Prevention of Terrorism and Business Continuity - Essay Example

Prevention of Terrorism and Business Continuity Introduction The relationship between terrorism and business has not been at the forefront in the literature on terrorism. Much of the attention has been directed at assessing the impact of terrorist attacks on certain sectors of the economy such as tourism, trade, insurance, defence, and foreign direct investment. The significance of business continuity was brought to the forefront by the 9/11terrorist attacks and other terror attacks across Europe. The private sector suffered significantly both directly and indirectly from the terror attacks of 9/11, which acted as a catalyst rather than a trigger to the concerns on business continuity planning in the event of terror attacks. The events availed a remarkable case of a widening interdependence of both the private and public sectors in confronting the present-day security challenges. Since the 9/11, the fight against terrorism has been a top political priority for both the government and businesses alike. Governments have a responsibility to prevent and disrupt terrorist attacks, which hinges on coordinated and collaborative relationships between the intelligence, security, and law enforcement agencies. The key motivation has not only been because of the suffering of the victims, but also because terrorist attacks are a direct assault on elemental values of human rights, rules of law, and democracy (Frias, Samuel and White 2012, 483). Terrorism bears a direct impact on the enjoyment of several human rights such as rights to life, liberty, and physical integrity. Terrorist attacks significantly destabilize governments; they also compromise peace and security, as well as social and economic development. One of the prominent themes in the human rights debate encompasses enhanced recognition of the link between business and human rights. The application of law in relation to the prevention of terrorism often proves to be complex, especially regarding recognition of human rights as outlined by instruments such as European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and UN Charter on human rights. Businesses can wield immense power and bear a direct impact on governmental policies and enjoyment of human rights. Businesses bear an obligation to contribute to the promotion and safeguarding of human rights (Ganor 2005, p.149). The preface of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights outlines that all persons and every organ of the society shall endeavour to promote respect for human rights and basic freedoms (Zwitter 2011, p.20). Corporations, as organs of society, have a crucial function to play in attaining adherence to human rights provisions. Companies have, as a minimum, responsibilities towards their employees and those affected by the company’s operations. Terrorism: A Brief Overview A broad range of groups incorporating both foreign and home grown perpetrators are capable of launching terrorist attacks. Security agencies in the United States and other Western countries are increasingly recognizing that the chief threat to business emanate from Islamic extremists, which are mainly linked to or inspired by al-Qaida. Successes by securities agencies such as the death of Osama bin Laden, and US drone strikes against known al-Qaida agents have significantly reduced the capability of foreign agents to carry out operations freely within Western countries. However, the increasing threat of home grown terrorism remains a constant threat to businesses (Goo 2009, p.101). Most home grown violent, extremist groups are significantly constrained tactically by a complex operating environment; however, some of the groups are manifesting enhanced tradecraft and operational security, which translates into an evolving threat. The franchising of jihadist crusade means that most terror plots will probably involve home grown jihadist targeting soft targets such as businesses (such as hotels and shopping malls) and mass transportation infrastructure. Domestic terrorism, in particular, presents an unprecedented threat to businesses. Businesses should be actively involved in terror attacks prevention since, historically, most attacks have targeted commercial enterprises or critical infrastructure instalments. Terrorists regard businesses as attractive targets owing to the regular public access and ease of access. In the long-term, the suppression of terrorism threat is a generational challenge demanding an active partnership across society (Suder 2008, p.10). The private sector can avail a significant contribution to both national and international effort against terrorism. Home grown terrorism can be singled out to be the genesis of the dilemma that governments and businesses find themselves in, especially on the premise of human rights abuses. In an effort to counter and tackle the growing home grown extremism, some governments have instituted restrictions on movement, which have yielded diminished freedom of action (Combs and Slann 2007, p.318). In addition, governments have often been accused of flouting rules prohibiting the application of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment. Governments have a critical role to play in maintaining a constant, competent, and vigilant posture in protecting the masses against fresh threats and evolving terror threats. Threats against national security and strategic interests are constantly evolving and interdependent, which means that both the government and business enterprises must pursue new capabilities and technologies that can aid preventing terror attacks (Bullock, Haddow, Yeletaysi and Coppola 2009, p.12). Terrorism Risk Terrorism risk can be perceived to possess three components; threat to a target, target’s vulnerability to the threat, and consequences in case of a successful attack. Risk assessment incorporates deciding the protective measures to take regarding the agreed upon risk reduction strategy. Businesses face exposure to terrorism either at home or abroad. Companies bear a duty to care for their employees, clients, visitors and shareholders and may suffer significant damage to their reputation in instances in which companies are viewed as failing to meet the set responsibilities, regardless of whether the businesses have explicit legal liability (Alexander 2004, p.8). As a result, businesses must respond to the ever present threats of terrorism, as well as the accompanying human rights concerns. In terms of its impact on business assets and the continuity of the business, a terrorist attack can create a blockage of access to business premises, cause direct and collateral property damage, lead to interruption to revenue streams, and disruption to supply chains or distribution networks. Other impacts of terror attacks on the business operations include reputational risk and balance sheet impairment. Role of Business in Prevention of terrorism Businesses play an essential role in the struggle against terrorism. Businesses are engaged in diverse measures directed at preventing terror attacks such as aiding to cut off the flow of money to terrorist organizations, producing anti- terrorist equipments, and beefing up security within the premises such as screening employees and visitors entering business facilities. Businesses should obey the set guidelines on insurance and anti-money laundering regulations so as to aid in prevention of financing of terrorism (Frey 2009, p.779). The regulations set out the standards critical to minimizing the risk of terrorism. However, such efforts to fight terrorism raise the cost of undertaking business and act like a new tax to private business enterprises. Despite the extra cost visited upon businesses in the fight against terrorism, businesses play a central role in shaping the national response to terrorism. Corporation plays a critical role in crisis management such as during terror attacks (Suder 2004, p.43). The private sector is engaged in diverse activities such as insurance provision, occupational health and safety, business continuity, volunteer and donation activities, reporting and information dissemination, and disaster preparedness and sheltering. The Collaboration between the Government and private sector in implementing Counterterrorism Measures Most of the anti- terror policies have yielded cumulative material costs, which have surpassed direct effects of terrorist attacks. As a result, it has become apparent that businesses and the government must collaborate in the fight against terrorism. Businesses should have a continuity plan, such as terrorism insurance cover that enables those directly impacted or suffering a significant or minor loss are able to continue with business operations. Statistics indicate that almost 80% of all businesses impacted by severe incidents never reopen or close within 18 months. Business interruption hits companies in critical areas such as cash flow, reputation, staff morale, and customer relationships. The struggle against terrorism can be perceived to incorporate two fronts; the government and private enterprises that are at the heart of the economic power. The government outlines the basic policies on internal security matters such as screening transfers at border crossings and airports. Anti- terrorism planning should pursue a closer interaction between the government and the private sector in order to ensure that efforts for fighting terrorism complement each other (Bailes and Frommelt 2004, p.2). The involvement of the private sector in preventing terrorism is informed by the fact that government programs and strategies, alone, are incapable of preventing and dealing effectively with terror attacks. Counterterrorism strategies should not be exclusive to the government domain as the private sector input, as well as public participation is essential in sustaining the fight against terrorism. It is essential for the private sector to play a bigger role in the prevention of terrorism as the challenge of prevention of soft targets grows. A combined effort by both the government and the private sector should shape the “last line of defence” against terror attacks. Similarly, the relations between the government and private sector companies via public-private partnership are essential, especially because the government does not have the resources to protect critical infrastructure (Bailes and Frommelt 2004, p.5). Effective responses to terrorism must incorporate a collaborative dimension whereby the government and the businesses must act in concert in tackling terrorism. Governments and businesses alike must collaborate in the fight against terrorism since terror attacks affect and threaten the continuity of both the government and businesses. The link between the promise of human rights and protection from terrorism is critical. The reconciliation of civil liberties and security of the state heralds a paradox whereby acts of terror flourish in the freedom of liberal democracies, which presents a conducive environment favourable to the preparation and the execution of terrorist acts fashioned at destabilizing or destroying state structures and propelling certain ideological ends (Ganor 2005, p.151). There are diverse examples that illustrate the complex juxtaposition between civil liberties and national security, where a perfect balance between the two may be elusive owing to erosion of civil liberties. Respect for human rights is grounded in respect for the integrity of persons, including freedom from arbitrary or illegitimate deprivation of life, disappearance, torture and other inhuman or degrading acts, arbitrary arrest or