Violation of collective human rights by international institutions

Violation of communal rights by transnational corporations

Nature

In many cases, those responsible for violations of economic, social and cultural rights and of the collective rights with an economic content such as the right to development or the right to a healthy environment, are sometimes international entities applying policies which constitute veritable sources of large-scale and serious violations of collective and individual rights in the countries with weak economies. At this level, the responsibility is collective. The most typical example is the case of debt management by the international financial institutions. Another example is the case of structural adjustment programmes whose consequences are disastrous for the economies of the developing countries.

Background

The violations committed by the transnational corporations in their mainly transboundary activities do not come within the competence of a single State and, to prevent contradictions and inadequacies in the remedies and sanctions decided upon by States individually or as a group, these violations should form the subject of special attention. The States and the international community should combine their efforts so as to contain such activities by the establishment of legal standards capable of achieving that objective. The same is true of the looting of the cultural heritage of the third-world peoples and countries. Until quite recently, only States were subject of international law but individuals and groups of individuals can now take legal action or be summoned before international authorities to answer for their activities. The international community must establish a legal framework which will make it possible to bring actions, with some hope of success, for redress or punishment, a framework that would be supplemented by the principle of universal jurisdiction. To meet this responsibility more effectively, the international community must obtain from the States the commitment to include in their domestic legal systems international standards concerning human rights as a whole, while respecting their international obligations.

Incidence

A 2021 report by the UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty highlighted that international financial institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, have been implicated in policies that undermine collective rights, particularly in low-income countries. These violations often manifest through austerity measures, privatization, and conditional lending, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities and limiting access to essential services. The scale of such incidents is global, with documented cases in Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia, reflecting a persistent pattern of collective rights infringements linked to institutional decision-making.
In 2018, the World Bank’s support for a hydropower project in Honduras led to the displacement of indigenous Lenca communities without adequate consultation or compensation. The project, known as Agua Zarca, was widely criticized for violating the collective land and cultural rights of the affected people, sparking international condemnation and legal challenges.

Claim

The responsibility of the international community is great with regard to these economic policies favouring the developed countries which widen daily the gap between rich and poor countries. The maintenance of the existing economic order with these injustices and its failure to adapt to today's economic realities, rectification of which has been constantly demanded but in vain, is also a responsibility of the international community. In the case of the violations which now form part of history, it is for the international community to undertake the necessary actions to remedy justly the harm done to the victim peoples. It should do so in cooperation with all the actors on the international stage.

Counter-claim

The notion that international institutions violate collective human rights is overstated and often sensationalized. These organizations primarily aim to promote peace, security, and development globally. While imperfections exist, the focus should be on their achievements rather than isolated incidents. Highlighting alleged violations distracts from the significant progress made in human rights advocacy. Instead of fostering constructive dialogue, this narrative undermines the vital work of these institutions in addressing global challenges.