, at 6; EC Directive on the establishment of a European Works Council on a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of information and consulting employees, 94/45 of 22 September 1994. This directive established European Works Councils to inform employees in the EU of their rights and to promote the OECD Guidelines for MNEs; TUAC held seminars on the European Works Councils and the OECD Guidelines for MNEs and disseminates information, available at: http://old.tuac.org/statemen/communiq/TUAC%20training%20En.pdf.Google Scholar
61 The Committee's decisions had to be taken by consensus, they had no retrospective applicability and a case was merely used to clarify the meaning of how a provision in the Guidelines should be applied in future cases. These decisions were not binding and resulted in no penalties for violation. See Salzman, James, Decentralized Administrative Law in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 68 Law and Contemporary Problems 189, 213 (2004-2005); Klinkenberg, Michael, Die Leitsätze der OECD für multinationale Unternehmen, 101 Zeitschrift für vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft 421, 421 (2002).Google Scholar
62 Ministerial Booklet (note 2), at Council Decision chapter I, Procedural Guidance, chapter I C.Google Scholar
63 Report by he Chair, 2007 Annual Meeting of the National Contact Points, at 14, available at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/23/26/39319743.pdf.Google Scholar
64 Ministerial Booklet (note 2), Council Decision, chapter I, Procedural Guidance, chapter I.Google Scholar
65 Id. at Council Decision, chapter I, Procedural Guidance, chapter I.Google Scholar
66 Id. at Procedural Guidance, chapter I; Commentaries on the Implementation Procedures, chapter I. In effect, the current NCP structure consists of: 20 NCPs single government departments; 7 NCP multiple departments; 1 bipartite NCP (involving government and business); 9 tripartite NCPs (involving governments, business, and trade unions); and 2 quadripartite NCPs (involving governments, business, trade unions and NGOs). Report by he Chair, 2007 Annual Meeting of the National Contact Points, at 20, available at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/23/26/39319743.pdf.Google Scholar
67 Id. at Council Decision, chapter I, Procedural Guidance, chapter I.Google Scholar
68 Id. at Council Decision, chapter I 1, Procedural Guidelines, chapter I C.Google Scholar
69 Id. at Council Decision, chapter I, Procedural Guidance, chapter I.Google Scholar
70 Id. at Procedural Guidance, chapter I C.Google Scholar
71 See Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC), TUAC Submission to the OECD Annual Meeting of National Contact Points (NCPs), para. 2 (2007), available at: http://www.tuac.org/en/public/e-docs/00/00/00/72/document_doc.phtml; OECD-Watch, List of OECD Guidelines cases filed by NGOs as of October 3, 2007, available at: http://www.oecdwatch.org/docs/List_OECD_Guidelines_cases_3October2007.pdf.Google Scholar
72 Ministerial Booklet (note 2), at Procedural Guidance, chapter I C. Approximately two-thirds of the specific instances concerned MNEs’ operations in non-adhering countries, but the procedural prescriptions do not determine which NCP will be responsible for an issue that took place in a non-adhering country. In practice issues arising in a non-adhering country are generally dealt with in the home country of the MNE. See id. at Commentary on the Implementation Procedures, para. 20.Google Scholar
73 See OECD Watch, The Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Supply Chain Responsibility (2004), available at: http://www.germanwatch.org/tw/kw-sup04.pdf; Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC), TUAC Submission to the OECD Annual Meeting of National Contact Points (NCPs), paras. 41, 44 (2007), available at: http://www.tuac.org/en/public/e-docs/00/00/00/72/document_doc.phtml.Google Scholar
74 Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC), TUAC Submission to the OECD Annual Meeting of National Contact Points (NCPs) paras. 39, 44 (2007), available at: http://www.tuac.org/en/public/e-docs/00/00/00/72/document_doc.phtml.Google Scholar
75 Ministerial Booklet (note 2), at Procedural Guidance, chapter I C.Google Scholar
76 Id. at Procedural Guidance, chapter I C.Google Scholar
77 Id. at Procedural Guidance, chapter I C.Google Scholar
78 Id. at Procedural Guidance, chapter I C. This obligation is often broken by NCPs. They more often report on the proceedings when they were successful, than when they were unsuccessful. OECD-Watch, List of OECD Guidelines cases filed by NGOs as of October 3, 2007, available at: http://www.oecdwatch.org/docs/List_OECD_Guidelines_cases_3October2007.pdf.Google Scholar
