Trade Law and Human Rights
The intersection of trade law and human rights has been a despirately urgent
issue in global management, an evidence of symbiosis and conflict between
economic opening and guarding fundamental human liberties. While international
trade law, governed primarily by the World Trade Organization (WTO) and regional
trade agreements, seeks to enhance economic growth and market access, it
conflicts with human rights obligations in the areas of labor standards,
environmental protection, and social justice. This paper examines to what extent
international trade law accommodates human rights concerns and how the two
regimes can be reconciled.
The study first attempts to map the development of trade law in terms of landmark treaties and agreements constituting the system that exists today. The study then attempts to find the institutions and legal frameworks for human rights and the functions of the United Nations (UN), the International Labour Organization (ILO), and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The criticism informs us that while trade liberalization has fueled economic growth, it has bred inequalities and the consequent exploitative labor, deforestation, and environment degradation, as well as erosion of the rights of indigenous peoples on much of the planet.
An examination of trade controversy and case law graphically illustrates the way in which human rights have been managed—or avoided—under the WTO dispute-settlement system. Particular emphases are brought on cases like the violation of labor rights, limitations on needed medicines due to intellectual property conditions, and issues concerning environmental protection. Moreover, it explores further into the prospect of human rights provisions in the FTAs and PTAs with regards to becoming tools for complying with human rights through enforcement measures. In spite of attempts to integrate social and environmental norms into trade policies, enforcement is weak because economic interests have primacy over human rights protection.
This paper maintains that coexistence between human rights and trade law is feasible only through a multi-dimensional approach with strengthened enforcement measures, integration of trade human rights impact assessments into trade negotiations, and greater involvement of civil society in trade policy-making.
It also emphasizes the role of corporate accountability through mechanisms such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Last but not least, the study advocates for an ethical and democratic trade regime that will balance economic interests with social justice and human dignity. Through enhanced collaboration between trade institutions and human rights institutions, the global community can work towards establishing a system where human rights and trade coexist rather than clash.
Research Question:
Does global trade disproportionately affect small producers in the developing world by allowing abusive pricing practices and trade practices that trample human rights?
Objective of the Research:
The aim is to show the positive contribution that a human rights approach can make to creating a democratic and equitable international trading system, and the most effective way to secure respect for human rights in international trade policy.
Introduction:
The idea of human rights encompasses a wide range of fundamental freedoms and protections, from the prohibition of torture and other civil, economic and political rights, such as freedom of speech and expression, right to equality etc. Among these, some human rights are inherently linked with economic transactions, such as social and labor rights.Basic labor standards such as the prohibition on child labor, forced labor, workplace discrimination, and unionization and collective bargaining rights are integral components of global human rights frameworks . Furthermore, rights such as property rights, freedom of speech, and access to unbiased judicial systems are generally regarded as the necessary preconditions for economic globalization.
Trade and economic globalization are geared towards encouraging economic development as well as increasing the well-being of states and citizens. Both international trade law and human rights law share a common objective of discouraging the misuse of state power and making states answerable, particularly post-World War II, when both systems were key in reconstructing and maintaining international peace (Charnovitz, 1999; Cottier, 2002). However, the convergence of trade law and human rights has become a subject of increasing dispute.
While trade liberalization leads to economic expansion and global trade, it has the tendency to create concern about the deterioration of labor rights, environmental integrity, and corporate responsibility. The debate of such issues has contributed to a more comprehensive examination of "trade and …" connections, such as but not limited to human rights, environmental conservation, and sustainable development (Steger, 2002; Trachtman, 2002).
World civil society in recent decades has vigorously pushed back against economic globalization, particularly when trade and investment agreements lack arrangements for corporate responsibility and lack strong human rights provisions. It has been argued that while free trade agreements ensure economic development, they may also intensify social inequality and compromise on labor and environmental protection.
The conundrum reflects the need for an over-all strategy of trade policy wherein economic globalization will not be made to occur at the expense of fundamental human rights. Through a debate on the policy, institutional, and legal components of trade law and human rights, this paper is looking to undertake an inclusive consideration of the engagement between the two regimes with their challenges, and avenues for how to go to a system that is both even and rights-centric in international trade.
ICJ dispute resolution stands different from WTO dispute settlement because Inspection Settlement Understanding (DSU) Article 3(2) imposes limitations on WTO dispute resolution procedures. The WTO dispute system through Article 3(2) of the Dispute Settlement Understanding prohibits panels and the Appellate Body from enlarging or changing any of the WTO members' agreements before they discover explicit obligations within those agreements. The dispute resolution system at WTO does not enforce human rights explicitly although treaty interpretation provides its exclusive enforcement framework.
