Monitoring Policy Making at the United Nations |
| ||||||||||||
Alien Torts Claims Act - International Justice - Global Policy Forum Alien Tort Claims Act
The Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) of 1789 grants jurisdiction to US Federal Courts over "any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States." In 1980 a Paraguayan man successfully used ATCA to sue the policeman who had tortured his son to death in Paraguay. Others have since filed civil suits against individuals, including Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe, seeking compensation for damages resulting from breaches of international law. On the rare occassion that a suit is successful, however, the defendant rarely has sufficient assets in the US to satisfy the final judgment.
An interesting development has been the recent efforts to use ATCA to sue transnational corporations for violations of international law in countries outside the US. If these suits are allowed to proceed, then ATCA could become a powerful tool to increase corporate accountability.
Articles | Archive | Links
Articles
2007 |2006 |2005 | 2004
Alternative Justice
Because of challenges to plaintiffs suing under the Alien Tort Claims Act, such as the protection of world leaders by sovereign immunity, the actual impact of ATCA suits has been generating publicity and stirring up politics more than anything else. (Crimes of War)
Don’t Be Dubbed a Human Rights Abuser (October 22, 2007)
A claim filed under the Alien Tort Claims Act 1789 (ATCA) alleging that an international mining company hired paramilitaries to murder three labor leaders in Colombia is rejected at trial. Despite the outcome, legal commentators suggest this case signals the beginning of ATCA claims against other multinational companies, including Bridgestone Firestone, Yahoo, Nestle, and Dole Foods. The author recommends that international companies implement measures such as the creation of a code of conduct to guard against human rights abuses abroad. (Legal Times)To Avoid Risk of Alien Tort Claims Act Cases, Companies Must Improve Human Rights (August 17, 2007)
In the first Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) case to make it through trial, a US court finds Drummond Coal not guilty of the murder of three union leaders in its Colombian mine. According to this SocialFunds.com article, companies facing ongoing human rights charges in US courts under ATCA should not assume similar results for their cases. Cynthia Williams, a University of Illinois business law professor, draws attention to the cases against tobacco companies “where for twenty years the few cases that went to trial were unsuccessful.” Companies that face ATCA cases include Texaco (a subsidiary of Chevron), Coca-Cola, Exxon-Mobil, Firestone, Shell and Wal-Mart.Win or Lose in Court (Summer 2006)
Since 1993, lawyers in the US have filed 36 corporate human rights abuse suits under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA), a 1789 law which extends US jurisdiction to cover violations of international law abroad. While human rights activists view the ATCA as “the only effective tool” for holding corporations accountable, only 13 cases remain ongoing compared to 20 dismissals and three out-of-court settlements. Although these figures may not represent a real threat to companies, the negative publicity generated by such procedures might encourage some businesses to improve their human rights records abroad. (Business Ethics)US Bill Puts Oil before Human Rights (October 26, 2005)
A US Senator has introduced a bill to US Congress which, if passed, would cripple the Alien Tort Claims Act. Among other things, the bill would allow the US president to dismiss any suit “deemed to interfere with foreign policy.” In an age of increasing energy insecurity, such a change could give transnational oil companies free reign to ruin the environment and violate human rights with impunity. (OhmyNews)The Unocal Settlement: Implications for Developing Law on Corporate Complicity in Human Rights Abuses (Fall 2005)
Unocal reached a settlement with Burmese villagers following litigation alleging human rights abuses in construction of a gas pipeline in March 2005. The lawsuit had proceeded further than any other litigation brought under the Alien Torts Claims Act (ATCA) and signifies new hope that transnational corporations will be held accountable for human rights violations. The case however did not reach a jury trial which would have brought further public attention to Unocal’s actions. The article highlights the “turning of the tides” towards contemporary use of the ATCA, and the various cases that have established precedent. (Washington College of Law)Liability Forges a New Morality (August 3, 2005)
Lawyers’ use of the Alien Tort Claims Act as a legal device for seeking damages for human rights abuses is changing the moral landscape of multinational corporations (MNCs). Even though most cases against corporations do not result in legal victories for the plaintiffs, the suits still force CEOs of MNCs to focus more stringently on corporate social responsibility in order to protect their brands and deflect negative press. (The Age)Unocal Settles Human Rights Lawsuit (March 22, 2005)