79 Information available on the Homepage of the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology: http://www.bmwi.de/BMWi/Navigation/aussenwirtschaft,did=177082.html.Google Scholar
80 Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie, Jahresbericht für den Berichtszeitraum Juni 2006-Juni 2007, at 1, available at: http://www.bmwi.de/BMWi/Redaktion/PDF/M-O/oecd-nks-jahresbericht,property=pdf,bereich=bmwi,sprache=de,rwb=true.pdf.Google Scholar
81 Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie, Verantwortliches unternehmerisches Handeln im Ausland, “Die OECD-Leitsätze für multinationale Unternehmen”, (2006), available at: http://www.bmwi.de/BMWi/Navigation/aussenwirtschaft,did=26126.html Google Scholar
82 The statements of the German NCP with regard to these three cases are available for download at: http://www.bmwi.de/BMWi/Navigation/aussenwirtschaft,did=178196.html.Google Scholar
83 Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie, Verantwortliches unternehmerisches Handeln im Ausland, “Die OECD-Leitsätze für multinationale Unternehmen” (2006), available at: http://www.bmwi.de/BMWi/Navigation/aussenwirtschaft,did=26126.html.Google Scholar
84 Report by the Chair, 2007 Annual Meeting of the National Contact Points, at 6, available at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/23/26/39319743.pdf.Google Scholar
85 Convention on the OECD (note 24), at Art. 1.Google Scholar
86 Blanpain (note 34), at 34.Google Scholar
87 Rules of Procedure of the Organisation (note 37), at rules 22(a), 18(a)(iii).Google Scholar
88 Resolution of the Council on the Terms of Reference of the Investment Committee, C(2004)3, 22 April 2004, Art. 3 no. 3.Google Scholar
89 Committee on International Investment and MNEs (CIME), Experience with the OECD Guidelines for MNEs, DAFFE/IME(98)15, 3 November 1998, para. 11; Blanpain (note 34), 31.Google Scholar
90 Rules of Procedure of the Organisation (note 37), at rule 21(b).Google Scholar
91 The Investment Committee: Strategy and Organisation, ‚Mandate of the Working Party of the Investment Committee', DAF/INV(2004)1, 20 September 2004, para. 1(i).Google Scholar
92 Argentina (1997), Brazil (1997), Chile (1997), Egypt (2007), Estonia (2001), Israel (2002), Latvia (2004), Lithuania (2001), Romania (2005) and Slovenia (2002).Google Scholar
93 Convention on the OECD (note 24), Art. 5(a); cf. above at Part B I 2a.Google Scholar
94 See CIME, Aide-mémoire of the informal consultations between BIAC, TUAC, NGOs and the CIME Working Party on the Guidelines on the Review of the OECD Guidelines for MNEs, held on 14 April 2000, DAFFE/IME(2000)13, 15 May 2000, paras. 9–13.Google Scholar
95 CIME, Aide-mémoire of the informal consultations between BIAC, TUAC, NGOs and the CIME Working Party on the Guidelines on the Review of the OECD Guidelines for MNEs, held on 14 April 2000, DAFFE/IME(2000)13, 15 May 2000, paras. 9–13.Google Scholar
96 Ministerial Booklet (note 2), at Procedural Guidance, II 3 b): “The Committee will consider a substantiated submission by an adhering country or an advisory body on whether an NCP is responsible with regard to its handling of specific instances.” Ministerial Booklet (note 2), at Commentary on the Implementation Procedures, para. 4: “[The Committee] is the OECD body responsible for overseeing the functioning of the Guidelines”; see Report of the International Law Association, Berlin Conference (2004), Accountability of International Organisations, reprinted in: 1 International Organizations Law Review 221, 237 (2004).Google Scholar
97 Compare above at A I.Google Scholar
98 Pulp mill project: CEDHA appeals to OECD Investment Committee over Finnish NCP handling of Botnia S.A. specific instance, 23 January 2007, available at: http://www.oecdwatch.org/docs/CEDHA_vs_Botnia_PR_InvCom.pdf.Google Scholar
99 Ministerial Booklet (note 2), at Procedural Guidance, chapter II 3c.Google Scholar
100 They are contained in the annual reports of TUAC and in the annual reports of the Investment Committee on the NCPs.Google Scholar
101 Ministerial Booklet (note 2), at Commentary on the Implementation Procedures of the Guidelines for MNEs, para. 23.Google Scholar
102 See Report of the International Law Association, Berlin Conference (2004), Accountability of International Organisations, reprinted in 1 International Organizations Law Review 221, 237 (2004).Google Scholar