The category of peremptory norms (jus cogens) prohibiting genocide and torture as well as slavery is the sole case where international trade law does not override human rights law. The compliance of trade law fails to prevent human rights violations although trade law and human rights law show little practical disagreement. Multiple legal experts argue human rights always take precedence over trade agreements because they protect human dignity yet these expert opinions become obsolete due to current international legal frameworks.
The WTO agreements enable countries to enforce trade restrictions when protecting human rights even though human rights do not receive explicit mention. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) enables members to limit trade through Article XX by allowing them to impose restrictions in cases of public morals protection (XX(a)), human health intervention (XX(b)) and prevention of trade in prison-made products (XX(e)). These exemptions have distinct rules that prevent discrimination toward WTO members and avoid hiding trade obstacles through these measures.
The general exceptions have been used by countries to implement tobacco packaging regulations in Australia and public morals restrictions for cultural items in China's imports. The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and GATT show limited room for human rights exemptions but the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) lacks such exceptions which leads to broad criticism about its influence on medicine accessibility and indigenous knowledge together with patent safeguards.
The rise of public apprehension prompted certain contemporary trade agreements to include human rights provisions. Two recent trade agreements serve as examples of how organizations now recognize the importance of human rights by including such statements in their introduction sections in the CARIFORUM-EC Economic Partnership Agreement (2008) and the KORUS Free Trade Agreement (2019).
Labor and environmental protection standards now play a role in modern Preferential Trade Agreements where certain countries can restrict market entry to firms that do not meet these standards. The lack of official binding power within preambular language makes enforcement practices weak in these agreements. The process of acceding to the WTO has considered human rights issues notably during negotiations for potential new member states. Such political conversations about human rights do not automatically lead to better enforcement of human rights safeguards in trade systems.
International trade law and human rights law intersect without constant competition in their relationship. Trade constitutes a potential tool to boost economic development while generating jobs and enhancing general standard of living but its negative aspects consist of eliminating protective workforce measures and environmental guidelines and indigenous rights limitations.
Oxfam declared in their Poverty Report (1995) that trade functions as a tool to reshape economic situations yet simultaneously results in displacement of financial resources from vulnerable economies. The difficulty emerges from making sure that trade regulations protect human rights standards. Trade agreements must incorporate strong human rights regulations along with binding obligations and better transparency measures in trade policy development as well as greater civil society participation for ethical trade advocacy.
Different legal systems of human rights and trade exist independently today but societies need coherent methods to harmonize economic policies with essential human rights standards. Future improvement requires governments together with international organizations and advocacy groups to establish mutual efforts for uniting economic liberalization with social justice.
Humanity considers the UDHR to be its basic charter because it implements both civil and political economic social and cultural rights. Leaders from different states made the UDHR rights enforceable through the 1966 adoption of the two Covenants. ICCPR contains protocols that defend fundamental rights which consist of life preservation along with freedom from all kinds of torture and slavery and unsafe conditions and arbitrary detention and religious beliefs and peaceful movement within society. Using ICESCR as a basis states have recognized how human rights include economic entitlements together with social protections extending to employment standards and pay adequacy as well as educational standards in teaching and healthcare accessibility and housing requirements.
Other than the core human rights instruments two distinct categories known as workers' rights and environmental rights generally enter into conflict with international trade procedures. The International Labour Organization (ILO) established through its protocols 150 conventions that address fair wages along with labor conditions and child and forced labor as well as trade union rights. The protection of ecological sustainability through economic growth receives specific treatment in more than 200 environmental agreements that have trade-related components.
International frameworks cooperate to create an adequate worldwide system that maintains fundamental human rights throughout economic globalization. Implementation challenges of these protections occur because agreements lack sufficient monitoring mechanisms.
Expansion of Global Trade:
Worldwide trade has experienced an unprecedented growth during the modern period. World exports have multiplied by ten over the last five decades despite inflation adjustments at all times exceeding global Gross Domestic Product (GDP) expansion rates. International investment has expanded at an unprecedented rate because transnational corporations (TNCs) are now strongly dominating global trade. The sales activity of TNCs exceeds global export quantities and corporate intercompany deals consist of an expanding section of worldwide commerce.
Foreign exchange transactions have experienced explosive growth over the years because the value started at $15 billion per day in 1973 then it surpassed $1.5 trillion per day recently. Global commerce registered important growth of transportation and services in 1995 until it exceeded $6 trillion according to the World Trade Organization's 1996 Annual Report.
Trade expansion became possible due to the advancements brought by the digital revolution. Former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan presented e-commerce statistics in his millennium address at the United Nations where his report revealed the sector grew from $2.6 billion in 1996 to estimated $300 billion in 2002. A different study predicted that worldwide trade would surpass $8 trillion during the year 2000.
Recent data shows the extensive changes within the global economy because of technological progress combined with digitalization and international investment activities which modified global trading behaviors. Global trade development creates important issues regarding economic unity sustainability alongside the equal distribution of advantages among nations.
From its beginning GATT limited itself to goods trade monitoring while the WTO included service agreements and IP protection as well as innovation policy within its expanded ambit. Through mandatory responsibilities the WTO evaluates agreement enforcement and maintains negotiation facilities for arbitration and carries out trade nation duties along with international economic cooperation efforts.
The WTO governance system functions based on four essential rules which direct its organizational activities:
The main reason for reservation about TRIPS relates to its effects on public health. Manufacturing facilities in developing nations produced affordable generic drugs because these countries did not impose product patent protection on pharmaceuticals until recently. The TRIPS requirement to transition from process to product patent protection eliminated domestic production possibilities and increased drug prices which caused severe barriers to essential medical treatment. The manufacturing cost of fluconazole as an anti-AIDS medication reached $55 for 100 tablets during its production in India although other countries paid between $700 and $1,000 for the same amount.
Under TRIPS regimes there exist worldwide threats to the protection rights of traditional knowledge and biodiversity resources. Before TRIPS life forms along with plants and animals were excluded from patent scope. TRIPS expects all WTO member countries to authorize patents for microorganisms along with biological processes which has caused extensive bioprospecting regarding traditional knowledge products. The patenting of turmeric healing abilities and neem pesticides created ethical problems but these patents were later removed.
The majority of patents (97%) and transnational corporations (90% of patents) belong to industrialized nations under TRIPS. Developing countries receive little advantage because they lack research and development capability.
The bargain demonstrates several points which contradict both human rights legislation and ecological treaties. Under the International Bill of Rights individuals maintain the right to scientific progress yet TRIPS provides exclusive ownership control to corporations regarding innovative ideas. The Convention on Biodiversity requires traditional knowledge and biological resource stakeholders to receive fair benefits but TRIPS has no provisions to fulfill this requirement.
The African Group of WTO Members has presented reform proposals for safeguarding indigenous knowledge alongside Indian proposals that advocate for technology transfer amendments alongside environmental protection measures. A fair global intellectual property system requires implementation of human rights protections within the TRIPS framework.
Additionally, globalization-fueled transnational corporations (TNCs) tend to be guilty of human rights abuses such as forced labor, destruction of the environment, and repression of indigenous peoples. Conventional human rights law mainly targets states, and it is challenging to hold corporations legally liable, whereas non-mandatory corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities do not have enforcement powers.
Intellectual property rights under the TRIPS Agreement have also sustained inequalities by limiting access to cheap medicines in developing countries. Pharmaceutical firms enjoy strict patent protections, and prices of medicines are artificially inflated, making it impossible for the poor to obtain life-saving medicine. The 2010 Netherlands Indian generic drug seizure and the COVID-19 vaccine patent controversy show continued problems with balancing public health imperatives against commercial concerns.
Furthermore, developed countries utilize trade agreements as an instrument of exercising economic and political hegemony over weaker countries. Conditioned market access arrangements, including the 1999 U.S.-Cambodia Textile Agreement, impose on signatories adherence to labor and social standards which might be irrelevant to prevailing wages and working conditions in the local economy, extending further Western economic hegemony. Attempts to tie human rights to trade have been rejected by developing nations as disguised protectionism. The WTO's Singapore Declaration of 1996 was against the inclusion of workers' rights in trade agreements, a reassertion of economic interest above social welfare.
In general, as trade and globalization have fueled economic expansion, they have further worsened disparities, enabled workers' exploitation, and restricted access to basic products. The absence of human rights protection mechanisms within trade agreements provides a platform where economic interests override social justice, normally at the expense of the vulnerable. Such concerns need to be addressed through more effective regulatory measures, better corporate accountability, and a more equitable integration of human rights guarantees into global trade policy.
Recommendations:
In order to make world trade serve human rights and not violate them, several steps must be taken. Enforceable human rights provisions must be included in international trade agreements that oblige governments and companies to uphold international social, labor, and environmental standards. There should be enforcement and monitoring agencies within the World Trade Organization (WTO) and regional trade blocs strengthened so that offenders are brought to book.
Besides that, corporate accountability and ethical business practices should be strengthened with obligatory human rights due diligence legislation for multinationals to prevent labor exploitation, environmental degradation, and unethical raw material sourcing. Setting reporting standards internationally on transnational corporations (TNCs) will increase transparency about human rights effects in supply chains.
