Forget Responsibility: Now is the Time for Accountability

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), like all systems that promote self-regulation, results in much discussion and much more disagreement. Essentially, companies that are socially responsible will always take the environment, the rights on their employees, the affects felt by local communities and basic notions of justice into consideration when conducting their operations. Some observers believe that CSR is a hindrance with no relevance and therefore no entitlement to be part of the commercial sphere. Others believe that CSR is nothing more than window dressing which will never have any real impact unless corporations are legally bound by it. And then there are those who consider it a positive tool that can be used to balance the interests of profit and people.

However, the fact remains that corporations can simply choose not to abide by the principles of CSR and there is very little that has been done in the past to counter this. For instance, the Company Law Review Group in Ireland has been set the task to reform and consolidate all existing companies’ legislation in a single companies’ code. The result of this will be the General Scheme of the Companies Consolidation and Reform Bill and should be drafted by the end of 2009. However, to date it is practically impossible to find any reference to CSR, human rights, social responsibility or the environment in the bill; a bill that consolidates all existing legislation relating to company law. Ireland is not alone in its inability to regulate such matters and serves as a reminder of the ineptness of the law to protect such notions when companies are involved.

With that in mind, it is of huge importance that a New York court is currently preparing for a trail (Wiwa v Shell) in which the oil giant Shell stands accused of crimes against humanity over its activities in the oil-rich Niger Delta of Southern Nigeria. The outcome of this case is expected to have a bearing on the issue of corporate accountability and how far it extends. The plaintiffs involved allege that Shell was an active participant in atrocities and abuses carried out by Nigeria's military police. They also hold Shell partially responsible for torture, illegal detention, forced exile and the shooting of hundreds of protestors.

The trial is a civil action based on an obscure law that has rarely proved successful for plaintiffs in similar cases. However, there is great anticipation that the current plaintiffs will indeed be victorious which could result in the award of millions of dollars. And that is only the beginning. What does a positive result for the plaintiffs mean for corporate accountability? Could successful civil proceedings lead to criminal cases? Will Shell lose more than money?

All these questions will soon be addressed and hopefully there will be a clear answer; This is the end of the line for corporate immunity!