CORPORATE COMPLICITY IN INTERNET CENSORSHIP IN CHINA: WHO CARES FOR THE GLOBAL COMPACT OR THE GLOBAL ONLINE FREEDOM ACT?

The efficacy of existing regulatory initiatives in redressing corporate complicity in human rights abuses is also suspect. Both the Global Compact (an existing initiative) and the Freedom Act (a proposed initiative) lack the effectiveness to ensure that corporate actors do not abridge human rights. The Global Compact suffers from serious limitations which direcdy impair its efficacy in promoting responsible corporate citizenship. Available data shows that, as compared to non-U.S. corporations, U.S. corporations generally are less interested in embracing and implementing the Compact. In particular, the Global Compact's principles apparendy have had no visible or significant impact on how Yahoo!, Microsoft, Google, or Cisco continue to do business in China. The failure of the Global Compact to take on board even a minimal number of U.S. corporations is a serious limitation for its success. The regulation envisioned by the Freedom Act does not offer much hope either. First, when discussed in the context of U.S. history regarding extraterritorial laws, the Freedom Act seems unlikely to pass through the Congress. But even it is enacted as law, it is doubtful the Act could achieve its noble objective in the current form.

One should not, however, lose heart in the fact that no existing initiative is able to afford robust protection against corporate human rights abuses. It took several decades to put in place statefocal human rights regimes at both the international and national levels, and the system is still far from perfect. The task of subjecting corporations to human rights norms is even more complex and challenging, given their sheer number, power, and influence. This project also challenges several well established principles of corporate and other laws, and would require a reorientation in the place and role of corporations in society. The need of the hour is to continue engagement with various stakeholders on how to move towards chartering a definite role for corporations in human rights realization. Among others, this is likely to require employment of creative, unconventional approaches and an "integrated theory" of corporate regulation384 so as to offer any real hope of justice to the victims of corporate human rights abuses. The era of legally binding corporate human rights obligations has not even properly begun.

SURYA DEVA*

* Lecturer, School of Law, City University of Hong Kong. Formerly Assistant Professor, National Law Institute University, Bhopal; Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi. LL.M., LL.B. University of Delhi; Ph.D. Thesis submitted, Faculty of Law, University of Sydney. I would like to thank Katherine KK Ng for providing research assistance. I dedicate this article to all those who suffered or are suffering due to corporate complicity in Internet censorship in China or elsewhere.

Copyright George Washington University, National Law Center 2007
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved