This thesis will investigate The Norwegian state and state-owned businesses positive obligations to fulfill the protection of equality and non-discrimination under international and regional jurisdiction. Particularly, women rights in general and women of ethnic minority’s rights. A positive critical legal method, based on a feminist theory, will be used to analyze the United Nation, European and Norwegian regulations. To illustrate the laws in practice the thesis will look at court decisions from both European Court Justice (ECJ), Norwegian Gender Equality Tribunal and The Norwegian Supreme Court. Even though the regulations exist, there is still a problem with respecting women’s rights in Norwegian society in general and in labour market. What is interesting to investigate is therefore the reason behind the disrespect, and to look for sustainable opportunities to include women’s experiences in the traditional jurisdiction. The conclusion is that there is space for implementation of women’s rights in human rights, and a transformation of the existing traditional legal system to “engender” the “mainstream” legal system is in place.

This thesis aims to investigate the process of consulting businesses on human rights through the concept of rationalisation. Corporations have struggled to act in accordance with what is considered responsible business conduct and this has put their legitimacy at risk. To align with the international standards on human rights, corporations have increasingly sought consulting on the topic. Previous research has criticised to what degree human rights can be reconciled with the corporate format and interests. Carrying out a qualitative case study on Human Rights Consulting, this thesis unpacks the process of introducing human rights in the corporation. We find that human rights become rationalised in corporations through referring to the UNGP, concretisation of human rights training and; management tools. At the same time, mapping the corporations serves as a precondition for rationalising human rights in the corporation. This thesis contributes to the theory of rationalisation by displaying how the social actions of consulting on human rights can be understood as expressions of rationalisation.

The thesis explores the nature of transnational legalisation by identifying one emerging norm - corporate accountability for human rights violations - and tracing its promotion through three separate pathways of legalisation. At the domestic level, the thesis discusses the jurisprudence of domestic courts that have contemplated assuming extraterritorial jurisdiction over alleged human rights violations of transnational corporations (TNCs) in other states. At the international level, the thesis considers developments in the United Nations (UN), which in 2011 launched a new normative framework to bolster the accountability of TNCs in respect of human rights. At the transnational level, the thesis discusses the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS), the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), and the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights (VPs), which have been selected as representative of the range of hybrid schemes increasingly developed by government and industry representatives to ameliorate the impact of TNCs on human rights. The thesis also develops a framework with which to analyse these trends by adopting (and further developing) the liberal institutionalist tool of legalisation, which is described in Kenneth Abbott et al's 'The Concept of Legalisation'. This thesis argues that this classic framework can be adapted and reimagined in the context of the transnational legal system, which is characterised by thick configurations of agents working across a multiplicity of issue areas. I suggest that in applying the classic framework in the transnational context, there appears to be an omitted variable - that of implementation, which exists alongside obligation, precision, and delegation. Implementation refers to the specific actions taken by agents to translate legal or law-like principles into practical, workable instructions for courts, governments, companies and other non-state actors to follow. The thesis argues that an increased focus on implementation generally leads to more effective or greater legalisation. The empirical chapters demonstrate that efforts in implementation are often undertaken for the purpose of strengthening one or more other legalisation characteristics in the long run. This suggests that agents will be willing to accept lower levels of obligation, precision and/or delegation if they believe a focus on implementation will help strengthen these characteristics over time.

The aim of this thesis is to examine the rights of internally displaced persons as well as finding out whose responsibility it is to maintain these rights. The questions being answered are: what policies, laws and conventions are addressing internally displaced persons in Somalia (mainly from within Somalia, UN and AU)? And; which principal similarities and differences in these documents are to find regarding what type of protection internally displaced persons can get? Whose responsibility is it to intervene if these rights and rules are not maintained? To answer these questions I have used a liberal-universal theoretical framework. The analysis is a describing case study of comparative nature between the Provisional Somalia Constitution, UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and the Kampala Convention. The result shows that there are many different rights of internally displaced persons in Somalia. Instead the problem seems to be based on the rights not being maintained in combination with the complex question of whose responsibility it is.

Business and human rights is a recurrent discussion and the literature shows that it is a common research topic. However, when it comes to Banking and human rights the academic works drop considerably. The purpose of this paper is first, measure the degree of detail and depth of the analyzed annual reports regarding the information relevant to human rights and second, check if the non-financial information or sustainability reporting of the selected banks have changed overtime. To try to answer those questions the paper makes use of a qualitative and quantitative content analysis that are based on a relevant theoretical framework for each of the questions. An extensive background on sustainability reporting is provided in order to have a linear narrative.

