Exporting Environmental and Human Rights Abuses – Where Does Responsibility Lie

Abstract

‘First world’ countries export their industries, manufacturing and production to ‘developing’ countries, thereby exporting their carbon emissions and other elements detrimental to biodiversity and the environment. Products manufactured for United States, United Kingdom and European Union corporations are produced in China, Bangladesh, India, Mexico and countries of Africa and, increasingly, South America. This creates low-paid jobs to the benefit of corporate profits, whilst increasing pollution and associated negative environmental consequences as well as exploiting labour and promoting human rights abuses. Countries such as the US export nuclear and chemical waste, too, transferring their blight to other parts of the globe. In the 1980s the US sought to export nuclear waste to Johnson Atoll in the Pacific, however, protest (principally from Australian activists) sought to put an end to this proposal, albeit chemical waste continues to afflict Johnson Atoll and the Pacific, it island nations people, flora, fauna and land. In the 2020s, the risks created by nuclear waste export are being multiplied with the AUKUS agreement between Australia, the UK and the US, including the prospect of US nuclear waste being disposed of in Central Australia where facility for storing the waste with any possible safety measures is lacking due to the nature of the terrain. In the 1970s, nuclear testing in the Pacific was banned when Australia went to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Now, the potential for and reality of environmental and human damage and degradation from the nuclear industry will be not on Australia’s doorstep, but effectively in the middle of the living room. What prospects are there for international law action in relation to the export of environmental damage and human rights abuse? What prospects for legal action to ensure that corporations exporting industry and outsourcing manufacturing and production contribute proportionately to environmental protections and an end to global warming and climate change? Furthermore, can legal action ensure the implementation of proper industrial conditions and payment for labour in countries taking on manufacture, production, outsourcing and supply of ‘first world’ goods.