Intellectual property rights must also be reformed to enhance public access to health. The TRIPS Agreement must be modified so that developing nations are provided with more flexibility in manufacturing low-cost medicine and health products. Promoting technology-transfer schemes between wealthy and developing nations will also continue to close the gap in health and innovation. Complementing the protection of labor rights everywhere is also important. Governments should encourage the International Labour Organization's (ILO) Core Labour Standards to protect workers' rights, decent wages, and secure working conditions. Trade agreements must not be utilized as a mechanism for undermining domestic labor protections, and nations must not be allowed to lower labor standards in order to lure in foreign investment.
Finally, prioritizing sustainable trade and environmental protection must be promoted. Environmental terms can be integrated in trade agreements in order to prevent deforestation, pollution, and loss of habitat. Incentives in trade should also be created for companies that respect sustainability and responsible sourcing. These proposals can be incorporated into international trade policies to make the global trade system more ethical and equitable but promote economic growth while upholding human rights, labor laws, and the environment.
Conclusion:
While world trade has the potential to be a strong stimulus for economic progress, innovation, and improved standards of living, its unregulated proliferation has also encouraged rampant human rights violations and economic inequalities. Trade liberalization has enabled TNCs to capture world markets, and their operations have at times been driven by greed instead of moral compasses. This has created exploitation of the working class, degradation of the environment, and increased inequalities among poor and richer countries.
Working class in the manufacturing sectors in poor countries normally work under undesirable working conditions, minimum wages, and denial of their rights as working class, while their homegrown indigenous people normally experience land loss and contamination of the environment through huge trade-initiated projects. The interests of marginalized groups such as women and poor earners are usually sacrificed in order to attain economic efficiency and global competitiveness.
Of particular concern is the fact that wealthier nations and multinationals disproportionately benefit from trade agreements at the expense of poor economies. The international market forces have made it costly for poor country farmers and small producers to control prices and unfair trade, resulting in unemployment, poverty, and economic instability.
Trade policy also fuels the race to the bottom, where countries reduce workers' and environment standards in order to lure in foreign capital at the expense of further annihilating human rights guarantees. The TRIPS Agreement has further restricted access to lifesaving medications as well as scientific progress at the expense of developing countries that are unable to purchase lifesaving medication and emerging technologies.
For this reason, there should be strict legal frameworks through which human rights protection is established in trade policy at the international level. The governments and intergovernmental organizations must ensure that trade agreements have enforceable human rights guarantees and not attempt to secure voluntary commitment from companies.
Mechanisms for corporate responsibility must be strengthened to hold companies accountable by making human rights due diligence mandatory in order to prevent worker exploitation, environmental degradation, and unethical business practices. Employees' rights must be secured through fair remuneration, a secure workplace, and the ability to unionize so that economic progress is not achieved at the expense of human dignity.
The study first attempts to map the development of trade law in terms of landmark treaties and agreements constituting the system that exists today. The study then attempts to find the institutions and legal frameworks for human rights and the functions of the United Nations (UN), the International Labour Organization (ILO), and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The criticism informs us that while trade liberalization has fueled economic growth, it has bred inequalities and the consequent exploitative labor, deforestation, and environment degradation, as well as erosion of the rights of indigenous peoples on much of the planet.
An examination of trade controversy and case law graphically illustrates the way in which human rights have been managed—or avoided—under the WTO dispute-settlement system. Particular emphases are brought on cases like the violation of labor rights, limitations on needed medicines due to intellectual property conditions, and issues concerning environmental protection. Moreover, it explores further into the prospect of human rights provisions in the FTAs and PTAs with regards to becoming tools for complying with human rights through enforcement measures. In spite of attempts to integrate social and environmental norms into trade policies, enforcement is weak because economic interests have primacy over human rights protection.
This paper maintains that coexistence between human rights and trade law is feasible only through a multi-dimensional approach with strengthened enforcement measures, integration of trade human rights impact assessments into trade negotiations, and greater involvement of civil society in trade policy-making.
It also emphasizes the role of corporate accountability through mechanisms such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Last but not least, the study advocates for an ethical and democratic trade regime that will balance economic interests with social justice and human dignity. Through enhanced collaboration between trade institutions and human rights institutions, the global community can work towards establishing a system where human rights and trade coexist rather than clash.
Research Question:
Does global trade disproportionately affect small producers in the developing world by allowing abusive pricing practices and trade practices that trample human rights?
Objective of the Research:
The aim is to show the positive contribution that a human rights approach can make to creating a democratic and equitable international trading system, and the most effective way to secure respect for human rights in international trade policy.
