Human rights in a frenzied time
Posted: July 27, 2008 Filed under: China, Law | Tags: China, Human rights, Law Leave a comment »
Otto Malmgren LL.M, Senior Program Officer, Norwegian Centre for Human Rights (University of Oslo) and guest researcher at Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Institute of Law (Beijing) ((otto.malmgren@nchr.uio.no))
.
Since before China was awarded the 29th Olympic Games in 2001 ‘human rights’ has been a focus point for all cooperation with China, at least on the political arena. No foreign politician could travel to China and come away with not pressing the regime on a number of issues ranging from torture, suspected extreme death penalty numbers and denial of justice, to persecution of dissidents and blatant discrimination of minority peoples and religious groups. However, after China won the bid, this attention only got stronger. The Chinese response towards the outside has been a paradoxical combination of indignant outrage and apologetic developmental argumentation, making both true claims of fantastic developments in living standards for a large portion of the Chinese people. And while perhaps less true claims of effective protection of forty-odd constitutional rights and freedoms are made, some critical discourse on human rights issues within its borders has been steadily developing. However, in the months running up to the Beijing Games this discourse seems to have dwindled to nothing. Well, almost anyway.
After the farmer activist Yang Chunlin was detained in February of his open letter titled “We Want Human Rights, not the Olympics”,[1] Minister of Foreign Affairs, Yang Jiechi, responded to international criticism with the following statement; “No one will get arrested because he said that human rights are more important than the Olympics. This is impossible. Ask 10 people from the street to face public security officers and ask them to say ‘human rights are more important than the Olympics’ 10 times or even 100 times, and I will see which security officer would put him in jail.” This seemed to close the door on the official human rights discussions in China, at least until the middle of July when the government felt compelled to ensure that there has been “[n]o ‘dissident’ arrested for [the sake of] Games’ security,” stating that such accusations are untrue and groundless.[2] Others seem to disagree.
Yang Chunlin was eventually sentenced to five years in prison in March for “inciting subversion of state power”, and the detention, harassment and persecution of a large number of activist, lawyers and organizations continue to be reported from within China.[3] Although the message seems to have come through and the domestic critical discourse on the issue has been effectively silenced, and subsequent debates have been careful at least not to formulate themselves within a human rights vocabulary, the official distrust towards proponents of human rights related issues such as HIV/AIDS, environmental activism, minority autonomy, rights defenders continues. All this seems to be, as Amnesty puts it, “occurring not in spite of the Olympics, but actually because of the Olympics.”[4] However, the conclusion often heard from Chinese lawyers and activists on the quick paced regression on rights guarantees in China, is largely limited to an international audience, and is not a part of a larger public debate within China.
The issue of human rights is obviously of such a sensitive nature that even positive developments are passed over in relative silence. The Chinese government’s willingness to shoulder further international obligations through the recent ratifications of both the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child Optional Protocol on Children in Armed Conflict and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – the latter would seem most natural considering China hosting the 13th Paralympic Games in September – have unfortunately only seen fleeting domestic mention (not counting English language press), and even less in the way of international attention (despite the informative attempts by the Chinese government). Furthermore, ample evidence – although sometimes anecdotal – reveal several initiatives and measures in recent months to place difficult issues on the agenda, such as the abolishment of the Reeducation through Labor system, reemergence of the Supreme People’s Court’s death penalty review procedures, and stabs at increasing intra-Party pluralism. Yet, the overshadowing concerns for harmony and stability seem to even reduce these issues to headlines and little more. National and international conferences on human rights issues has been cancelled or postponed indefinitely, and the publication of human rights related materials not directly sanctioned by the government is strongly discouraged. Perhaps the failure of the February government White Paper on rule of law to make the standard observations on the future ratification of the UN Covenant of Civil and Political Rights could be considered a suitable illustration of the political temperature in the country, at least at the time some Chinese scholars were in private finding this a telling development.
