|
Security of Personnel in high-risk environments |
 |
Background :
The « DCN jurisprudence * » was named after the French state-owned naval shipbuilder whose personnel were attacked in Karachi. Since that terrorist attack, a company is deemed to be legally responsible for the safety and security of its personnel. The ruling stipulates that a company is liable even when it cannot repond directly to an agressor.
When doing business internationaly, and in high-risk environments, corporations and non profits are increasingly the target of acts of intentional damage and terrorist action. Criminal acts against a company now involve the liability of the company.
Your requirements :
• Provide journey management and security tracking for personnel working in high-risk zones
Our solutions :
• Implementation of secure journey management systems for your personnel,
• Expatriate Security Audit,
• Drafting of security plans and procedures to protect sites and facilities
GEOS + :
• Expert journey management in high-risk countries,
• Our dedicated country risk tracking centre provides a pushed alert system for expatriates in the event of a deterioration of the security situation. Our team of experts track the security situation in host countries in real time,
• Highly qualified GEOS trainers provide expatriates and business travelers with specific security knowledge and expertise as well as practical, effective pre-departure security recommendations,
• Many world-leading corporations benefit from our security management expertise,
• A worldwide network (partners, institutions) with permanent representatives on all continents and more than 10 years experience,
• Design and drafting of global security plans for major corporations deploying staff to high-risk countries.
Case study :
A major pharmaceutical company with operations on all continents is concerned about security conditions in new markets. The company requested GEOS to draft and implement plans and procedures to secure its personnel and sites in Central and South America. The Risk Advisory Bureau mandated a local expert who drafted and implemented a global security policy for the company’s international subsidiaries, working in close cooperation with company management.
Contact
*15 January 2004: the court ruled that the attack was made possible because sufficient security measures had not been taken by the company for the protection of its personnel.
|
