A Case Study On Human Rights Issues In The Ship Recycling Industry

In February 2018, the UN OHCHR sought clarification of information about the facts where the Maersk allegedly inflicted harms on human rights in the South Asian beaching yards for shipbreaking of its FPSO. In its report, the OHCHR firstly asked the Maersk to provide information whether it has carried out the human rights due diligence process under the UNGPs. Since early 2000s various international organisations have raised significant concerns about human rights abuses by the business activities of shipbreaking in South Asia. However, current established international instruments such as the Basel Convention and the Hong Kong Convention have seemed not to retain a sufficient level for effectively regulating shipowner’s responsibility to human rights abuses in the ship-recycling industry. In this line, the UN Human Rights Council in the current Maersk case took an additional step to find the shipowner’s responsibility by considering whether the Maersk has carried out ‘human rights due diligence process’ under UNGPs to discharge its responsibility in human rights abuses occurred by its business relationship. The question whether the UNGPs may apply the shipowner’s responsibility for the human rights abuses in South Asian ship-recycling industry is still ongoing matter. Thus, this paper will examine the limitations of current international instruments, focusing the allegations raised by the UN Human Rights Council and the Maresk. Then, if the current treaties may not be sufficient effectively to control the Maersk’s business activities occurring the human rights abuses through its business relationships, as the other measure that recently was developed by the UN, this paper will examine the corporate responsibility of the UNGPs, and will then assess whether the Maersk’s lack of implementation of human rights due diligence under the UNGPs may not sufficiently discharge its responsibility for human rights in the South Asian shipbreaking yards.