Of course, any human rights discourse would have had to compete with a perfect storm of all-consuming events over the last few months. Starting and ending with natural catastrophes, Chinese society, media, ‘blogosphere’ and everyday life has been torn between frenzied nationalism and feverish despair, eventually leaving little room for a discussion about little else, not the least human rights. The dissatisfied grumbling over the governments handling of the snow and ice disaster during the Chinese New Years’ celebration was eventually taken over by the reemerging questioning of foreign concern for Chinese engagement in the Sudan, eventually drawing little response from the Chinese community. Any concern was sharply broken off by the 15 March riots in Lhasa and the following repercussions in and around traditionally Tibetan areas. The official response was largely formulated in a disbelieving anger over petulant minority criminals led by foreign forces, and any attempts within China to negotiate a more careful evaluation of the March riots were met with the wrath of the Chinese ‘netizens’. These events blended ominously with the Paris leg of the Olympic torch relay, which ended in a public relations mayhem for French public security authorities and contributed to stoking the fires in the increasingly vociferous Chinese national pride. And when Chinese students in Seoul started mixing up freedom of speech with violence, the government had no other choice but to express meek support for the students’ acts – anything else would have been unpatriotic.
In the meantime, foreign media supplied government media and internet nationalists with sufficient ammunition for rather strong arguments of anti-China sentiments. By conflating the Chinese engagement – or lack thereof – in the Sudan (Darfur) conflict, Tibetan independence and the violent response to the Lhasa riots, political boycott
of the opening ceremony, and the general concerns for human rights issues in China leading up to the Olympic Games, it created a situation so complex and – for Chinese – so threatening that it brought frustration and indignation even to usual system critics. When CNN commentator Jack Cafferty made his “goons and thugs” comment, showing a certain lack of fingerspitzgefühl, it was just added as another general statement of foreign perception of China further confirming the sentiments represented at anti-cnn.com - a website set up by a 23 year old student “to expose the lies and distortions in the western media.” Any further qualification of Cafferty’s statement was discredited as an attempt to foment discord between the government and the people of China. The public response in China was overwhelmingly supportive of the government, and the continued perceived international criticism of China and the Chinese eventually reawakened a long-time “human rights tiredness” among many, turning any human rights questions into a negative. As was observed to a Norwegian newspaper recently in response to the last few months’ China bashing media frenzy; “Human rights are bullshit.” Whether or not the criticisms of China are deserved or not remains for the time being beyond the domestic discourse, despite attempts by domestic liberal media to point out inconsistencies in the Chinese patriotic response. This self-righteous nationalism will probably remain the legacy of the events during the spring of 2008.
Just when things were quieting down, the torch had completed its difficult international tour and started its far more harmonious domestic tour, and the final preparations for the Games could commence – nature struck. The devastating 8.0 Richter scale earthquake in Sichuan left China in shock and in the hands of the largest humanitarian disaster China has faced since the 1976 Tangshan earthquake. While the Chinese people rediscovered a national solidarity among the rubble of the many collapsed schools, the disaster also left the government open for a new round of critical remarks. Shoddy construction and lack of funds left thousands of children dead under the rubble, and the grieving parents search for closure put the local governments on the spot. Accusations of corruption, ineffective governance and abuse of powers shamed the government into action with new instructions to pay more attention to the grievances of the people, but the focus on stability over all other concerns ahead of the Olympic games has put limits on the tolerance for complaints, and reporting and investigations into contributing factors to the magnitude of the Sichuan disaster was quickly banned, leaving many without answers or closure. The persistent questioning by the survivors is increasingly met with vilification, just as other prior and subsequent protests are either disregarded as actions of mal-contents subject to administrative sanctions or even subjected to criminal proceedings.
