Thesis (M.A.)--University of Canterbury, 2008. / Typescript (photocopy). Includes bibliographical references (leaves 153-173). Also available via the World Wide Web.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Toledo, 1994. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 325-341).

Thesis (M.Soc.Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 1998. / Includes bibliographical references (leaf 77) Also available in print.

Zugl.: Utrecht, University, Diss., 1999. / Zugl.: Utrecht, Univ., Diss., 1999.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Idaho, 2005. / Also available online in PDF format. Abstract. "December 2005." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 150-158).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Idaho, 2005. / Also available online in PDF format (12.43 Mb image-only). Abstract. "December 2005." "UMI number: 3196093"--T.p. verso. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 150-158).

Thesis (Ph.D.)--McMaster University, 2003. / Advisor: Rhoda E. Howard-Hassmann. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 285-303). Also available via World Wide Web.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--York University, 2005. Graduate Programme in Social and Political Thought. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 219-239). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://wwwlib.umi.com/cr/yorku/fullcit?pNR11630

The questions of business involvement in human rights violations in countries facing civil conflict, as well as access to remedy and accountability for these violations have generated a considerable amount of attention from academia and practitioners. While most theoretical efforts on access to remedy and accountability have focused on identifying the obstacles to access to justice, these do not explain the unlikely case of Colombia, where despite all structural obstacles being present (e.g. armed conflict, corruption), the country has positioned itself as a leader in the region in terms of judicialisation and convictions of economic actors for their complicity with grave human rights violations committed in the course of the 50 year internal armed conflict. This thesis is a theory building and theory-testing project that looks for alternative explanations to the outcomes registered in Colombia, focusing on the agents involved in these cases and how the variation in the power of the people (claimants) and the power of businesses (defendants) explains access to justice. This thesis uses the most comprehensive datasets in existence of business involvement in human rights violations (the Corporations and Human Rights Database and the Corporate Accountability and Transitional Justice Database) to present a novel and much needed systematic analysis to identify the factors explaining why and when remedy and accountability is possible. The results of the study suggest that the variations in the power of people and the power of business do offer a plausible alternative explanation to the unlikely case of Colombia. The Colombia data analyzed in this thesis suggests that while an increase in the power of the people (through the support of global actors and political opportunities) is necessary to secure judicialisation and remedy, these results are only possible when they face an economic actor with reduced veto power.

The concept of human rights holds a distinctive significance in political practice, yet philosophers remain divided over the nature of these rights. The Orthodox View defines human rights as moral rights possessed by all individuals simply in virtue of their humanity. Proponents of this view claim that the contemporary idea of human rights is a continuation of the natural rights project of the eighteenth century and shares many of its basic philosophical assumptions. This thesis argues that the Orthodox View is no longer an appropriate characterisation of the concept of human rights we find in current domestic and international practice. It also rejects recent alternatives offered by supporters of the Political View, who define human rights by particular functions they serve, specifically their role(s) in acting as benchmarks for the legitimacy of states or triggers of international concern. I propose instead a new 'Political Justification View' of human rights, which states that human rights are demands which challenge unjustifiable political-institutional orders, which are the concern of all people, and which protect the equal standing of individuals in political decisions that affect the collective or individual good. This view better captures the diversity of practices that employ the term 'human rights', whilst also explaining its innovative power as a moral language that enables individuals to challenge the official institutional order under whose authority they live. Finally, I argue that within this broader view of human rights there are two distinct moral concepts which pertain to different parts of human rights practice: Domestic Human Rights and International Legitimacy Rights. Separating these two concepts is helpful in resolving long-standing debates about whether human rights are properly thought of as minimalist moral concerns of legitimacy or broader social goals to be achieved through political institutions.