Name: 公司的未來 - BBC學習英語 (The future of companies - BBC Learning English)
Uploaded: 2021-10-15T16:50:32.000Z
Duration: 9 min 50 s

Multinational companies are getting bigger and bigger.

情態助動詞 B1

This show will look at what the future might hold.

本節目將探討未來可能出現的情況。

反身代名詞

Will countries start to use that power for themselves?

各國是否會開始為自己使用這種權力？

And could the law make companies a force for good?

而法律是否可以使公司成為一種善的力量？

Huawei: the company that many fear is being

華為：許多人擔心的公司正在被

And how could the immense power of corporations and their billionaires

而企業和其億萬富翁的巨大力量怎麼可能

Of course, countries will still be powerful in 50 years' time.

當然，國家在50年後仍將是強大的。

Nations will go on competing with each other.

Businesses have been used as part of that in the past.

過去，企業一直被用作其中的一部分。

Is Chinese phone company, Huawei, already showing how

中國手機公司華為已經在展示如何

in new mobile networks in many western countries –

在許多西方國家的新移動網絡中 -

你甚至可能擁有一部華為手機。

But western intelligence chiefs warn it could be used

但西方情報部門負責人警告說，它可能被用於

被中國用於間諜活動甚至破壞活動。

They're worried the Chinese government controls the company.

他們擔心中國政府控制了該公司。

Lots of nations are banning its technology.

It goes all the way back to them being founded by a former

這可以追溯到他們是由一位前總統創立的。

officer of the Chinese military, to the fact that their organisational

中國軍隊的官員，對他們的組織結構的事實

structure isn't well known, and the fact that there are some

結構並不廣為人知，而事實上，有一些

pretty damning lawsuits out there regarding the theft of trade secrets.

關於竊取商業祕密的訴訟案相當具有破壞性。

Meng Wanzhou, daughter of the company's founder and also

孟晚舟，該公司創始人的女兒，同時也是

Huawei's chief finance officer, has been charged with stealing

trade secrets by China's main rival, the US.

中國的主要競爭對手--美國的貿易機密。

So, what can the law do if competing countries

那麼，如果相互競爭的國家，法律能做什麼呢？

Dr Russell Buchan from the University of Sheffield explained

謝菲爾德大學的拉塞爾-布坎博士解釋說

how hard it is to prove a country is hiding behind a company:

要證明一個國家躲在一家公司後面是多麼困難。

A state can be be responsible under international law for

根據國際法，一個國家可以對以下情況負責

the acts of non-state actors, actors, such as companies,

非國家行為者的行為，行為者，如公司。

where the act of that non-state actor can be attributed to the state.

在這種情況下，該非國家行為者的行為可以被歸於國家。

Now, attribution is a very particular technical concept of

現在，歸屬是一個非常特殊的技術概念，即

international law, but in order for attribution be established,

國際法，但為了確定歸屬問題。

certain factors need to be present: for example,

the state has to instruct or direct the acts of the non-state actor.

國家必須訓示或指導非國家行為者的行為。

The state will will also have to support the acts of the non-state actor:

國家也將不得不支持非國家行為者的行為。

for example, through training, through the provision of finances,

例如，通過培訓，通過提供資金。

To prove countries are using companies, states have to be

為了證明各國都在使用公司，各國必須要

shown to be supporting a company and telling them what to do.

顯示出支持一家公司並告訴他們該怎麼做。

Why would a country hide behind a company?

一個國家為什麼要躲在一家公司的後面？

If a state acts through a company but the acts of that company

如果一個國家通過一個公司行事，但該公司的行為

cannot be attributed to the state under international law,

根據國際法，不能將其歸於國家。

then it follows that the state will not held responsible legally for any

那麼，國家就不會對任何 "不公平 "的行為承擔法律責任。

violations of international law that that company would otherwise commit.

For example, by intervening in the internal affairs of

例如，通過干預國家的內部事務。

other states or, for example, by interfering with the

其他國家，或者，例如，通過干預

human-rights protection of individuals located elsewhere in the world.

對位於世界其他地方的個人的人權保護。

Hiding behind behind a company means countries can avoid certain

躲在一個公司的背後意味著國家可以避免某些

responsibilities: that includes certain human-rights agreements.

Is this something international organisations are worrying about?