Concerns for nationalism, anti-terrorism, territorial integrity and a successful Beijing Games are thought to warrant all and any limitations on individual rights for the time being, and largely overshadow any rights discourse in China. The key being social stability and harmony, however, these goals are quite out of tune with the often draconian measures employed to achieve them. Next year China’s human rights situation will be placed under the scrutiny of the UN Human Rights Council through the mandatory universal periodic review. One can only expect increased focus on human rights in China, and only hope that the Chinese authorities will respond with tolerance and openness to domestic concerns.
[1] Chinese Human Rights Defenders, “Activist Yang Chunlin Tried for Demanding Human Rights Prior to the Olympics”, 2008.02.19[2] The Telegraph, “China denies arrests over Beijing Olympics”, 2008.02.29, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1580333/China-denies-arrests-over-Beijing-Olympics.html, last accessed 2008.07.17[3] See e.g. Chinese Human Rights Defenders web pages for details on individual cases (http://www.crd-net.org/Article/ShowClass.asp?ClassID=9)[4] Amnesty International, “People’s Republic of China The Olympics countdown – crackdown on activists threatens Olympics legacy”, ASA 17/050/2008, 2008.04.01
Norsk-kinesisk menneskerettighetsdialog: mer enn diplomati og formelle møter?
Posted: July 27, 2008 Filed under: China, Law | Tags: China, Human rights, labour rights, Law, Nordic countries Leave a comment »
Cecilie Figenschou Bakke Director, China Programme, Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, University of Oslo ((c.f.bakke@nchr.uio.no))
.
Hva er bakgrunnen for at Kina valgte å innlede bilaterale dialoger om menneskerettigheter med land som Norge, Canada og Australia på midten av 1990 tallet? Innlegget presenterer de tre nivå som kjennetegner den norsk-kinesiske dialogen og gir en kort presentasjon av akademisk samarbeid om menneskerettigheter mellom Norge og Kina. Hovedformålet med samarbeidet er å bygge opp forsknings- og undervisningskompetanse om menneskerettigheter blant kinesiske forskere og ved kinesiske universitet. Dette fordi flere sentrale akademiske miljøer i Kina spiller en viktig rolle i forhold til det pågående reformarbeidet. For flere av prosjektene på menneskerettighetsutdanning er det inngått et tett samarbeid med institusjoner i Sverige og Danmark.
På begynnelsen av 1990 tallet var Kina utsatt for sterk kritikk i FNs menneskerettighetskommisjon (som nå er erstattet av menneskerettighetsrådet). I 1996-1998 foretok derfor kinesiske myndigheter nye strategiske grep for å komme kritikerne i møte. De signerte to av FNs hovedkonvensjoner på menneskerettområdet (1) konvensjonen om økonomiske, sosiale og kulturelle rettigheter i 1996 og (2) konvensjonen om sivile og politiske rettigheter i 1998. I tillegg inviterte de til dialog om menneskerettigheter med noen få utvalgte land, deriblant Norge, Canada og Australia. Kritikken stilnet men til gjengjeld fikk dialoglandene mulighet til å diskutere menneskerettigheter mer dyptgående med kinesisk side. Det er mange kritiske innvendinger mot dialogene, deriblant at den viktige debatten om menneskerettigheter i Kina føres med enkeltland i stedet for i åpne bilaterale prosesser i FN. Dialogprosessene er også relativt lukket og lite informasjon når offentligheten.[1] Det er viktig med et sterkt og kritisk søkelys på dialogmetoden, men, når dialogene diskuteres fokuseres det mest på de årlige møtene som er av mer offisiell karakter. Det som ikke har kommet like godt frem er det langsiktige prosjektsamarbeid mellom utenlandske og kinesiske partnere som har sprunget ut av dialogene. Dette er konkrete og praktiske prosjekt som har bidratt til å bygge kompetanse og kunnskap om menneskerettigheter blant viktige samfunnsaktører i Kina.
