Corporate Human Rights Responsibility in Illiberal Regimes
The Example of the Ukrainian Refugee Crisis in Hungary
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13019254 |
|---|---|
| Authors | András L Pap (0000-0003-4546-6632, Eötvös Loránd University, corresponding author), Nóra Chronowski (0000-0003-0519-0707, Institute for Legal Studies), Zoltán Nemessányi (Corvinus University of Budapest) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 9 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 32-53 |
| Publication date | 2024-02-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Business and Human Rights Journal (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2057-0198 • E-ISSN: 2057-0201 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/bhj.2024.5 |
| OpenAlex | W4393045793 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 32 |
Following the first-ever rule of law conditionality procedure in September 2022, a resolution was adopted by the European Parliament which declared that Hungary could no longer be considered a full democracy, as it had turned into a ‘hybrid regime of electoral autocracy’. Against this background, this article explains the business and human rights (BHR) gap in Hungary and presents its consequences for the Ukrainian refugee crisis. We first provide a general overview of the role of business in the development and consolidation of the Orbán regime over the past 13 years, highlighting how businesses are both agents and victims of legal and political developments. The paper distinguishes four types of ‘business’: multinational and foreign companies that are direct beneficiaries of the regime; local companies that are direct beneficiaries of the regime; multinational companies that are targets of restrictive and repressive populist rhetoric and economic policies; and the ‘rest’, the remainder that try to avoid becoming targets of oligarchic takeovers. The article also documents how the state and other stakeholders are failing to meet their commitments under the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). The next part of the article assesses how companies are responding to the refugee crisis caused by the war in Ukraine, Hungary’s neighbour. If the government does not adopt Pillar I and Pillar III of the UNGPs, what room for manoeuvre do companies have? The focus here is on how companies, domestic and foreign, multinational enterprises (MNEs) and small and medium enterprises (SMEs), engage in humanitarian (and human rights) crisis management
Development economics · Economics · Human rights · Political economy · Political science · Refugee · Refugee crisis · Sociology · Ukrainian · European and International Law Studies · Law
Post-Communist Mafia State
Refugee Protection and Civil Society in Europe
Democratic Decline in Hungary
The Refugee Reception Crisis
Multinational Corporations and Global Justice
The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights
The politicized motivations of volunteers in the refugee crisis
Restructuring and re-regulation of the Hungarian tobacco market
National Action Plans on Business and Human Rights
Conditionalities in International Organization Accession Processes
The Swiss Human Rights Due Diligence Legislation
National Action Plans
The French Law on Duty of Care
Hungary’S U-Turn
Corporate Social Responsibility Versus Business and Human Rights
Explaining Orbán
Nationalisation in Hungary in the Post-Crisis Years
Disappearing workers
How Orbán won? Neoliberal disenchantment and the grand strategy of financial nationalism to reconstruct capitalism and regain autonomy
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |