How can corporate accountability be interpreted when dealing with complex international interdependencies and how victims of socio-economic violations by corporations can enforce their rights?

The ever-growing world population is increasing pressure on the integration and implementation of socio-economic rights. This, coupled with the globalized economic environment, increases problems in the enforcement and protection of socio-economic rights against companies. In countries where there is no adequate national legal system in which these are abundant. In some cases, the victims also face a corrupt system. The problems are particularly difficult in the international supply chain. It is becoming apparent that investments are increasingly being made in emerging and developing countries, with global companies having a major influence on them. Hence the question, how can corporate accountability be interpreted when dealing with such complex international interdependencies and how victims of socio-economic violations by corporations can enforce their rights. In the book "Corporate Accountability under Socio-Economic Rights", Jernej Letnar Černič describes corporate accountability from the perspective of socio- economic rights in a narrow understanding as the responsibility of companies resulting from interaction or omissions regarding socio-economic rights and interests. However, he also considers corporate responsibility in the context of violations of socio-economic rights. Černič addresses the problem of a lack of a common understanding of accountability. He attempts to understand corporate responsibility at different levels and to take a differentiated view of it. He succeeds in doing so by adopting a structured approach from different perspectives, supporting the idea that victims of rights violations should have a choice of ways and means to act against violations of socio- economic rights by companies. It is interesting to see how the lack of an international legal platform has led to the fact that the enforcement of socio-economic rights takes place mostly at the national level. Proximity to right holders ensures that greater attention is paid to them. It thus becomes clear how problematic the international interdependence of companies is, as infringement of rights and responsibilities can be outsourced where national legal systems no longer apply, although it is the latter that are trying to protect those affected or have an interest in safeguarding socio-economic rights, for whatever reasons. It is therefore difficult even for companies themselves to meet the differing demands of national groups. An international platform for the enforcement of socio-economic rights is therefore an important means of safeguarding them. Černič notes that although there is an international solution through the Optional Protocol, there are only 22 ratifications. However, he correctly notes that it does not take into account direct complaints against companies. On the contrary, it does not allow individuals to take adequate international action against human rights violations. This is why companies often set voluntary standards for their social responsibility. With codes of conduct such as CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility), companies control compliance. It should be noted that this does not create any obligations for companies. In this respect, companies can determine the appropriateness by their self-determination. The success of such measures is therefore questionable and only shows more clearly that international platforms are necessary. Particularly with regard to more countries catching up and opening up bring further population groups and affected persons.