“Store problemer med menneskerettighetene i kombinasjon med et forbedringspotensial gjennom dialog og kontakt” var den formelle grunnen til at Norge i 1997 ønsket å etablere en formell dialog om menneskerettigheter med Kina.[2] Den norsk-kinesiske dialogen defineres som bredere enn de årlige møtene, og kan sies å foregå på tre nivå. På nivå én finner det sted årlige politiske konsultasjoner på viseministernivå, og disse foregår bak lukkede dører. Men, i forbindelse med konsultasjonene arrangeres det også større rundebordsmøter. De første årene var deltakerne ved disse møtene i hovedsak representanter fra de to lands departementer, men etter hvert har et stadig større antall institusjoner og organisasjoner fra det sivile samfunn blitt invitert med (deriblant flere forskningsinstitusjoner, advokat- og legeforeninger, Amnesty og Den norske Helsingforskomite). Rundebordsmøtene kan sees som nivå to og fungerer som en viktig møteplass for norske og kinesiske aktører. De større åpnings- og avslutningssesjonene foregår i plenum, hvor også pressen har deltatt siden 2006. I tillegg er det etablert mindre tematiske arbeidsgrupper, hvor mer konkrete diskusjoner finner sted. Fra norsk side har det vært et uttalt ønske om å ha tematisk kontinuitet slik at man kan diskutere mer i dybden og over lengre tid. Siden 2003 har fokus vært på fangers og arrestanters rettigheter samt arbeidstakerrettigheter. I 2006 ble det også etablert en egen arbeidsgruppe på minoriteters rettigheter, med eget feltbesøk til Xinjiang provinsen i forbindelse med Beijing-møtet i juni. De ulike arbeidsgruppen kommer frem til egne sluttrapporter som presenteres til plenum under avslutningssesjonen.
De årlige dialogmøtene støtter de opp om nivå tre i dialogen som består av en rekke konkrete samarbeidsprosjekt som utvikles mellom aktørene og gjennomføres gjennom hele året. Kinaprogrammet ved Senter for Menneskerettigheter (SMR) kom til som et resultat av dialogen i 1997 og har etablert samarbeid om menneskerettigheter med et stort antall kinesiske akademiske institusjoner. For flere av prosjektene, deriblant menneskerettighetsutdanning av jurister, har det vært et tett nordisk samarbeid med Dansk Institutt for Menneskerettigheter (DIHR) og Raoul Wallenberg Instituttet (RWI) i Sverige. Andre sentrale aktører i Norge, som Næringslivets Hovedorganisasjon (NHO) og fagforeningen LO, har nært samarbeid med sine respektive partnere i det kinesiske arbeidsliv. Prosjekter på bedriftenes samfunnsansvar (CSR), kollektive forhandliger og trepartssystemet har foregått over flere år. Også flere andre norske aktører, som Den norske Legeforening, Sivilombudsmannen og Den Norske Advokatforening har, med økonomisk støtte fra utenriksdepartementet og rådgivning fra SMR, etablert direkte samarbeid med sine kinesiske partnere i forlengelsen av dialogmøtene.
Det er store begrensninger på ytringsfriheten, spesielt for kinesiske grupper og enkeltindivider som opptrer “aktivistisk” eller tar opp spørsmål og som utfordrer kommunistpartiets legitimitet eller sosial stabilitet i Kina. I forberedelsene til OL kan det se ut som om det har blitt strammet inn på hva som aksepteres av debatt og ytringer. Dette for å sikre at ingen skader Kinas image eller gjennomføringen av et vellykket sportsarrangement. Flere institusjoner og organisasjoner har blitt bedt om å ikke engasjere seg i menneskerettighetsprosjekter i 2008 “i hvert fall ikke før etter OL”. Flere internasjonale konferanser og møter har blitt avlyst, og det er også en merkbart større skepsis til utenlandske prosjekt i Kina. [3]
Men under normale omstendigheter gis sentrale akademiske miljøer i Kina rom for å delta i debatter om viktige spørsmål angående menneskerettighetene. Dette gjelder blant annet diskusjoner om tortur, rettsikkerhet, diskriminering, og rettighetsbeskyttelse for svake grupper i samfunnet. Ett eksempel er den nye loven om kontrakter i arbeidslivet som ble iverksatt fra 1. januar 2008. Forberedelsene til loven inkluderte en bred offentlig høringsrunde initiert av myndighetene, og åpen diskusjon i fagmiljøer og kinesisk presse. Utenlandsk samarbeid med akademikere er viktig fordi det kan bidra til å øke deres kunnskap om sentrale menneskerettighetsstandarder, noe som igjen kan spille inn på pågående reformarbeid. Med utgangspunkt i de internasjonalt vedtatte menneskerettighetsnormene samarbeider Kinaprogrammet derfor med akademiske institusjoner og forskere i Kina om temaer som fri rettshjelp, kvinners rettigheter, ikke-diskriminering i arbeidslivet, religionsfrihet og sist men ikke minst utdanning i internasjonale menneskerettigheter og produksjon av lærebokmateriale og fagbøker til utdanning og forskning.
