Thank you for the explanation -- when I'm speaking foreign languages I appreciate this sort of explanation. But in this case, as a native English speaker, I was well aware of the idiom, and was trying to subvert it. :-)

The original idiom is said in the first person, and as you say means essentially, "Justice and equity compel me to do this; I don't find myself able to do less".

GGP was actually using a derivative of the idiom in the second person. What the derivative literally says is, "Justice and equity compel them to do this; they don't find themselves able to do less". But idiomatically, what it actually means is, "Justice and equity ought to compel them to do this; they ought not to find themselves able to do any less".

Which is true; but it's still the case that the vast majority of companies find themselves very much able to do far less. Justice and equity should compel companies to do this bare minimum, but in the vast majority of cases it doesn't. And so we should still commend those who do find themselves so compelled, and hold them up as an example.

[some edits]