detention, deprivation of a just, public trial, and unnecessary interfering with privacy. Importance of Respect Human Rights to Business Continuity Planning Combating and eventually defeating terrorism will be elusive if the means to secure the society does not conform with human rights standards. The guaranteeing of security demands a multidimensional approach that balances liberty with security issues. Responses towards combating terrorism must be in conformity with the law statutes and not threaten human rights, which forms the bedrock of democratic societies (Schorlemer 2003, p.265). This is informed by the fact that much of the anti- terrorist measures encompass invasions of privacy, interferences in the execution of the liberty of expression and association, and an onslaught to the procedural safeguards. Some of the counterterrorism measures that depict an onslaught on human rights include denial of access to legal representation, surveillance of conversation with lawyers, denial of the right to challenge the legality of detention, ill-treatment such as torture, and arbitrary detention. Protection of human rights is a critical component (a precondition) for any anti- terrorist measure. There are diverse approaches to the intricacy of Human Rights and fight against terrorism. One of the controversial approaches advocates a “balance” between human rights and security issues. However, there is a thin line between conformity with human rights standards and combating terror threats. Domestic and international human rights law recognize that some human rights may be restricted suffice that any restrictions is proportionate to the threat posed and that the measures taken are essential to the prevention of terrorism or apprehension of perpetrators (Schutter2010, 12). The application of the proportionality principle does not necessarily guarantee the supremacy of human rights, although it can be perceived as a screen protecting the indiscriminate application of legislative and administrative powers. Although the central objective of businesses is the maximization of profits, the adoption of human rights can derive the following benefits: The business case The adoption of a human rights policy can enhance the reputation of a business, which in turn contributes to increased sales, enhanced shareholder satisfaction, and elevated “licence to operate.” Other benefits include enhanced employee satisfaction and productivity. The moral case Human rights are universal and businesses, as non state actors, have a moral obligation to ensure respect for human rights. The legal case Businesses have a responsibility to respect human rights as outlined by UN Norms on Human Rights. The responsibility to respect human rights forms the minimal expectation where businesses are expected to avoid complicity. Human rights forms one of the initiatives addressed under corporate responsibility goals and principles along other areas such as corporate governance and labour standards. On human rights, businesses should support and respect the protection of international acclaimed human rights provisions, especially in the era of terrorism threat (Hert 2005, P.68). In addition, businesses should not be complicit in human rights abuses. The UN Norms on the role of Corporations and other business enterprises concerning Human Rights avail the baseline for human rights principles. The provisions map out human rights issues as essential, expected, and desirable business actions. The human rights provisions as outlined by UN Norms on Human Rights outline that all persons have a right to equal opportunity and non discriminatory treatment. The provisions also outline that all persons bear a right to security and respect for human rights. Businesses are expected to uphold better corporate governance and enhanced accountability, transparency and integrity, as the outlined principles form the foundation of corporate success and legitimacy (Schutter2010, 15). A company’s corporate responsibility revolves around the notion of responsibility towards a company’s “sphere of influence”. A company’s sphere of influence encompasses people to whom the company has certain contractual, political, economic, and geographic proximity. Complicity may be direct or indirect, especially when a company authorises, tolerates or purposely overlooks human rights abuses perpetrated by actors associated with it, or deliberately assists in or encourages human rights abuse (Hawkins 2006, p.5). Companies influence the government’s policies on broad issues and bear a moral, if not legal responsibility to apply its influence to promote policies and actions that sponsor human rights. Besides the implementation of minimum human rights pertinent to the business sector, businesses are expected to implement voluntary initiatives towards corporate social responsibility. The corporation’s responsibility to respect human rights is a global standard that outlines how business enterprises are expected to operate. Businesses should adopt policies that demonstrate their commitment to human rights. The corporate responsibility to value human rights requires due diligence to avoid violating the right of others and addressing harms that may arise. Companies are expected to take into account the geographical contexts for certain challenges they may pose, as well as how those might shape the human rights impacts on company activities and relationships (Cooper and Eicher 2007, p.21). Companies need human rights due diligence process that informs ways of preventing and addressing cases of human rights violations. The heightened calls for effective corporate citizenship (CSR Movement) have presented businesses with risks and opportunities, especially with regard to business continuity planning. In addition to addressing the requirements for greater corporate