Introduction:
The idea of human rights encompasses a wide range of fundamental freedoms and protections, from the prohibition of torture and other civil, economic and political rights, such as freedom of speech and expression, right to equality etc. Among these, some human rights are inherently linked with economic transactions, such as social and labor rights.Basic labor standards such as the prohibition on child labor, forced labor, workplace discrimination, and unionization and collective bargaining rights are integral components of global human rights frameworks . Furthermore, rights such as property rights, freedom of speech, and access to unbiased judicial systems are generally regarded as the necessary preconditions for economic globalization.
Trade and economic globalization are geared towards encouraging economic development as well as increasing the well-being of states and citizens. Both international trade law and human rights law share a common objective of discouraging the misuse of state power and making states answerable, particularly post-World War II, when both systems were key in reconstructing and maintaining international peace (Charnovitz, 1999; Cottier, 2002). However, the convergence of trade law and human rights has become a subject of increasing dispute.
While trade liberalization leads to economic expansion and global trade, it has the tendency to create concern about the deterioration of labor rights, environmental integrity, and corporate responsibility. The debate of such issues has contributed to a more comprehensive examination of "trade and …" connections, such as but not limited to human rights, environmental conservation, and sustainable development (Steger, 2002; Trachtman, 2002).
World civil society in recent decades has vigorously pushed back against economic globalization, particularly when trade and investment agreements lack arrangements for corporate responsibility and lack strong human rights provisions. It has been argued that while free trade agreements ensure economic development, they may also intensify social inequality and compromise on labor and environmental protection.
The conundrum reflects the need for an over-all strategy of trade policy wherein economic globalization will not be made to occur at the expense of fundamental human rights. Through a debate on the policy, institutional, and legal components of trade law and human rights, this paper is looking to undertake an inclusive consideration of the engagement between the two regimes with their challenges, and avenues for how to go to a system that is both even and rights-centric in international trade.
Complex Relation Between Human Rights and International Trade Law:
Each of human rights and international trade law operates separately based on different specifications regarding rights obligations enforcement tools and corrective actions. A state qualifies for international accountability as soon as it violates its obligations under established legal standards. The World Trade Organization dispute settlement system lacks the power to resolve cases beyond trade regulations and cases that charge human rights atrocities.ICJ dispute resolution stands different from WTO dispute settlement because Inspection Settlement Understanding (DSU) Article 3(2) imposes limitations on WTO dispute resolution procedures. The WTO dispute system through Article 3(2) of the Dispute Settlement Understanding prohibits panels and the Appellate Body from enlarging or changing any of the WTO members' agreements before they discover explicit obligations within those agreements. The dispute resolution system at WTO does not enforce human rights explicitly although treaty interpretation provides its exclusive enforcement framework.
The category of peremptory norms (jus cogens) prohibiting genocide and torture as well as slavery is the sole case where international trade law does not override human rights law. The compliance of trade law fails to prevent human rights violations although trade law and human rights law show little practical disagreement. Multiple legal experts argue human rights always take precedence over trade agreements because they protect human dignity yet these expert opinions become obsolete due to current international legal frameworks.
The WTO agreements enable countries to enforce trade restrictions when protecting human rights even though human rights do not receive explicit mention. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) enables members to limit trade through Article XX by allowing them to impose restrictions in cases of public morals protection (XX(a)), human health intervention (XX(b)) and prevention of trade in prison-made products (XX(e)). These exemptions have distinct rules that prevent discrimination toward WTO members and avoid hiding trade obstacles through these measures.
The general exceptions have been used by countries to implement tobacco packaging regulations in Australia and public morals restrictions for cultural items in China's imports. The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and GATT show limited room for human rights exemptions but the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) lacks such exceptions which leads to broad criticism about its influence on medicine accessibility and indigenous knowledge together with patent safeguards.
The rise of public apprehension prompted certain contemporary trade agreements to include human rights provisions. Two recent trade agreements serve as examples of how organizations now recognize the importance of human rights by including such statements in their introduction sections in the CARIFORUM-EC Economic Partnership Agreement (2008) and the KORUS Free Trade Agreement (2019).
Labor and environmental protection standards now play a role in modern Preferential Trade Agreements where certain countries can restrict market entry to firms that do not meet these standards. The lack of official binding power within preambular language makes enforcement practices weak in these agreements. The process of acceding to the WTO has considered human rights issues notably during negotiations for potential new member states. Such political conversations about human rights do not automatically lead to better enforcement of human rights safeguards in trade systems.
International trade law and human rights law intersect without constant competition in their relationship. Trade constitutes a potential tool to boost economic development while generating jobs and enhancing general standard of living but its negative aspects consist of eliminating protective workforce measures and environmental guidelines and indigenous rights limitations.
