Congress has begun serious consideration of a set of human rights principles which, if adopted, would urge U.S. companies to make a “good faith effort” to decline joint ventures with Soviet firms that engage in human rights violations.
The principles have been hailed by human rights activists, but detractors include both the State Department and many U.S. companies. They are concerned the Slepak Principles — named after former refusenik Vladimir Slepak — will serve to discourage the Soviets’ new-found interest in opening up their markets to the West.
The Senate postponed action Thursday on a bill containing the Slepak Principles, and referred it to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Sens. John Heinz (R-Pa.) and Dennis DeConcini (D-Ariz.), who introduced the bill during debate on the State Department authorization bill, received a pledge that the committee will hold a hearing on the principles by Sept. 15.
The principles are a seven-point human rights code written by the Slepak Foundation, the Philadelphia-based human rights group founded by Dr. Alexander Slepak, Vladimir’s son.
The principles target a number of human rights violations said to be practiced in the Soviet Union and Baltic states, and include provisions that U.S.-Soviet joint ventures comply with international standards for occupational safety and environmental protection.
U.S. companies would be asked not to engage in business if a Soviet firm or project was known to engage in forced labor, political or ethnic discrimination or the desecration of current or former religious institutions.
Although adherence to the principles would be voluntary, the law would order the State Department to submit a yearly report to Congress that monitors compliance. The law would not provide for the punishment of those companies that do not go along.
SENDS A STRONG MESSAGE
Human rights organizations and advocacy groups, including the Union of Councils for Soviet Jews, said the Slepak Principles will send a strong message to the Soviets on human rights.
Defending the bill, a spokesman for Heinz said Wednesday that “it is important to bear in mind that Soviet societies have been sporadic in terms of openings and closings.”
The Slepak Foundation first presented its principles to lawmakers at a meeting in October 1988. They were partly a response to new initiatives by Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to open up Soviet markets to Western investors, according to Jack Engelhard, communications director for the foundation.
Engelhard said the principles were inspired by the example set by Vladimir Slepak, who was a founding member of the Moscow group that monitored Soviet compliance with the Helsinki human rights accords before he was allowed to emigrate in 1987. Slepak now lives in Israel.
Reps. John Miller (R-Wash.) and Lawrence Smith (D-Fla.) introduced the principles as a House bill in May. The House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on human rights has yet to hold hearings on the principles.
Engelhard said the principles had earned the endorsement of the AFL-CIO, the Union of Councils for Soviet Jews, assorted advocacy organizations representing ethnic in the Soviet Union and the Rev. Leon Sullivan of Philadelphia.
Sullivan is the author of the Sullivan Principles, a 1985 employment code for U.S. businesses active in South America. The code was adopted to help U.S. government efforts to fight apartheid.
Like the Sullivan Principles, the Slepak Principles have met resistance from American businesses and trade groups.
The companies say that practices codes, export controls and economic sanctions should not be used as political tools, because they end up hurting the people they are trying to protect.
The companies point out that adherence to the Sullivan Principles failed to undermine apartheid in South Africa.
Not one of the 30 U.S. corporations invited agreed to take part in the October 1988 meeting announcing the Slepak principles.
Secretary of State James Baker has also testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that with Soviet society appearing to open up, the time is not ripe to press the Soviets on human rights.
A State Department representative is again expected to voice the department’s objections next week before the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Europe and the Middle East.
But according to Engelhard, “there’s never a wrong time to be for human rights.
“We’re not asking that American businesses refrain from doing business with the Soviet Union. We’re only saying that if you’re going to do it, keep your eyes open.”
Micah Naftalin, national director of the Union of Councils, said debate over the Slepak Principles is related to the Jackson-Vanik Amendment, which denies the Soviet Union favorable trade status with the United States until it allows for free emigration.
“For years we’ve been hearing from those parts of the private sector that we don’t need Jackson-Vanik, that there are better ways for the private sector to promote human rights and emigration,” Naftalin said.
“It is our sense that the Slepak Principles have the effect of asking the private sector to put their money where their mouth is.”
JTA has documented Jewish history in real-time for over a century. Keep our journalism strong by joining us in supporting independent, award-winning reporting.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