In 1998 the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement were developed following years of crises faced by the millions of people experiencing forced displacement, especially those internally displaced. These Principles were widely considered to be precedent setting, both historically and normatively. However, the examination of the construction of the international norms that underpin the Principles indicates that there are important epistemological weaknesses in widely used constructivist frameworks that understand normative shifts in international relations. They are critiqued as being impedingly linear, temporally compressed and analytically obstructive in its agent-centric view of norm cascading. This research aims to address some of these gaps with an enhanced life-cycle model using cluster genealogies and the processes of replication and particularization. The reformulated framework is tested for robustness and feasibility using two preliminary cases – UNSC Resolution 1325 and the Chemical Weapons Convention. It is then used to conduct an in-depth original analysis of the development of the 1998 UN Guiding Principles. The findings in the case of the Guiding Principles show, for example, that though the acceptance of the IDP definition was a big leap, the replication and particularization of human rights limits the humanitarian scope of the Guiding Principles, and also brings into question existing humanitarian protection of IDPs under the Geneva Conventions. Meanwhile, rooting them in ‘sovereignty as responsibility’ has not shifted the community of states’ intersubjective take on sovereignty, but it has added to the existing normative tension – individual vs. state – that underpins the very understanding of sovereignty.

In 1998 the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement were developed following years of crises faced by the millions of people experiencing forced displacement, especially those internally displaced. These Principles were widely considered to be precedent setting, both historically and normatively. However, the examination of the construction of the international norms that underpin the Principles indicates that there are important epistemological weaknesses in widely used constructivist frameworks that understand normative shifts in international relations. They are critiqued as being impedingly linear, temporally compressed and analytically obstructive in its agent-centric view of norm cascading. This research aims to address some of these gaps with an enhanced life-cycle model using cluster genealogies and the processes of replication and particularization. The reformulated framework is tested for robustness and feasibility using two preliminary cases – UNSC Resolution 1325 and the Chemical Weapons Convention. It is then used to conduct an in-depth original analysis of the development of the 1998 UN Guiding Principles. The findings in the case of the Guiding Principles show, for example, that though the acceptance of the IDP definition was a big leap, the replication and particularization of human rights limits the humanitarian scope of the Guiding Principles, and also brings into question existing humanitarian protection of IDPs under the Geneva Conventions. Meanwhile, rooting them in ‘sovereignty as responsibility’ has not shifted the community of states’ intersubjective take on sovereignty, but it has added to the existing normative tension – individual vs. state – that underpins the very understanding of sovereignty.

Business-related human rights violations are a recurring problem in the world. Just over 10 years ago, Sweden adopted the UN's guiding principles for business and human rights, in 2015 Sweden presented an action plan for business and human rights, and in 2016 there was a law regarding sustainability reporting for companies.  The Swedish government repeatedly states that business and human rights go hand in hand and expresses high expectations for Swedish companies to respect human rights.  In order to carry out the study of both the Swedish state's and Swedish companies' compliance with the UN's guiding principles, the Uyghurs' exposure to forced labor in Xinjiang and three Swedish companies are used as study objects. The result of the study leaves much to be desired from the Swedish state's side, as it acted very passively in the matter.

The text discusses the Framework for the Implementation of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDD) proposed by the European Union. The directive, aligned with UN and OECD guidelines, imposes obligations on companies to ensure respect for human rights and the environment. The due diligence obligation involves identifying and addressing the negative impacts of business activities, establishing internal complaint mechanisms, and publicly communicating efforts. The directive emphasizes integrating these activities into corporate policies and strategic decisions throughout the value chain. Companies must assess and address negative impacts in their supply chains, with measures tailored to the severity, likelihood, size, resources, and capabilities of the undertaking. The text highlights the complexity of sustainability as a long-term, multifaceted process, calling for collective responsibility from various stakeholders to navigate challenges in ecological and digital transitions, social inclusion, and energy and food security.

Operating through complex supply chains and multiple jurisdictions, today’s business enterprises can outsource manufacturing to different parts of the world where they can take advantage of low labour- and production costs. In the global quest for businesses to maximise their profits, deteriorating working conditions for offshore labour workers are increasing the risks of human rights abuses. Such abuses often take the form of ‘modern slavery’, which refers to situations of exploitation in which labour workers are trapped and unable to leave due to threats, violence, deception, abuse of power or other forms of coercion. In 2015, the United Kingdom (UK) enacted the Modern Slavery Act (MSA), aimed at combatting modern slavery by requiring business enterprises to be transparent with the steps they have taken to ensure that modern slavery is not taking place within their supply chains. By putting pressure on business enterprises to display their actions taken to address adverse human rights impacts, the MSA has brought the responsibility of business enterprises to conduct ‘human rights due diligence’ (HRDD) – as stipulated in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) - into domestic law. While the MSA has been regarded as a ‘world-leading instrument’ and a ‘historic milestone’ by the UK government, its effectiveness in counteracting modern slavery has been questioned in various studies, pointing towards a risk that the MSA is allowing human rights abuses to prevail under a form of a legal veil. Bearing in mind the country’s long colonial history, the enactment of the MSA can be seen as carrying an important symbolic value for the UK when it comes to taking accountability for human rights abuses committed overseas. However, adopting weak or ineffective legislation could instead, paradoxically, reflect an interest by the UK government to maintain beneficial trade relationships based on exploitative working conditions in a manner that reflects a continuation of former colonial power structures. This thesis is set out to examine this potential paradox by analysing the MSA’s level of compliance with the UNGPs from a postcolonial perspective.