這是否是國際組織所擔心的問題？

International organisations are very worried about states avoiding

their legal responsibilities by acting through non-state actors.

他們的法律責任是通過非國家行為者來實現的。

And in recent years we've seen international organisations

而在最近幾年，我們看到國際組織

push for different standards, lower standards,

for attributing the acts of non-state actors to states.

將非國家行為者的行為歸於國家。

So, we're moving away from the question of whether states exercise

是以，我們正在從各州是否行使的問題上移開

effective control over non-state actors and looking to more relaxed

對非國家行為者的有效控制，並期待更寬鬆的

and less stringent standards such as, for example, whether the state is

和不太嚴格的標準，例如，國家是否是

exercising overall control over the acts of non-state actors.

對非國家行為者的行為進行全面控制。

International organisations worry about states hiding from

the law behind companies. Some are trying to change the law to

公司背後的法律。一些人正試圖改變法律，以

make it it easier to link a company to a country. Will that happen soon?

使一個公司與一個國家的聯繫變得更加容易。這將很快發生嗎？

Including non-state actors within the framework of international

將非國家行為者納入國際框架內

so it's very unlikely that international law will regulate

directly and specifically the acts of of non-state actors.

直接和具體的非國家行為者的行為。

However, international law is increasingly looking to establish

然而，國際法正越來越多地尋求建立

a closer relationship between non-state actors and the state

非國家行為者與國家之間的關係更加密切

and, by doing so, they can ensure that states do not avoid

而且，通過這樣做，他們可以確保各州不逃避

their legal responsibilities under international law.

It's very hard to use international law on companies, but lawyers are

對公司使用國際法是非常困難的，但律師是

trying to make sure they follow rules by linking them more to countries.

試圖通過將他們與國家更多聯繫起來，確保他們遵守規則。

So, it's hard to prove that a country is hiding behind a company.

是以，很難證明一個國家隱藏在一家公司的背後。

But lawyers are working to make it easier.

但律師們正在努力使它變得更容易。

Looking to the future, will companies get more powerful than countries?

展望未來，公司是否會變得比國家更強大？

Tesla founder Elon Musk – at one point the richest person on the planet –

特斯拉創始人埃隆-馬斯克--曾一度成為地球上最富有的人--

is so powerful that when he added '#bitcoin' to his

是如此強大，以至於當他把 "#比特幣 "加入到他的

Twitter profile page, the online currency's market value rose by 50%.

推特簡介頁面，在線貨幣的市場價值上升了50%。

Could a giant company ruin a nation by devaluing its currency?

一家巨頭公司能否通過貨幣貶值來毀掉一個國家？

Or could the opposite be true? A company trading in two countries

或者可能是相反的情況？一家在兩個國家交易的公司

works better if those countries get on well enough to allow easy trade.

如果這些國家相處得足夠好，允許輕鬆的貿易，效果會更好。

How could companies use their power to promote peace?

公司如何利用他們的力量來促進和平？

And what about how they behave? Could good working conditions

那麼他們的行為方式又如何呢？良好的工作條件能否

和公平的薪酬被強加給大公司？

Would they spread good practices around the world?

他們會不會把好的做法傳播到世界各地？

So, are companies and their owners getting too powerful for the law?

那麼，公司和它們的所有者是否變得對法律來說過於強大？

Ranjan Agarwal, who's dealt with some huge companies, gave us his opinion:

與一些大公司打過交道的Ranjan Agarwal給了我們他的意見。

In many countries there are laws that make officers and directors liable

在許多國家，有法律規定高管和董事要承擔責任

for the acts of their companies. I believe that in recent years

為其公司的行為。我相信在最近幾年

we've seen more and more countries enforce those laws against officers

我們已經看到越來越多的國家對官員執行這些法律。

and directors, in order to not only hold the companies,

but also the leadership of those companies, accountable for

但也要對這些公司的領導層負責。

violations of human-rights law, environmental law and labour laws.

違反人權法、環境法和勞動法。

Ranjan says there are lots of laws which limit powerful companies.

蘭揚說，有很多法律限制強大的公司。

Importantly, many countries are increasingly using their laws against

重要的是，許多國家正越來越多地利用其法律來反對

字幕列表影片播放

公司的未來 - BBC學習英語 (The future of companies - BBC Learning English)

structure

effective

ruin

purpose