Oxfam declared in their Poverty Report (1995) that trade functions as a tool to reshape economic situations yet simultaneously results in displacement of financial resources from vulnerable economies. The difficulty emerges from making sure that trade regulations protect human rights standards. Trade agreements must incorporate strong human rights regulations along with binding obligations and better transparency measures in trade policy development as well as greater civil society participation for ethical trade advocacy.
Different legal systems of human rights and trade exist independently today but societies need coherent methods to harmonize economic policies with essential human rights standards. Future improvement requires governments together with international organizations and advocacy groups to establish mutual efforts for uniting economic liberalization with social justice.
Internationalization of Human Rights:
Nations around the world became the most dramatically changed among international diplomatic entities due to universal human rights protection acceptance. Throughout its history starting from 1948 the United Nations has generated 90 human rights instruments that protect human dignity and guarantee various liberties. After the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) (1948) and The Optional protocol which includes the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) (1966) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) (1966) were established as the International Bill of human rights became the central motif of international governance.Humanity considers the UDHR to be its basic charter because it implements both civil and political economic social and cultural rights. Leaders from different states made the UDHR rights enforceable through the 1966 adoption of the two Covenants. ICCPR contains protocols that defend fundamental rights which consist of life preservation along with freedom from all kinds of torture and slavery and unsafe conditions and arbitrary detention and religious beliefs and peaceful movement within society. Using ICESCR as a basis states have recognized how human rights include economic entitlements together with social protections extending to employment standards and pay adequacy as well as educational standards in teaching and healthcare accessibility and housing requirements.
Other than the core human rights instruments two distinct categories known as workers' rights and environmental rights generally enter into conflict with international trade procedures. The International Labour Organization (ILO) established through its protocols 150 conventions that address fair wages along with labor conditions and child and forced labor as well as trade union rights. The protection of ecological sustainability through economic growth receives specific treatment in more than 200 environmental agreements that have trade-related components.
International frameworks cooperate to create an adequate worldwide system that maintains fundamental human rights throughout economic globalization. Implementation challenges of these protections occur because agreements lack sufficient monitoring mechanisms.
Expansion of Global Trade:
Worldwide trade has experienced an unprecedented growth during the modern period. World exports have multiplied by ten over the last five decades despite inflation adjustments at all times exceeding global Gross Domestic Product (GDP) expansion rates. International investment has expanded at an unprecedented rate because transnational corporations (TNCs) are now strongly dominating global trade. The sales activity of TNCs exceeds global export quantities and corporate intercompany deals consist of an expanding section of worldwide commerce.
Foreign exchange transactions have experienced explosive growth over the years because the value started at $15 billion per day in 1973 then it surpassed $1.5 trillion per day recently. Global commerce registered important growth of transportation and services in 1995 until it exceeded $6 trillion according to the World Trade Organization's 1996 Annual Report.
Trade expansion became possible due to the advancements brought by the digital revolution. Former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan presented e-commerce statistics in his millennium address at the United Nations where his report revealed the sector grew from $2.6 billion in 1996 to estimated $300 billion in 2002. A different study predicted that worldwide trade would surpass $8 trillion during the year 2000.
Recent data shows the extensive changes within the global economy because of technological progress combined with digitalization and international investment activities which modified global trading behaviors. Global trade development creates important issues regarding economic unity sustainability alongside the equal distribution of advantages among nations.
Inclusion of WTO In Global Trade:
The World Trade Organization (WTO) began operations on January 1stJanuary, 1995 through the shift from the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade to become the leading organization GATT. Various multifaceted trade negotiations led to the Marrakesh Agreement that signed on 15thApril, 1994. These negotiations during the Uruguay Round set forth the most complex trade agreement ever written that controlled extensive product and service sectors. The Marrakesh Declaration confirmed that this new trade system would establish worldwide economic security while simultaneously fostering superior international trade opportunities and enhanced investment flows and better income and employment figures across the globe.From its beginning GATT limited itself to goods trade monitoring while the WTO included service agreements and IP protection as well as innovation policy within its expanded ambit. Through mandatory responsibilities the WTO evaluates agreement enforcement and maintains negotiation facilities for arbitration and carries out trade nation duties along with international economic cooperation efforts.
The WTO governance system functions based on four essential rules which direct its organizational activities:
- All trade operations need to operate without discrimination that affects the relationships between member states regarding imported products compared to local products.
- WTO agreements must be transmitted to member states which means they receive predictable rules because all nations must publicly display their trade regulations at their national and multilateral levels.
- Under WTO regulations members can defend fair competition because the organization maintains free trade access while allowing particular situations for using trade restrictions.
- Through its global economy entry model the WTO supports underdeveloped nations towards economic development as well as reform.
