기업의 인권침해 연루에 관한 법적 규제- 국제법상 연루의 법리를 중심으로 -
이상수
2018년
' 기업의 인권침해 연루에 관한 법적 규제- 국제법상 연루의 법리를 중심으로 -' 의 참고문헌
-
로마조약(The Rome Statute)과 國際刑事裁判所(ICC)에 관한 小考송상현 [2003]
-
기업의 사회적 책임 맥락에서 본 유노칼 판결의 의미이상수 [2011]
-
기업과 인권Ruggei, John [2014]
-
‘로힝야족 비극’에 한국 등 외국 대기업은 관계없나?
-
[判例評釋] 미연방대법원 Kiobel 판결의 국제인권법적 검토(미연방대법원 No. 10-1491, 2012.02.28. 1차 변론, 2012.10.01. 2차 변론, 2013.04.17. 판결)백범석 [2013]
-
World War II
-
United States v. von Weizsaecker (“The Ministries Case”), 14 Trials of War Criminals 308 (1950)
-
United States of America, the French Republic, the United Hingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics v Hermann Wilhelm Goering et al., The International Military Tribunal
-
United States of America vs. Carl Krauch et al., US Military Tribunal Nuremberg, (30 July 1948)
-
United Nations War Crimes Commission, 1 Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals 93, 101-02 (1947)
-
Transnational Public Law LitigationKoh, Harold Hongju [1990]
-
Transnational Corporations and International Human Rights LawDroubi, Sufyan [2016]
-
Tracing the Contours of Transnational Corporations’ Human Rights Obligations in the Twenty-first CenturyHalpern, Iris [2008]
-
The Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact
-
The Past and Present of Corporate Complicity: Financing the Argentinean DictatorshipBohoslavsky, Juan Pablo [2010]
-
The Mens Rea Standard for Corporate Aiding and Abetting Liability: Conclusions from International Criminal LawMichalowski, Sabine [2014]
-
The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: An Interpretative GuideOHCHR [2012]
-
Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 U.S. 692
-
Prosecutor v. Vasiljevic, Case No. IT-98-32-A, ICTY Appeals Chamber, Feb. 25, 2004)
-
Prosecutor v. Tadic, Case No. IT-94-1-A (ICTY, Appeals Chamber July 15, 1999)
-
Prosecutor v. Periŝiŝ, Case No. IT-04-81-A, Appeals Judgement, para. 48 (ICTY Appeals Chamber, Feb. 28, 2013)
-
Prosecutor v. Furundzija, Case No. IT-95-17/1 (ICTY, 1998.12.10.)
-
Prosecutor v. Aleksovski, Case No. IT-95-14/1- A, ICTY Appeals Chamber, Mar.24, 2000)
-
Prosecutor v Kvocka Case No. IT-98-30/1 (ICTY Trial Chamber, 2 November 2001)
-
Prosecutor v Blagojevic and Jokic, Case No. IT-02-60-A (ICTY Appeals Chamber, 9 May 2007)
-
Prosecutor v Blagoje Simić, Case No. IT-95-9-A (ICTY Appeals Chamber, 28 November 2006)
-
Prosecutor v Andre Ntagerura, Case No. ICTR-99-46-A (ICTR Appeals Chamber, 7 July 2006)
-
Prosecuting Corporations for Genocide under International LawKelly, Michael J. [2012]
-
Presbyterian Church of Sudan, et al., v. Talisman Energy, Inc., On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
-
Presbyterian Church Of Sudan v Talisman Energy Inc., 582_F.3d_244
-
Presbyterian Church Of Sudan v Talisman Energy Inc., 453 F.Supp.2d 633
-
OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises
-
Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with Regard to Human RightsUnited Nations [2003]
-
Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with Regard to Human RightsWeissbrodt, David [2003]
-
No Complicity Liability for Funding Gross Human Rights Violations?Michalowski, Sabine [2012]
-
Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 133 S.Ct. 1659
-
Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum Co, 621 F.3d 111
-
Khulumani v Barclay Nat Bank Ltd, 504 F.3d 254
-
Interim Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business EnterprisesRuggie, John [2006]
-
In re South African Apartheid Litigation, 617 F. Supp. 2d 228
-
Impact on Human Rights of Private Military and Security Companies’ Activities
-
Human Rights Violations by Canadian Companies Aborad: Choc v Hudbay Mineral IncPea, Susana C. Mijares [2014]
-
Human Rights Principles for Companies
-
Human Rights
-
Guidance for Social Responsibility
-
Final Report
-
Doing Business with a Bad Actor: How to Draw the Line between Legitimate Commercial Activities and those that Trigger Corporate Complicity liabilityMichalowski, Sabine [2015]
-
Doe I v. Unocal Corp., 395 F.3d 932
-
Doe I v. Nestle USA, Inc., 766 F.3d 1013, 1017-18
-
Declaration 60/147 on the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law
-
Corporations are not PeopleClements, Jeffrey D. [2012]
-
Corporation and Human Rights: A Theory of Legal ResponsibilityRatner, Steven R. [2001]
-
Corporate liability for Gross Human Rights Abuses: Towards a Fairer and more Effective System of Domestic Law Remedy, A Report Prepared for the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human RightsZerk, Jennifer [2013]
-
Corporate Complicity: From Nurenberg to Rangoon - An Examination of Forced Labor Cases and Their Impact on the Liability of Multinational CorporationsRamasastry, Anita [2002]
-
Corporate Complicity in International Human Rights ViolationPayne, Leigh A. [2016]
-
Corporate Complicity & Legal Accountability, Vol. 1-3
-
Commerce, Crime and Conflict: Legal Remedies for Grave Breaches of International Law, A Survey of Sixteen CountriesRamasastry, Anita [2006]
-
Clarifying the Concepts of ‘Sphere of influence’ and ‘Complicity’, Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and other Business EnterprisesRuggie, John [2008]
-
Business & Human Rights Law: Diverging Trends in the United States and FranceTriponel, Anna [2008]
-
'기업과 인권 조약' 논의의 쟁점과 전망이상수 [2017]