Spørsmålet er selvsagt om slikt prosjektarbeid kan gi result
ater i et større perspektiv. Det å måle forbedring av menneskelige rettigheter på nasjonalt nivå er mildt sagt en metodisk utfordring. Det er et stort antall internasjonale aktører som arbeider med menneskerettigheter og rettsreformer i Kina, og det er vanskelig å peke på at det er spesielle enkeltprosjekter som helt konkret har vært de som har bidratt til endring. Men, om man skal oppsummere mer enn 10 års samarbeid med Kina, er det muligvis ett område med små, men viktige fremskritt, hvor den norske og nordiske innsatsen kan sies å ha hatt en effekt.
Gitt at det var lite kunnskap om menneskerettigheter internt i Kina på slutten av 1990-tallet ble menneskerettighetsutdanning tidlig et prioritert område fra norsk side. Og for å undervise trenger man bøker. I 2002 kom den aller første læreboka (på kinesisk) om internasjonale menneskerettigheter ut i Kina. Boka var støttet av Kinaprogrammet ved SMR , og resultat av et flere års samarbeid med China University of Political Science and Law (CUPL) og Foreign Affairs College i Beijing. En stor del av opplaget på 3000 ble distribuert gratis til universiteter og bibliotek omkring i landet og boka er fortsatt i bruk ved universitet i Kina. De senere år har det skjedd en svært positiv utvikling ved at nye kinesiske tekstbøker, initiert av kinesiske forskere, kommer ut på markedet og tas i bruk ved kinesiske læresteder.
Kurs og seminarer om menneskerettigheter har vært et naturlig satsningsområde for Kinaprogrammet, og flere av aktivitetene har blitt gjennomført i samarbeid med DIHR og RWI i tillegg til lokale kinesiske partnere. Menneskerettighetsundervisning var i begynnelsen svært følsomt for kineserne og det første nordiske treukers intensivkurs for jurister, arrangert i Jilin i 2001, ble i sin helhet filmet av myndighetene, og stemningen var anspent. Et definitivt gjennombrudd for menneskerettighetsundervisning skjedde senere samme år da det kinesiske utdanningsdepartementet ga tillatelse til å starte universitetskurs i menneskerettigheter. For våre kinesiske samarbeidspartnere ble det dermed lettere å få tillatelse til å kjøre kurs med kinesiske og utenlandske forelesere. Siden 2001 har man, gjennom den nordiske innsatsen og sammen med kinesiske universitetspartnere, gitt intensivkurs i internasjonale menneskerettigheter (på 2-3 uker) til over 200 kinesiske jurister. Mange av disse er involvert i undervisningen ved de mer enn 20 universitetene hvor man i dag kan studere internasjonale menneskerettigheter i Kina. Det er ved disse kinesiske juridiske fakultet at neste generasjon dommere, advokater og jurister skal utdannes. I tillegg finnes det i dag kunnskap om menneskerettigheter ved partiskoler og fagforeningscollege omkring i Kina. Siden 2005 har også Kinaprogrammet satt opp separate kurs for universitetslærere fra de mer fattige vestlige provinsene i Kina. Kursene kjøres på kinesisk og gir mulighet til å inkludere flere deltakere fra områder som Tibet, Xinjiang og indre Mongolia. Mange av deltakerne ønsker nå å starte opp undervisning ved sine hjemmeuniversitet, og forhåpentligvis vil man kunne se mye av den samme positive utviklingen som ved de større universitetene i Øst-Kina.
