I. Introduction

The end of the Cold War represented a seminal moment for
the human rights movement. In less than three decades of active
campaigning, non-governmental advocates had made human rights a common and
powerful language and could claim no small part in the widespread
attention to civil liberties and democratic reforms in countries
throughout Latin America, Africa, Asia, and Eastern Europe. But if the
expansion of freedom and democracy represented a victory for human rights,
it also underscores the dangers of equating civil and political rights
with human dignity. The enduring and pervasive poverty suffered by well
over a billion people across the globe stands as an inescapable rebuke to
those ready to celebrate the "age of rights." ^{href="#_ftn1"
name="_ftnref1">1}

The human rights movement has much to offer the struggle
against poverty, but it must first move beyond its unnecessarily narrow
vision of human rights. The domination of Western nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs) and governments has produced a model of human rights
advocacy that is limited to civil liberties and state action. ^{href="#_ftn2"
name="_ftnref2">2} While the narrow focus on civil
liberties has been widely criticized and an increasing number of NGOs are
now addressing economic, social, and cultural rights (ESCR), the singular
focus on state action endures. This focus fails to address the roots of
many violations — particularly violations of ESCR — that increasingly lie
beyond national borders.

This article suggests a fuller interpretation of human
rights obligations, making them more relevant and truer to international
realities. Moving human rights beyond its state-centric paradigm will
potentially serve two purposes. First, it will challenge the reigning
neo-liberal extremism that infects much of the public discourse about
development and poverty, providing a rhetoric and vision to suggest that
entrenched poverty is neither inevitable nor acceptable. Second, it will
provide a legal framework with which to begin holding the most influential
non-state actors — corporations, financial institutions, and third-party
states ^{href="#_ftn3"
name="_ftnref3">3} — more accountable for their role in creating and
sustaining poverty. This article will outline the role of these sectors in
ESCR violations and the extent to which they are governed by human rights
instruments. The focus on impact and accountability is meant to
demonstrate the importance of, and the legal basis for, broadening human
rights advocacy to address additional actors.