This chapter identifies and examines the elements determining the legal content of any given theory of, or positive law provision for, the human right to resist. It reviews the primary triggers or conditions for activation, indicating the ‘right to resist what’, including ‘tyranny’, ‘oppression’, and ‘other violations’. It reviews the secondary triggers or conditions for activation, indicating the ‘right to resist when’, in particular the necessity condition. It also reviews both aspects of the personal scope, being the rights-holders, indicating ‘who may resist’, and also the duty-bearers, indicating ‘whose corresponding duty’. It identifies a four-fold typology of legitimate ‘object and purpose’, or ‘right to resist why’, being for human rights enforcement, for self-defence, for self-determination, and for ‘peace’ or human security. The final element examined is the material scope of application, or ‘right to resist how’, identifying three competing approaches to permissible means, and affirming proportionality limitations and other applicable limitations in international human rights law and international criminal law, as well as grounds for discretionary non-exercise. This general analytical template for identification and comparison of elements and therefore content is then applied to the evidence of legal sources of the right considered in Chapters 5–7.

The last chapter of the textbook briefly reflects on the road travelled so far in BHR and the challenges that still lie ahead. Despite significant acheivements in improving corporate accountability for human rights in recent years, there is still a lot to be done to improve the situation of affected rights-holders on the ground. However, in the light of the rise of right-wing populism and the global Covid-19 pandemic, the global environment for human rights protection has become more, rather than less challienging in recent years. On a positive note, businesses can be progressive forces in promoting human rights in these challenging contexts. Recent incidents of companies engaging in human rights advocacy and activism demonstrate that a growing number of companies are willing to use their leverage to push for pro-social and human rights issues. In such situations, crisis can become an opportunity for ethical renewal.