Det kreves balansekunst å drive dialog og samarbeid med et land som er så stort og komplekst som Kina. Landet har oppnådd enormt mye siden reformene startet i 1978, blant annet en sterk økonomisk vekst og betydelig fattigdomsreduksjon. Men, det er fortsatt enorme utfordringer å ta tak i, økonomisk, sosialt og ikke minst politisk. Flere viktige reformer og debatter er satt litt i bakgrunnen gitt vårens dramatiske hendelser i Tibet og det forestående OL i Beijing (ratifisering av FNs konvensjon for sivile og politiske rettigheter (SP) og forholdet mellom SP og nasjonale lover, RETL reform etc.). Men, flere nye lover som regulerer arbeidslivet, (f.eks. Contract Law og Employment Promotion Law og Labour Arbitration Law effektive fra våren 2008), er eksempler på at noe av reformarbeidet har kunnet ferdigstilles samtidig med forberedelsen til OL. Dette til tross for økende forsiktighet og mindre åpen debatt internt i Kina.
Det er vanskelig å forutse hva som vil være den videre utvikling etter at OL og Paralympics avsluttes. Vårens hendelser har helt klart vist at Kina har opparbeidet seg større selvsikkerhet vis a vis det internasjonale samfunn når det gjelder å forvare nasjonal politikk og interne anliggende; spesielt om rettighetskrav anses å utfordre kinesisk stabilitet og nasjonal sikkerhet. En dialogtretthet kan også merkes fra kinesisk side, og dialog kan vise seg å bli et mindre effektivt virkemiddel for å fremme internasjonale standarder i årene fremover. Verken Norge eller de nordiske land kan løse Kinas menneskerettighetsproblemer, dét kan bare kineserne selv gjøre. Det er derfor viktig å opprettholde et trykk utenifra og krav om overholdelse av internasjonale standarder på de områder hvor kinesiske myndigheter har forpliktet seg. Håpet er at lovende reformer innefor ulike rettighetsområder blir videreført i Kina og at utenlandsk samarbeid med kinesiske aktører i det politiske, administrative og akademiske system fortsetter, uavhengig av hva som skjer i forbindelse med OL.
* Cand Polit (statsvitenskap) med hovedoppgave om forholdet mellom Kina og Vietnam. Cand. Mag (sosialantropologi, statsvitenskap og kulturforståelse). Bloginnlegget tar utgangspunkt i en kronikk skrevet for Norsk Dagblad i samarbeid med Koen Wellens. De norske prosjektene som nevnes her er de som er direkte støttet av det norske utenriksdepartement som den del av dialogen med Kina. Det finnes et stort antall norske bistandsprosjekter i Kina (direkte støttet av den norske bistandsorganisasjonen NORAD) som ikke nevnes her.
[1] For et kritisk blikk på dialogarbeidet se f.eks: S. Woodman og C. Samdup (2005) Canada’s bilateral human rights dialogue with China:considerations for a policy review. Briefing paper for Rights and Democracy, S. Woodman (2004) Bilateral aid to improve human rights. Donors need to adopt a more coherent and thoughtful strategy. In Perspectives Chinoises 51, 28-49.[2] Se mer om dialog på hjemmesiden til det norske utenriksdepartement: http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/ud/tema/menneskerettigheter/menneskerettighetsdialoger.html?id=506849[3] Samtaler med forskere i akademiske miljøer og ulike organisasjoner i Kina og Hong Kong, feltbesøk oktober 2007 og april 2008.
