Mother Company's Responsibility for Multinational Subsidiary Activities

• Hamidreza Foadi Tehran University,Tehran-Irán

Abstract

The objective of the article is to analyze the various forms of responsibility of parent companies and their subsidiary multinationals in terms of what corporate social responsibility means. At the methodological level it is analytical and descriptive research. Despite all the struggles and activities   carried out to regulate the operations of multinational corporations and the demand of the agents of the main governments   responsible for strictly monitoring compliance with the rules (corporate social responsibility) the fact that major multinational corporations are pursuing interests for the implementation oflos control and monitoring of the cross-border activities of their companies should not be ignored. It is concludedthat the government's support for foreign investment, for example, is sometimes subject to compliance with minimum social, environmental, and human rights standards. It is difficult to judge the success and outcome of the effort made to monitor and regulate the business of multinational corporations, but what seems certain is that rich countries, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, have apparently accepted the task of playing a significant role in promoting and promoting cross-border (corporate social responsibility).

References

BACKER, Larry Catá. 2005. “Multinational Corporations, Transnational Law: The United Nations' Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations as a Harbinger of Corporate Social Responsility in International Law” In: Colum. Hum. Rts. L. Rev. No. 37, pp. 253-287.‏

BACKER, Larry Catá; MOLINA, Augusto. 2009. “Cuba and the construction of alternative global trade systems: Alba and free trade in the Americas” In: ALBAPUBSSRNBACKER7-2009.DOC. Available online. In: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1407705. Consultation date: 22/10/2019.

BADGE, Myfanwy. 2006. Transboundary Accountability for Transnational Corporations: Using Private Civil Claims. Royal Institute of International Affairs. London, England.

CERIONI, Luca. 2008. Corporate governance: The OECD principles, the scope for a “model of the successful company”, and a new challenge for the company law agenda and the broader regulatory agenda. Available online. In: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/49400340_Corporate_Governance_The_OECD_principles_the_scope_for_a_model_of_the_successful_company_and_a_new_challenge_for_the_company_law_agenda_and_the_broader_regulatory_agenda. Consultation date: 14/04/2019.

CERNIC, Jernej Letnar. 2008. “Corporate responsibility for human rights: A critical analysis of the OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises” In: International Law/ Internationales Recht. Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 71-100.

COUSSENS, Christine. (ed.). 2007. Global environmental health in the 21st century: From governmental regulation to corporate social responsibility: Workshop summary. Available online. In: https://doi.org/10.17226/11833. Consultation date: 22/10/2019.

DOWNES, John; GOODMAN, Jordan Elliot. 2006.‏ Dictionary of finance and investment terms. Barrons Educational Series Incorporated. New York, USA.

DU, Shuili; BHATTACHARYA, Chitrabhan, B; SEN, Sankar. 2010. “Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication” In: International journal of management reviews. Vol. 12, No.1, pp. 8-19.‏

FERRAN, Eilis. 2011. “Corporate attribution and the directing mind and will” In: Law Quarterly Review. Vol.127, pp. 239-259.‏

HOSSEINI KHAZAN, Marzieh. 2010. The Laws Regarding the Activities of Transnational Corporations, Thesis for a Master's Degree in International Business Law. Shahid Beheshti University. Teheran, Iran.

IMBER, Jane; TOFFLER, Betsy-Ann. 1994. Dictionary of Marketing Terms (Barron's Business Guides). Barron's snippet , Barrons Educational Series, Hauppauge, New York, USA.

‏

MCCAHERY, Joseph; PICCIOTTO, Sol; SCOTT, Colin. 1995.‏ Corporate control and accountability: changing structures and the dynamics of regulation. Oxford University Press. Oxford, England.

MORTARA, Letizia; MINSHALL, Tim. 2011. “How do large multinational companies implement open innovation?” In: Technovation. Vol. 31, No.10-11, pp. 586-597.‏

PLOUFFE-MALETTE, Kristine; MCCORQUODALE, Robert. 2012. “International Law Beyond the State. Essays on Sovereignty, non-State Actors and Human Rights” In: Londres, CMP Publishing, 2011. Revue québécoise de droit international. No. 25-1, pp. 227-233.

SAXENA, Harshit. 2010. “Lifting of Corporate Veil” In: SSRN. Available online. In: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1725433. Consultation date: 15/12/2019.

SEIFI, Seyed Jamal; HASSANKHANI, Ali. 2017. “Countermeasures for Human Rights Obligations” In: Journal of Public Law (Law Research Quarterly) (Law & Politics Research Journal). Vol. 19, No. 56, pp. 34-58.

THORSEN, Sune Skadegaard; ANDREASEN, Signe. 2012. “Remodelling responsible supply chain management: the corporate responsibility to respect human rights in supply chain relationships” In: The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Available online. In: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004225794_006. Consultation date: 22/10/2019.

TIGNOR, Robert L. 2015. Modernization and British colonial rule in Egypt, 1882-1914. Princeton University Press. Nueva Jersey, UU. EE. ‏

VANDEKERCKHOVE, Karen. Piercing the corporate veil. 2007. Eur. Company L. Wolters Kluwer. Amsterdam, Netherlands.

WINCKLER, Antoine. 2011. “Parent's Liability: New case extending the presumption of liability of a parent company for the conduct of its wholly owned subsidiary” In: Journal of European Competition Law & Practice. Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 231-233.