accountability and transparency, the private sector is expected to engage in the community and international development efforts directed at tackling the complex social, economic, and environmental challenges that neither the business or the government can solve on its own such as terrorism (Hawkins 2006, p.2). Businesses often face challenges in attempting to reconcile the countervailing concerns of privacy, freedom, and security. The protection of basic rights relevant in the contemporary information and knowledge society such as liberty of expression, movement, and privacy are often undermined in the name of public security concerns (Alexander 2004, p.10). Businesses have a role to play in promoting respect for human rights and freedoms and securing an effective recognition and observance of human rights. Both the government and businesses have an obligation to contribute to an environment conducive to the enjoyment of human rights. However, the primary responsibilities and obligations in the arena of human rights enjoyment remain with the state, and the government cannot relieve itself of these obligations by “delegating” human rights obligations to non state actors (Schutter 2010, 16). This does not mean that non state entities such as businesses do not possess responsibilities in abstaining from violating human rights, or contributing to human rights compliance. Corporations and other business enterprises bear the capacity to foster economic wellbeing, development, technological enhancement, and wealth. States have a principal responsibility to promote, secure the fulfilment of, respect of protect human rights. Corporations and other businesses should not engage in or benefit from human rights violations such as torture, forced disappearance, or arbitrary executions, which are associated with counterterrorism measures. Business Continuity Planning The threat presented in the UK from international terrorism remains real and grave, and attacks may be mounted devoid of warning, as demonstrated by the London July 2005 attacks. Such events underline the need for all businesses to plan and prevent such terrorist attacks, or at least reduce their consequences. No business can claim immunity from such attacks; thus, firms must adopt risk management techniques that align with respect for human rights. Experience demonstrates that it is easier for businesses to plan for probable effects of such events logically and objectively in advance, rather than react in the aftermath (Snedaker 2007, p.3). The speed, with which businesses within the city of London responded to the July 2005 events, highlights the gain of an effective and detailed business continuity plan. Any business continuity plan should embrace both emergency procedures (incident management) and business recovery plan. Business continuity planning highlights an organization’s exposure to both internal and peripheral threats and blends hard and soft targets to avail effective prevention and recovery for the organization, while sustaining competitive advantage and value system integrity. A business continuity plan details a roadmap for continuing operations under adverse conditions such as a terror attack. A sound business continuity plan should incorporate support for the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Businesses should adopt strategic policy initiative indicating commitment to aligning the business operations and strategies with universally accepted principles in the arena of human rights. Despite the obvious commercial pressures, businesses need to pay greater attention to the impact of critical events on their personnel, their families, and the community at large. Business recovery cannot succeed devoid of the employees’ input. Thus, HR plays an essential role in promoting trustful and prepared leadership throughout the organization in order to reassure the employees of their safety (Myers 2006, p.2). Business continuity management centres on seven key impact areas; reputation, finance, customers, supply chain, people, sites and facilities, information and communication. Systematic public-private sector consultation and partnership is needed to tackle the ballooning threats of terrorism. The happenings of 9/11 and other terror attacks such as London and Madrid bombings simulate the potential magnitude and geographical scale of a disaster. Business continuity planning has become a central issue owing to increasing business disasters, enhanced number of natural disasters and heightened national alert levels. Business continuity planning is directed at guaranteeing and safeguarding continuous business operations against a series of potential threats emanating from nature, technology, or man-made events such as a terror attack. Terrorist attacks can yield unprecedented business interruption losses coupled with relocation costs. Companies have to prepare adequately for interruptions that could bring business operations to a halt (Suder 2004, p.46). For instance, whereas a business could manage to sustain its equipment and facilities functioning through a crisis, there are disasters whose magnitude could render personnel incapable of functioning. Hence, companies have to factor in business-continuity planning. Primarily, business continuity management represents a collection of coordinated plans and actions that alleviate and/or negate the adverse impact of both natural and man-made events on essential business operations. Some of the elements of business continuity planning include documentation of business operations detailed in the continuity strategy, their threats and regulatory requirements, mediation and remediation activities. Business continuity planning incorporates critical business elements such as technology, facilities, suppliers, clients, and personnel. Business continuity demands planning