Abstract

State-owned enterprises (SOEs) carry out important activities in many countries, often generating considerable negative impact regarding the enjoyment of human rights. This paper addresses issues of attribution of responsibility in international customary law and international human rights law, considering that international remedies are one of the possible venues for access to justice in case national redress fails. The question is whether responsibility only arises when the State does not comply with its duty of SOEs’ human rights impact, or whether acts and/or omissions by SOEs may also be directly attributable to the State. Finally, the paper looks into a recent proposal that it is necessary to use “piercing the veil” theories in order to complement theories of state responsibility and evaluates its usefulness for international human rights law. The article argues, innovating on this point, that SOEs are the only business entities which have, as of now, direct responsibilities under international law lege lata.