Promoting the human rights essence of CSR in China
Posted: July 21, 2008 Filed under: China | Tags: China, corporate social responsibility, Human rights Leave a comment »
Mads Holst Jensen Adviser, Ph.D., The Human Rights & Business Project, The Danish Institute for Human Rights (DIHR) (mhj@humanrights.dk)
. .
Introduction
By the mid 1990s, the CSR wave hit China and its introduction can be seen as a process. Initially, CSR was conceived of almost entirely as demands placed on Chinese companies by Western business associates. This conception has certainly survived to the present day, but from the early 21st century on we have seen a rapid increase in CSR projects based on multi-stakeholder engagement and partnerships that aim at step-by-step progress to pave the way from Chinese realities to CSR ideals. Increasing Chinese ownership for CSR is the basic thrust of this process and it yields promising results. However, the essence of CSR should remain intact throughout the process and therefore we need a common language to guide it.
The first and second principles of the UN Global Compact manifestly establish the key role of human rights for business. Human rights laws have proved their practical and theoretical worth and combining reliability and flexibility human rights laws offer an adequate framework for a common language for standards that stay the same in essence despite fluctuations in business practices and contexts.
Promoting human rights and business in China does at times seem like fighting an up-hill battle with two fronts. One front results from the fact that addressing human rights issues is still controversial in China. The other front is resulting from the fact that concern for responsibility and sustainability in a broader perspective all too rarely matches up with concern for short term survival in an environment of relentless competition. This problem is part of reality for all companies around the world and it becomes no less real in China often playing a key role in “a race to the bottom” with other countries of similar status in the global value chains. At the same time, China’s integration and gradual ascend in these value chains result in emerging acknowledgement of the fact that compliance with international standards is the most viable way forward.
In this short blog-posting I will sketch our work on China at the Human Rights & Business Project of the Danish Institute for Human Rights (DIHR)
Setting the scene
To some extent, the conventional Chinese saying, “take Chinese learning as the essence and Western learning for its utility” (zhongti xiyong ????) epitomizes the Chinese reception of CSR. Part of the process of translating CSR into the Chinese context consists in comparing the concept to what is considered essentially Chinese. The Chinese tradition of business ethics is often highlighted as a predecessor of CSR. This argument implies sheer generalizations about CSR as well as the Chinese past, but still, Chinese business ethics scholars have developed and expounded it for more than a decade now. Representatives of Chinese business also share the notion that CSR does correspond to Chinese realities, past and present.
The Chinese government expresses commitment to promote common prosperity and equity under the concept of “Harmonious Society” and in this context it comes close to expressing endorsement of human rights. For instance, the declaration of The 2005 GoTone-Nanchang International Forum of Constructing Harmonious Society and Corporate Social Responsibility of October 2005, which is commonly recognized to be among the very first CSR forums organized at the government level in China, brings signals to that effect:
“[..] those basic conceptions in terms of human rights, employee, environment, anti-corruption, etc in the Global Compact sponsored by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan are basically the same as those endorsed by the human-entered strategies of the Chinese government”
However, the fact that there are overlaps between Western CSR and Chinese preconceptions does not imply full assimilation of the former into the latter. In effect, this would lead to a kind of one-way communication in which the essence of CSR is getting lost in translation, so to speak. In stead, it is important that Western and Chinese actors meet half-way to create a common language for CSR. This leads to the introduction of human rights and business. DIHR employs the partnership approach as the basis.
The partnership approach of DIHR
International human rights organizations play an important role in pointing to and documenting violations of human rights by the Chinese government, while the approach of DIHR is to support the development of viable institutions and enhance the human rights capacity of stakeholders within the country. The two methods supplement each other and are part of the same struggle.
