FAMBB

104 DELIVERING RESULTScommercial sector and put such financialresources as there are in the hands of thegovernment and its cronies. Enthusiastsfor sanctions point to the presentnegotiations with Iran on nuclear activitiesas a successful product of sanctions, butthis has come at much human cost to theimpotent majority.Furthermore, the creation of bitternessand distrust provides a poor foundationfor negotiations. How much better if wehad maintained an ongoing engagement,commercially and otherwise, expandingrather than destroying the middle classand providing a counterweight not directlydependent on government? The samecould be said of Sudan and Myanmar.less frequent nowadays as a realisationgrows that it is perhaps better to have aresponsible company engaged than not.In taking such a decision, a company alsohas responsibilities towards its nationalemployees, who will remain, whateverthe decision. Local business has no luxuryof choice.There are challenges and risks inremaining engaged. These may includeoperating in highly corrupt environmentsand being subject to charges of complicitywith an oppressive regime or individual.Corruption is the easiest to address – nocompany has to make corrupt payments ifit does not wish to, except perhaps in casesof extortion where human life rather thanmerely loss of business is the price of notcomplying with demands.The work of John Ruggie, formerUN Special Rapporteur on Businessand Human Rights, has done much toclarify the situation on complicity. Inthe UN Guiding Principles on Business© ReutersIranian students protest against sanctions, standingin front of an anti-US mural, painted on the wall of theformer US Embassy in Tehran. The effects of sanctionscan be counter-productive and it can be argued thatengagement by responsible businesses is a moreeffective tool against oppressive regimesand Human Rights (2011), through his‘Protect, Respect, Remedy’ Framework,Ruggie places the responsibility to protecthuman rights squarely on the nation state.However, businesses must also ensurethat they respect the human rights ofall they come into contact with. Bothgovernments and businesses, therefore,have a responsibility for remedies wherehuman rights are infringed.To engage or not?There may be times when a business isforced to withdraw due to sanctions. Inmy experience, the imposition of sanctionson, for example, Iran for over 30 yearshas merely aided and concentrated powerin an unattractive regime, decimated theWhat is ‘responsible’?When responsible businesses remainengaged in such countries, not only doesthis result in the honest provision ofimproved goods and services. It also leads tothe creation of jobs that are not dependenton the government, and to the developmentof other companies in the supply chain.Such activities can also demonstrate thatit is possible to achieve sound businessresults without engaging in corruptpractices. Much care, consideration andengagement by responsible companies andcivil society is required if the effects areindeed to be beneficial. The qualifying wordis ‘responsible’. How should we define it?There are three elements that comeinto play:1) the commitment to a code of principles,such as the Global Compact;2) public reporting on progress in theimplementation of this code in theorganisation’s day-to-day business; and3) a governance structure that is opento public pressure from shareholders,consumers and civil society organisationsand which is committed to engagementand cooperation with all other elementsof society.In whatever country, these are theelements that help to ensure that businesscan indeed play a progressive role wheregovernments falter.GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT GOALS 2014