103 In July 2004, the Swiss NCP made a formal request for clarification to the Investment Committee concerning the applicability of the Guidelines and the admissibility of the case because the company was based in Switzerland and not in a foreign country. In its reply the Committee recognized that the Guidelines were applicable to both domestic and international operations of companies, but it stressed the fact that the implementation procedures involving NCPs had been created to deal with issues arising in the context of international investment and in conclusion merely encouraged the Swiss NCP to address the issue in terms of how to further the effectiveness of the Guidelines. Cf. Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC), TUAC Internal analysis of the treatment of cases raised with national contact points February 2001-April 2007, at 18, available at: http://www.oecdwatch.org/docs/TUAC_ListOfCases_Feb2007.pdf.Google Scholar
104 Compare above at B I.Google Scholar
105 The procedures taken to revise the Guidelines in 2000 are the result of the lessons learned from the experience the OECD made during the negotiations for a Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) in 1998 when NGO opposition took the OECD and the MAI negotiators by surprise and forced the supporting governments to drop out of the negotiations. See Günter Metzges, NGO-Kampagnen und ihr Einfluss auf internationale Verhandlungen 69 (2006); Salzman (note 21), at 189, 196.Google Scholar
106 Amnesty International, ANPED, Alliance of Northern Peoples for Environment and Development, Friends of the, Friends of the Earth, GERMANWATCH, OXFAM, Reform the World Campaign, SOMO, Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations, TOBI, NGO Task Force on Business and Industry; Tradecraft Exchange, World-Wide Fund for Nature. See Working Party on the Guidelines, OECD Guidelines for MNEs Proposals Submitted by BIAC TUAC and NGOs, DAFFE/IME/WPG/RD(2000)16, 9 May 2000.Google Scholar
107 Committee for Investment and Multinational Enterprises, Aide-mémoire of the informal consultations between BIAC, TUAC, NGOs and the CIME Working Party on the Guidelines on the Review of the OECD Guidelines for MNEs, DAFFE/IME(2000)13, 15 May 2000, para. 2.Google Scholar
108 Report of the International Law Association, Berlin Conference (2004), Accountability of International Organisations, reprinted in: 1 International Organizations Law Review 221, 230 (2004).Google Scholar
109 Jan Klabbers, The Changing Image of International Organisations, in The Legitimacy of International Organisations 221, 244 (J.-C. Coicaud & V. Heiskanen eds., 2001).Google Scholar
110 Steve Charnovitz, Nongovernmental Organisations and International Law, 100 American Journal of International Law 348, 363 (2006); Ruth W. Grant & Robert O. Keohane, Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics, 99/1 American Political Science Review 29, 38 (2005); Günter Metzges, NGO-Kampagnen und ihr Einfluss auf internationale Verhandlungen 189 (2006).Google Scholar
111 Report of the International Law Association, Berlin Conference (2004), Accountability of International Organisations, reprinted in: 1 International Organizations Law Review 221, 229 (2004).Google Scholar
112 Report by the Chair, 2007 Annual Meeting of the National Contact Points, (2007) available at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/23/26/39319743.pdf, forms part of the forthcoming Annual Report on the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises 2007.Google Scholar
113 Compare above at Part B IV 1.Google Scholar
114 See. Ministerial Booklet (note 2), The Procedural Guidance, chapter I C 4. NCPs are advised to take appropriate steps to protect sensitive business information, cf. Ministerial Booklet (note 2), Commentary on the Implementation Procedure of the Guidelines for MNEs, no. 19.Google Scholar
115 Compare above at Part B IV 1.Google Scholar
116 Report by the Chair, 2007 Annual Meeting of the National Contact Points 15 (2007), available at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/23/26/39319743.pdf; see Michael Klinkenberg, Die Leitsätze der OECD für multinationale Unternehmen, 101 Zeitschrift für vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft 421, 428 (2002); Cornelia Heydenreich, Die OECD-Leitsätze für multinationale Unternehmen – Ein wirksames Instrument zur Unternehmensregulierung? 7, May 2005, available at: http://www.germanwatch.org/tw/kw05ls.pdf.Google Scholar
117 For a critical assessment of the United States’ implementation of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, see Christopher N. Franciose, A Critical Assessment of the United States’ Implementation of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, 30 Boston College Intl & Comparative Law Review 229, 232 (2007).Google Scholar
118 Zerk (note 18), at 243.Google Scholar
119 Compare above at B V.Google Scholar
- 15
- Cited by