and incorporate all activities essential to maintaining service, consistency, and recoverability. Business executives often face challenges to manage new and unfamiliar risks, restore trust and credibility (accountability, transparency and integrity), respond to increasing stakeholder expectations and complex societal needs, and remain profitable and competitive. Most business executives are often under pressure to exhibit high performance, not only regarding the aspects competitiveness, market growth, and financial results, but also regarding corporate governance and their ethical, social, and environmental performance. Corporate strategies for delivering value to society and shareholder value encompass complying with the law control (costs, risks, liabilities, and negative impacts), creating new value and collaborating to solve complex social and environmental issues. Companies should be aware of counterterrorism statutes such as statutes criminalizing the provision of material support to listed criminal organizations. Both, the government and businesses, should reaffirm their commitment in taking the necessary measures critical to protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The parties should implement effective and resolute measures against terrorism to ensure that the counterterrorism measures are conducted according to the rule of law. In order to be successful, the government must engage private businesses as an ally and a partner in combating terrorism. The solutions must have the ability of protecting economies devoid of stifling them or running them dry in the name of security. In order to be legitimate, the business and the government activities must hinge in the framework of fair and transparent norms, while respecting basic rights of the citizens (Hert 2005, P.72). Conclusion The contemporary terrorist threat highlights precisely objectives that must be met; these encompass state security and human rights. Governments and businesses should construct and maintain a subtle balance between the two. It is now clear that if governments and businesses are to win the battle against terrorism, the two must take a proactive stance anticipating probable targets, significantly beefing up security and laying out countermeasures aimed at preventing future attacks from happening. It is critical for governments and businesses to collaborate a definitive approach to shaping a more secure environment. In order to generate stronger commitment to international norms for human rights protection, the private sector and national governments have to concert their efforts towards accountability. Similarly, national governments in cooperation with businesses need to embed norms and standards into policies that avail a window for more possibilities for enforcement of human rights. Governments and businesses should adopt approaches that combine the resources and capacities of both the private sector and public sector, when dealing with situations that herald uncertainties and threaten business continuity. In so doing, both the government and businesses should observe and fulfil the underlying guiding principles and practices such as respect for human rights. References List Alexander, D. (2004). Business confronts terrorism: Risks and responses, Madison, University of Wisconsin Press. pp.8-10. Bailes, A. & Frommelt, I. (2004). Business and security: Public-private sector relationships in a new security environment, Oxford, Oxford University Press. pp.1-5. Bullock, J., Haddow, G.,Yeletaysi, S. & Coppola, D. (2009). Introduction to Homeland security: Principles of all-hazards response, Oxford, Butterworth-Heinemann. pp.12-14. Combs, C. & Slann, M. (2007). Encyclopaedia of terrorism, Revised Edition, New York, Facts on File, Inc. pp.383-420. Cooper, J. & Eicher, P. (2007). Countering terrorism, protecting human rights, Warsaw, OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR). pp.20-25. Frey, B. (2009). How can business cope with terrorism? Journal of Policy Modelling 31, pp.779-787. Frias, A., Samuel, K. & White, N. (2012). Counter-terrorism: International Law and practice, New York, Oxford University Press. pp.426-490. Ganor, B. (2005). The counter-terrorism puzzle: A guide for decision makers, New Jersey, Transaction. pp.149-160. Goo, G. (2009). Terrorism threat assessment and management, Defence Against Terrorism Review 2 (1). pp.101-116. Hawkins, D. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: Balancing tomorrow’s sustainability and today’s profitability, New York, Palgrave Macmillan. pp.2-5. Hert, P. (2005). Balancing security and liberty within the European human rights framework. A critical reading of the Court’s case law in the light of surveillance and criminal law enforcement strategies after 9/11, Utrecht Law Review 1 (1). pp.68-96. Myers, K. (2006). Business continuity strategies: Protecting against unplanned disasters, New Jersey, John Wiley & Sons. pp.1-2. Schorlemer, S. (2003). Human rights: Substantive and institutional implications of the war against terrorism, European Journal International Law 14 (2). pp.265-282. Schutter, O. (2010). International human rights Law: Cases, materials, commentary, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. pp.11-20. Snedaker, S. (2007). Business continuity and disaster recovery planning for IT professionals, Burlington, Syngress. pp.2-9. Suder, G. (2004). Terrorism and the international business environment: The security-business nexus, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar. pp.43-50. Suder, G. (2008). International business under adversity: A role in corporate responsibility, conflict prevention and peace, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar. pp.8-30. Zwitter, A. (2011). Human security, law and the prevention of terrorism, New York, Routledge. pp.13-20. Read More