Germany and Norway are the two latest states to adopt laws mandating human rights due diligence by companies. Germany adopted a Law on Supply Chain Due Diligence (German Law) on 10 June 2021. 1 The same day, the Norwegian parliament passed a Transparency Act (Norwegian Act) requiring human rights and decent work due diligence. 2 Like the French Loi de Vigilance and the Dutch Child Labour Due Diligence Law, these laws provide further momentum for mandatory measures to promote corporate respect for human rights, including future regulations in the European Union (EU). While the aims are similar, the German and Norwegian laws contain certain important differences when it comes to the substance and scope of the due diligence requirement. In this context, adherence to international standards remains the way forward to ensure compliance with divergent requirements in different jurisdictions.
In the aftermath of the overthrow of President Morsi in the summer of 2013, Egypt garnered international censure for violations of due process in mass trials. Thousands of members of the political opposition, pro-democracy movement, and other activists and journalists were arrested, held in pre-trial detention, handed lengthy prison sentences, or sentenced to death in criminal courts. This article shows how ordinary criminal courts became a focal point in the repression of political opposition and activists in Egypt in the aftermath of July 2013. Studying the courts' verdicts during a time of socio-political upheaval provides insight into political and judicial dynamics, and how these may interact in times of crisis. The article shows that it was not due to executive pressure that ordinary courts reasoned and ruled as they did, but the ideologies and interests of judges. Several of the verdicts were subsequently overturned by Egypt's Court of Cassation for failing to uphold Egyptian standards of due process. This divergence may be motivated by an interest in higher courts in upholding professional and institutional integrity, revealing significant cleavages within the judiciary. This, too, may in part be deemed an expression of judicial independence.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.