There is growing awareness of the role that multinational corporations (MNCs) play in contributing to modern slavery down their supply chains (8.7 Alliance, 2023). According to Global Estimates of Modern Slavery, published by the International Labour Organization (ILO), in 2021 there were 27.6 million people trapped in situations of forced labour around the world, with 17.3 million individuals being exploited in the private sector (ILO, 2022). Sectoral analysis of this finding suggests that a third of exploited workers are employed in export-related sectors and are, presumably, part of global value chains (GVCs) (ILO, 2022). The increasing realization, in the last decade or so, that MNCs’ profits are linked to modern slavery has driven workers, their representatives, global and local activists, consumer organizations, and unions, as well as legislators and policymakers at various levels (local, national, regional, and international), to seek innovative and effective ways to hold MNCs accountable and assign them responsibility (LeBaron, 2020; ITUC, 2020; Trautrims et al., 2021).

This trend suggests a shift in policy responses to modern slavery. Since the adoption of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) Trafficking Protocol in 2000,1 there has been a predominant view that human trafficking and modern slavery primarily result from the operation of organized crime (H. Shamir, 2012). The expansion of the anti-trafficking and modern slavery policy response towards addressing the role of mainstream business entities, and particularly MNCs, raises multiple complex questions for scholars, policymakers, and activists. These relate to the exact role of MNCs in modern slavery and the practices they adopt, and MNC and supplier compliance (Han et al., 2022); the causes and drivers of modern slavery; the reality of work on the factory floor (and wherever work takes place); and effective policy solutions to change corporate patterns of purchasing, supply chain management, and engagement with suppliers, as well as with workers and their communities.

This chapter traces the history of the UK Human Rights Act 1998, from its inspiration in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, through the adoption of the European Convention on Human Rights in 1950, the cases lost by the United Kingdom after the acceptance of the individual right to petition the European Court of Human Rights in 1966, the movement to ‘bring rights home’ which culminated in the 1998 Act, the attacks on the Act by media and politicians, and the ill-fated Bill of Rights Bill to replace it, culminating in 2023 with the insidious disapplication of the Act in the particular context of migration and asylum and a new willingness of the government to promote legislation which is incompatible with the Convention rights, coupled with renewed calls in some quarters for the United Kingdom to withdraw from the Convention.

The Statute of Uses enacted radical reform which can still be felt across the common law world. It was from exceptions to the statute’s execution of uses to perform last wills that the modern trust emerged. Our understanding of the passage of the statute has been shaped by the survival of several draft bills and ancillary documents. It has been argued that a draft bill introduced in 1529 was rejected by the Commons in March 1532. This in turn inspired the landmark litigation in Dacre’s Case (1533–35), which paved the way for the subsequent enactment of the Statute of Uses. This chapter challenges that orthodox position by demonstrating that there were in fact three early drafts which were considered. It then considers what this tells us about the role of the crown, parliament and the courts during this pivotal period in our legal history.

This chapter explores the roles of different generations of lawyers in Estonia’s post-1991 democratic transformation. Focused on young, progressive lawyers familiar with Western legal culture and established leaders educated under the Soviet regime, the study draws on extensive interviews and document analysis to trace how these actors shaped the nation’s transition from Soviet legal structures to a contemporary democratic framework. The findings highlight the critical importance of individual efforts in redefining legal practices, emphasising the dual impact of innovative youth and experienced mentors in driving significant legal and institutional reforms. The study enhances understanding of the dynamics of legal transitions in post-Soviet states, highlighting the essential blend of innovation and experience necessary for successful legal reform.

In 1636, a set of nine paintings was installed on the ceiling of the Banqueting Hall in Whitehall Palace. Three central and six side panels. The set had arrived from the studio of Peter Paul Rubens in Antwerp, and had been commissioned by King Charles I in honour of his father James. They were intended to summate three aspirations which defined James’s reign. The three central panels were entitled The Apotheosis of King James, The Peaceful Reign of King James, and The Union of Crowns. Each spoke to a matter of constitutional urgency, then and now; respectively, the nature of monarchy, relations with the rest of Europe, and the possibility of forging a union between England and Scotland. The purpose of this chapter is to revisit the reign of King James I and see if we can spot some resonances.

This chapter deals with child labour in value chains, whether global value chains (GVCs) or domestic value chains (DVCs). This chapter goes beyond the usual question of the regulation of child labour in value chains to consider the conditions necessary for the elimination of child labour. This chapter is the product of many years of research on this topic by the two authors, sometimes jointly and at times along with other researchers. The empirical base of the analysis in this chapter comprises the various studies carried out by the authors, jointly or separately, of child labour in the garment GVCs in Delhi (Bhaskaran et al., 2010); in the global and DVCs of handicrafts in Jaipur, matches in Sivakasi, stone quarries in Rajasthan, brick kilns in Malda, West Bengal, knitwear and fireworks in Tirupur, Tamil Nadu (Nathan and George, 2012); cotton production in Punjab and Haryana (IHD and Save the Children, 2014); and of gems, lac bangles, and embroidered garments in Jaipur (The Freedom Fund, 2018). One of the authors (Varsha Joshi) led the Child Helpline, which is the key agency in the identification and rescue of child labour in Jaipur, so we were able to use the insights gathered in the course of her work in rescuing child labourers. While the data leading to the chapter's analysis are mainly from Indian cases, the analysis itself is applicable to other, developing countries in the Global South where child labour still exists in serious dimensions. The chapter's policy prescription of combining higher adult earnings at the base of the labour force pyramid with compulsory and quality education is relevant to all developing countries of the Global South.

After this introduction, the next section deals with types of child labour and the implications for different types of interventions. This is followed by a summary of the different types of interventions of both public and private regulation that have been undertaken to eliminate child labour in value chains, both global and domestic. The elimination of child labour involves a change in the business strategy of both the lead firm or principal employer and the supplier.