Unocal Corporation finalized settlement of the “landmark” lawsuit filed under the Alien Tort Claims Act on behalf of 15 Myanmar villagers; victims of human rights abuses committed by troops assigned to protect the Unocal pipeline route. Some observers have hailed the settlement as a human rights victory, but others believe a trial would have shed more light on international corporate human rights abuses. (Los Angeles Times)Appeal Upholds Crime Against Humanity Finding in Chilean Torture (March 15, 2005)
A US federal appeals court upheld a $4 million lawsuit against former Chilean army officer Armando Fernandez Larios , held responsible for the 1973 murder of political prisoner Winston Cabello. Cabello’s relatives sued under the Alien Tort Claims Act, and a jury awarded the verdict in 2003 in what amounted to the nation’s first ruling by a US jury for crimes against humanity. (Associated Press)Khulumani’s Reparations Case and the Future of Human Rights (January 6, 2005)
South African human rights organization Khulumani Support Group is awaiting an appeal decision in the US on its “vital test case” against multinational corporations for supporting atrocities committed during apartheid. The action was brought under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) on behalf of victims, and if successful, could promote the ATCA as a legitimate avenue for the remedy of human rights abuses. (Pambazuka)Unocal To Settle Rights Claims (December 14, 2004)
California-based Unocal Corporation agreed to settle in lawsuits filed by 15 Myanmar villagers, who claim Burmese troops abused them while protecting the energy giant’s natural gas pipeline. Though some US companies have settled human rights lawsuits out of court, the Unocal case—one of the most developed under the Alien Tort Claims Act—may provide new direction for pending lawsuits against IBM, ChevronTexaco and other large corporations. (Los Angeles Times)Four Ex-Detainees Sue Rumsfeld, 10 Others (October 28, 2004)
Former Guantanamo ex-detainees sued top US military officials for violating national and international human rights laws in what could become a landmark case of the Alien Tort Claims Act. US officials say they upheld all legal obligations, even though the Bush administration has said the Geneva Conventions did not apply to the Afghan conflict. The ex-detainees cite “top secret memos” made public after the prison abuse scandals as among the evidence against the officials. (Boston Globe)Not in Their Backyard (July 14, 2004)
Corpwatch highlights the effects of the US Supreme Court decision that allows foreign citizens to bring cases to US courts under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA). Though the ATCA ruling has most often led to human rights cases against transnational corporations, this article suggests the ruling will also help foreign citizens address prisoner abuse scandals in the US.Ruling Makes It Harder for Foreigners to Sue in US Courts (June 30, 2004)
This Christian Science Monitor article puts in perspective the US Supreme Court ruling on the Alien Tort Claims Act - frequently described as a human rights victory. While the ruling will keep US courts open to foreign victims of human rights violations, it also empowers judges to decide which international legal standards should apply in particular cases and whether the conduct in question violates those standards.Helping Bush Bushwhack Justice (April 27, 2004)
The UK, Australia and Switzerland submitted a brief to the US Supreme Court supporting the Bush administration’s bid to stop the use of the Alien Tort Claims Act. The governments argue that domestic courts should not interfere in matters falling under foreign jurisdictions. (Guardian)When Can Foreigners Sue In US Courts? (March 30, 2004)
Human rights activist and legal experts are paying close attention to the US Supreme Court case Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, brought to the court under the Alien Tort Claims Act. The outcome of the case could determine the role of American judges in enforcing international human rights and help define the place for international law in US courts. (Christian Science Monitor)Supreme Court Asked to Stop Abuse of Alien Tort Statute (January 26, 2004)
The International Chamber of Commerce and major American business groups submitted an amicus brief calling on the United States Supreme Court to clarify the Alien Tort Statue. The brief claims that the law "increasingly interfered with international investment flows and US foreign relations" and condemns it as an "unacceptable extraterritorial extension of US jurisdiction." (International Chamber of Commerce)Unocal Cannot Be Blamed for Myanmar Rights Abuses: US Judge (January 23, 2004)
The Los Angeles Superior Court has ruled in favor of the US oil giant Unocal in a lawsuit which accused the company of human right abuses during the building of a gas pipeline in Myanmar in the 1990’s. The plaintiffs’ lawyer argued that Unocal set up "corporate shells" to avoid liability for the human right violations. However, the court found Unocal was not liable for the conduct of its subsidiaries. (Agence France Presse)DaimlerChrysler Sued Over Alleged Argentine Abuses (January 14, 2004)
DaimlerChrysler AG faces charges under the Alien Tort Claims Act over its alleged role in the disappearance and torture of workers and union leaders during Argentina’s "Dirty War." The plaintiffs argue that the disappearances "were carried out by state security forces acting under the direction and collaboration" of Mercedes Benz Argentina. (Reuters)
More Information on International Justice
More Information on Transnational Corporations