Relation between Trade and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR):
The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) serves as a prominent mainstay of the Uruguay Round agreement while remaining a highly debatable international trade agreement. The World Trade Organization (WTO) through TRIPS enforces and binds IP rights as intellectual property rights (IPRs) with mandatory international status. TRIPS has been criticized by multiple parties because it chooses corporate gains over public health measures especially when protecting healthcare and native rights.The main reason for reservation about TRIPS relates to its effects on public health. Manufacturing facilities in developing nations produced affordable generic drugs because these countries did not impose product patent protection on pharmaceuticals until recently. The TRIPS requirement to transition from process to product patent protection eliminated domestic production possibilities and increased drug prices which caused severe barriers to essential medical treatment. The manufacturing cost of fluconazole as an anti-AIDS medication reached $55 for 100 tablets during its production in India although other countries paid between $700 and $1,000 for the same amount.
Under TRIPS regimes there exist worldwide threats to the protection rights of traditional knowledge and biodiversity resources. Before TRIPS life forms along with plants and animals were excluded from patent scope. TRIPS expects all WTO member countries to authorize patents for microorganisms along with biological processes which has caused extensive bioprospecting regarding traditional knowledge products. The patenting of turmeric healing abilities and neem pesticides created ethical problems but these patents were later removed.
The majority of patents (97%) and transnational corporations (90% of patents) belong to industrialized nations under TRIPS. Developing countries receive little advantage because they lack research and development capability.
The bargain demonstrates several points which contradict both human rights legislation and ecological treaties. Under the International Bill of Rights individuals maintain the right to scientific progress yet TRIPS provides exclusive ownership control to corporations regarding innovative ideas. The Convention on Biodiversity requires traditional knowledge and biological resource stakeholders to receive fair benefits but TRIPS has no provisions to fulfill this requirement.
The African Group of WTO Members has presented reform proposals for safeguarding indigenous knowledge alongside Indian proposals that advocate for technology transfer amendments alongside environmental protection measures. A fair global intellectual property system requires implementation of human rights protections within the TRIPS framework.
Effect of Trade Law on Human Rights:
- Positive Impact:
Trade and globalization, if dealt with through proper policies, can be the basis of protection of human rights as these foster economic growth and stability. Economic growth is reportedly most times coupled with higher adherence to human rights standards. Also, economic growth—through trade or otherwise—can provide good conditions for political liberties and the rule of law .
Some human rights, including freedom of expression and property rights, are essential in promoting economic growth and global trade. These rights ensure market stability, investment security, and open governance, which in turn promote long-term economic development.
While Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs) are chiefly aimed at controlling economic relations instead of advancing human rights, they could indirectly promote more human rights compliance among member states. This is because enforcement and obligations contained in bilateral or plurilateral agreements have the potential to force member states to conform to higher standards of human rights.
Generally, globalization and trade can contribute positively to the protection of human rights, but it is dependent on effective governance, rule of law, and policy that ensures economic gains are enjoyed in an equitable manner.
- Negative Impact:
Although it brings economic advantage, international trade constitutes enormous challenges for the protection of human rights in terms of economic inequality, the exploitation of workers, corporate fraud, and limitations on access to basic goods and services. Trade agreements have a tendency to grant more importance to economic commitments than to commitments in terms of human rights, hence preventing states from implementing labor regulations, environmental protection laws, and social welfare initiatives.
The WTO dispute settlement process does not guarantee direct enforcement of human rights, hence making it challenging for aggrieved communities to obtain legal redress. Further, the liberalization of trade has been linked to increasing economic inequality since rich countries and multinationals reap unequal gains while poor countries find it hard to compete with global players. The concentration of economic power in a few privileged players' hands has led to job insecurity, reduced wages, and minimal social protection, pushing the vulnerable groups further away.
Additionally, globalization-fueled transnational corporations (TNCs) tend to be guilty of human rights abuses such as forced labor, destruction of the environment, and repression of indigenous peoples. Conventional human rights law mainly targets states, and it is challenging to hold corporations legally liable, whereas non-mandatory corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities do not have enforcement powers.
Intellectual property rights under the TRIPS Agreement have also sustained inequalities by limiting access to cheap medicines in developing countries. Pharmaceutical firms enjoy strict patent protections, and prices of medicines are artificially inflated, making it impossible for the poor to obtain life-saving medicine. The 2010 Netherlands Indian generic drug seizure and the COVID-19 vaccine patent controversy show continued problems with balancing public health imperatives against commercial concerns.
