Einde inhoudsopgave
Corporate Social Responsibility (IVOR nr. 77) 2010/10.6.2
10.6.2 Second mediatory attempt: Amnesty et al.
Mr. T.E. Lambooy, datum 17-11-2010
- Datum
17-11-2010
- Auteur
Mr. T.E. Lambooy
- JCDI
JCDI:ADS369510:1
- Vakgebied(en)
Ondernemingsrecht (V)
Voetnoten
Voetnoten
Each of these organisations is a member of the FWF executive or advisory board. Interestingly, Amnesty International Netherlands was a founding organisation of the FWF, while Amnesty International is a partner of SAI. This raises questions concerning, for example, Amnesty's position towards CCC/ICN's fierce critics on CSR initiatives other than FWF.
See for instance: chapter 2 of the European Code of Conduct for Mediators on Independence and Impartiality, published by the EU Commission, and H. Verbist, 'Bemiddeling in handelszaken in internationale context' (Mediation in commercial matters in an international context), TMD 2008-3, p. 16-36.
See reference 25.
In October 2007, the Dutch NGOs Amnesty International Netherlands and Oxfam-Novib, and the Dutch labour union FNV, initiated a joint mediatory
attempt between FFI/JKPL, G-Star and CCC/ICN. All three belonged to the
group of FWF initiators (Box 10.3).1 The mediators demanded that FFI/JKPL withdraw all legal proceedings. FFI/JKPL could not accept this as CCC/ICN intended to continue their campaigns. FFI/JKPL stated that it was its democratic right to defend itself in court against false accusations from the Indian Organisations and CCC/ICN, and to claim damages. Although understandable, FFI/JKPL's attitude was not conducive to reaching an agreement. Furthermore, the fact that the mediators - through FWF - were directly linked with CCC/ICN did not help to establish a position of impartial mediator.2 Moreover, at the beginning of October, Amnesty had released a press statement in which it expressed its concerns regarding:
the continuing harassment of defenders of women workers' rights in the garments export industry in Bangalore city in the Southern Indian State of Karnataka, as well as associated campaigning activists based in the Netherlands. The harassment has included the filing of apparently false criminal charges against them, aimed at curbing their freedom of expression.3
This may have resulted in the FFI/JKPL management feeling that it was being pressed by 'third organisations' to acknowledge the allegations of the Indian Organisations and CCC/ICN in a roundabout way. The mediatory attempt failed.