CYIL vol. 8 (2017)

CYIL 8 ȍ2017Ȏ INDIRECT OBLIGATIONS OF BUSINESS ENTITIES UNDER THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION… Legal theory distinguishes between ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ obligations of the subjects of law. Thomas Donaldson in his monograph titled ‘Corporations and Morality’ offers very straightforward definitions of both terms at issue: “Direct obligations are those that are specified explicitly and formally” and “Indirect obligations have opposite characteristics”. 6 Carlos Manuel Vázquez in his paper titled ‘Direct vs. Indirect Obligations of Corporations under International Law’ specifies that international law regulates corporate conduct indirectly by requiring states to enact and enforce regulations applicable to corporations. 7 Given the context of present research, it is possible to define indirect obligations of business entities under the Convention as the duties set forth by the states with the aim to regulate the conduct of businesses in order to comply with the norms of this treaty . Such obligations are implied in the text of the Convention and could be demonstrated by means of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter also ‘the Court’). From this perspective, we may say that the obligations at issue take root in international law. In literature dealing with the subject-matter we find two concepts that may have a synonymous meaning. These are the terms ‘obligations’ and ‘duties’. In a general sense, there may be a difference in the meanings of these words. The Cambridge dictionary defines a ‘duty’ as “something that you have to do because it is part of your job, or something that you feel is the right thing to do”. 8 Meanwhile, an ‘obligation’ denotes “the fact that you are obliged to do something”. 9 The definitions above illustrate a difference between the two concepts. With reference to German philosopher Immanuel Kant, some scholars explain that an act of duty emanated from moral law and an obligation arises out of a set of rules aimed at maintaining order. 10 For the purposes of law, the distinction of these two notions is less clear. In Black’s Law Dictionary, ‘legal duty’ is described as “an obligation arising from contract of the parties or the operation of the law” 11 and ‘legal obligation’ as “the obligation or duty that is enforced by a court of law”. 12 Here we see that the terms ‘obligation’ and ‘duty’ are interchangeable. Société de législation comparée published a ground study on comparison of the notions ‘duty’ and ‘obligation’. 13 They recognise that there are strong obstacles to a coherent use of the terms ‘obligation’ and ‘duty’ within the various legal systems and that academic accessed 17 May 2017; Multinational Corporations: Human Rights beyond States’ Responsibility. The dissertation submitted for the degree of MA in Understanding and Securing Human Rights of the University of London. Student No. 1040731, 2 September 2011. URL: accessed 21 May 2017. 6 DONALDSON, Thomas, Corporations and Morality . Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1982, p. 32. 7 VÁZQUEZ, Carlos Manuel, Direct vs. Indirect Obligations of Corporations Under International Law. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law , 2005, Vol. 43, p. 927. 8 Cambridge dictionary on-line. URL: accessed 18 May 2017. 9 Cambridge dictionary on-line. URL: < http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/obligation> accessed 18 May 2017. 10 BRANDT, R. B., The Concepts of Obligation and Duty. New Series , Vol. 73, No. 291 (Jul., 1964), pages 374-393; KELLY, Bob. Difference Between Duties & Obligations. URL: accessed 18 May 2017. 11 Black’s Law Dictionary Free Online Legal Dictionary 2nd Ed. URL: accessed 18 May 2017. 12 Black’s Law Dictionary Free Online Legal Dictionary 2nd Ed. URL: < http://thelawdictionary.org/legal- obligation/> accessed 18 May 2017. 13 Obligation and Duty. URL: accessed 18 May 2017.

293