The partnership approach adopted by DIHR for our work in China has as its underlying motive and guiding parameter mutual understanding and respect between the partner and DIHR as well as the partner’s self-determination, professional integrity and ability to promote human rights in a politically sensitive environment. DIHR defines partnership as a form of cooperation based on joint planning, commonly agreed objectives and shared values for the promotion and protection of human rights, rule of law and the fundamental human rights values. Based on the partnership approach we are in the process of conducting the following four key projects concerning China.
Developing the China-specific HRCA Quick Check
The HRCA Quick Check is a diagnostic tool designed to help companies detect human rights issues with regard to their business operations, associates and all other stakeholders. It is based on a 6-year process of research and consultation involving representatives from over 100 companies, human rights organizations and international specialists and researchers.
The Human Rights & Business Project website offers free access to an interactive, computerized version of the tool (https://www.humanrightsbusiness.org/), as well as PDF versions translated into several languages, including Chinese (http://www.humanrightsbusiness.org/020_project_publications.htm)
Launched at the UN Global Compact Summit in Shanghai in 2005, the HRCA Quick Check is at the forefront of the human rights and business approach in China. To ensure optimal Chinese participation and ownership, we have produced a Chinese translation of the standard version of the tool. Currently, we are developing a China-specific version that targets the issues most relevant and challenging in the Chinese context and offers advice on how to tackle these issues.
Developing China-specific CSR training
Developing material and methodologies for CSR training that adequately appeals to a Chinese audience is the key objective of the project. Moreover, the project is based on a train-the-trainers format, which ensures enhanced impact of the project’s capacity building approach. The China-specific CSR training has the following features:
- Draws on a range of experiences with CSR training in China, including consultation with
a selection of organizations in China specialized in CSR training.
- Conducted by Chinese-speaking trainers
- Addresses staff as well as management
- Enhances CSR performance for all kinds of businesses in China; Chinese associates and suppliers constitute a key target group
- Based on systematic training material specially developed to fit the Chinese context and appeal to Chinese training participants
- Communication between staff and management to enhance CSR performance is a key priority of the training; there will be a focus on capacity building for staff representatives
Launching the updated China Country Risk Assessment (China CRA)
Originally published in 2005 the China CRA has been comprehensively updated to reflect the dynamic nature of Chinese law and practice. The full CRA, totalling nearly 200 pages, compiles detailed information on Chinese law, common labour practices, international regulations, risk proximity to company operations and management recommendations. The full China CRA includes nine Focal Areas summarizing the most urgent human rights issues for companies to confront as they manage Chinese operations or supply networks. Moreover, a Background Sheet is included with relevant information on Chinese economy, demographics, history, government, human rights challenges and recent developments. All of these sections have been significantly updated from the original version.
To reflect the ongoing risks faced by migrant workers, a Focal Area has been added with additional background and risk information on the specific challenges of applying human rights to China’s nearly 160 million ‘floating’ workers. Moreover, a special section of the Background Sheet is summarizing the major developments in legislation, including the recently implemented Labour Contract Law, Property Law and Employment Promotion Law. These developments are described in detail in the relevant sections of the full China CRA. The sections on freedom of association and trade unions have been reformulated to reflect the rapidly changing context in Chinese law and common practice and a new section addresses internet privacy that has emerged as major area of concern in recent years.
Rights of Migrant Workers in China – A DIHR Human Rights Programme
It is the overall aim of this three-year programme to achieve increased respect, formally and substantially, for the rights of migrants in China and compliance with existing human rights standards. In particular the focus is on enabling the partners to improve relevant labour laws affecting the situation of migrant workers as well as to contribute to a practical improvement of their conditions including an improved access to dispute resolution mechanisms and improved working conditions. The immediate objective of the programme is to contribute to the access of migrant workers in Beijing and in the Western part of China in particular to strengthened mechanisms of labour dispute prevention and resolution both formally and in practice.
One key element of the programme is aimed at the private sector. Training and other activities will be carried out to inspire an operational understanding of and commitment to the protection of the rights of migrants into participating companies.