Furthermore, developed countries utilize trade agreements as an instrument of exercising economic and political hegemony over weaker countries. Conditioned market access arrangements, including the 1999 U.S.-Cambodia Textile Agreement, impose on signatories adherence to labor and social standards which might be irrelevant to prevailing wages and working conditions in the local economy, extending further Western economic hegemony. Attempts to tie human rights to trade have been rejected by developing nations as disguised protectionism. The WTO's Singapore Declaration of 1996 was against the inclusion of workers' rights in trade agreements, a reassertion of economic interest above social welfare.
In general, as trade and globalization have fueled economic expansion, they have further worsened disparities, enabled workers' exploitation, and restricted access to basic products. The absence of human rights protection mechanisms within trade agreements provides a platform where economic interests override social justice, normally at the expense of the vulnerable. Such concerns need to be addressed through more effective regulatory measures, better corporate accountability, and a more equitable integration of human rights guarantees into global trade policy.
Recommendations:
In order to make world trade serve human rights and not violate them, several steps must be taken. Enforceable human rights provisions must be included in international trade agreements that oblige governments and companies to uphold international social, labor, and environmental standards. There should be enforcement and monitoring agencies within the World Trade Organization (WTO) and regional trade blocs strengthened so that offenders are brought to book.
Besides that, corporate accountability and ethical business practices should be strengthened with obligatory human rights due diligence legislation for multinationals to prevent labor exploitation, environmental degradation, and unethical raw material sourcing. Setting reporting standards internationally on transnational corporations (TNCs) will increase transparency about human rights effects in supply chains.
Intellectual property rights must also be reformed to enhance public access to health. The TRIPS Agreement must be modified so that developing nations are provided with more flexibility in manufacturing low-cost medicine and health products. Promoting technology-transfer schemes between wealthy and developing nations will also continue to close the gap in health and innovation. Complementing the protection of labor rights everywhere is also important. Governments should encourage the International Labour Organization's (ILO) Core Labour Standards to protect workers' rights, decent wages, and secure working conditions. Trade agreements must not be utilized as a mechanism for undermining domestic labor protections, and nations must not be allowed to lower labor standards in order to lure in foreign investment.
Finally, prioritizing sustainable trade and environmental protection must be promoted. Environmental terms can be integrated in trade agreements in order to prevent deforestation, pollution, and loss of habitat. Incentives in trade should also be created for companies that respect sustainability and responsible sourcing. These proposals can be incorporated into international trade policies to make the global trade system more ethical and equitable but promote economic growth while upholding human rights, labor laws, and the environment.
Conclusion:
While world trade has the potential to be a strong stimulus for economic progress, innovation, and improved standards of living, its unregulated proliferation has also encouraged rampant human rights violations and economic inequalities. Trade liberalization has enabled TNCs to capture world markets, and their operations have at times been driven by greed instead of moral compasses. This has created exploitation of the working class, degradation of the environment, and increased inequalities among poor and richer countries.
Working class in the manufacturing sectors in poor countries normally work under undesirable working conditions, minimum wages, and denial of their rights as working class, while their homegrown indigenous people normally experience land loss and contamination of the environment through huge trade-initiated projects. The interests of marginalized groups such as women and poor earners are usually sacrificed in order to attain economic efficiency and global competitiveness.
Of particular concern is the fact that wealthier nations and multinationals disproportionately benefit from trade agreements at the expense of poor economies. The international market forces have made it costly for poor country farmers and small producers to control prices and unfair trade, resulting in unemployment, poverty, and economic instability.
Trade policy also fuels the race to the bottom, where countries reduce workers' and environment standards in order to lure in foreign capital at the expense of further annihilating human rights guarantees. The TRIPS Agreement has further restricted access to lifesaving medications as well as scientific progress at the expense of developing countries that are unable to purchase lifesaving medication and emerging technologies.
For this reason, there should be strict legal frameworks through which human rights protection is established in trade policy at the international level. The governments and intergovernmental organizations must ensure that trade agreements have enforceable human rights guarantees and not attempt to secure voluntary commitment from companies.
Mechanisms for corporate responsibility must be strengthened to hold companies accountable by making human rights due diligence mandatory in order to prevent worker exploitation, environmental degradation, and unethical business practices. Employees' rights must be secured through fair remuneration, a secure workplace, and the ability to unionize so that economic progress is not achieved at the expense of human dignity.
Share this Article
Popular Articles
How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi
How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi Mutual Consent Divorce is the Simplest Way to Obtain a D...
Increased Age For Girls Marriage
It is hoped that the Prohibition of Child Marriage (Amendment) Bill, 2021, which intends to inc...
Facade of Social Media
One may very easily get absorbed in the lives of others as one scrolls through a Facebook news ...
Section 482 CrPc - Quashing Of FIR: Guid...
The Inherent power under Section 482 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (37th Chapter of t...
Comments