You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
But is it possible to hold companies accountable for abuses in their supply chains?
YES!
French law stipulates that large companies must mitigate risks of abuse in their supply chains, or else be liable - for subsidiaries & suppliers
#bizhumanrights
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/28/lafarge-charged-with-complicity-in-syria-crimes-against-humanity …pic.twitter.com/2xrMv4bSxh
Interesting cases. (quite different I think). It ought to be hard (i.e. not the norm) to overturn domestic sovereignty and appeal to foreign courts about the conduct of a local company In the Unilever case the English court seem to be saying this is a matter for Kenyan courtspic.twitter.com/CKZSS6Iyf2
They're not appealing to a foreign court about the conduct of a local company.
They are. Para 1 says"In order to be able to sue UTKL in England, appellants have to show that they have a claim against Unilever (to be anchor defendant in this jurisdiction). The judges dont find 'Unilever is not liable', but that it is up to Kenyan courts to determinepic.twitter.com/iSkBeJDtkX
(a parallel to think about): UK's previous P&O ports are owned by the UAE company DP World. If there was a dispute between employees, suppliers or local community and the London Gateway Port we would not expect the case to be heard in Dubai.
Could be either. Likewise with transnational bribery, a French company that bribes a Kenyan official could be tried in a US court, a French court, or even a Kenyan court. Each has a law prohibiting this (1977, 2017, 2016 respectively).
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
