Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Corporations Now Immune from Alien Tort Claims Act

Expand Messages
  • Dan Clore
    News & Views for Anarchists & Activists: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo [Judges now routinely rule that corporations are legally considered persons --
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 1, 2010
      News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo

      [Judges now routinely rule that corporations are legally considered
      persons -- when this will benefit the corporations. But now, when it
      comes to human rights suits against corporations brought under the ATCA,
      these judges rule that corporations are immune -- because they aren't
      persons. Oh, and how many conservatives have you heard whinging about
      this particular act of legislation from the bench?--DC]

      http://www.complianceweek.com/article/6209/court-companies-arent-subject-to-alien-tort-claims-act
      Court: Companies Aren’t Subject to Alien Tort Claims Act
      By Jaclyn Jaeger
      October 26, 2010

      The U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled by a 2-1 decision in
      Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum that the Alien Tort Claims Act only
      applies to individuals, not corporations. Enacted in 1789, the law
      allows foreign citizens to file actions in U.S. courts for violations of
      “international law” and has increasingly been used by plaintiffs to
      target the deep pockets of multinational corporations.

      Hardly any suits were filed under the ATCA until 1980, and those
      specifically targeting companies for abuses overseas didn’t arise until
      the 1990s. Over the last 15 years, however, more than 100 such cases
      have been launched against companies, according to a list compiled by
      Jonathan Drimmer, a partner in the law firm Steptoe & Johnson. The
      majority of the cases have been dismissed, while 13 have settled, and
      another 17 are still pending.

      “These suits have been the bane of the existence of major corporations,”
      not only because they tarnish their reputations, but also because
      they’re costly to litigate, says John Bellinger, a partner in
      international law at law firm Arnold & Porter.

      With the Kiobel decision, the court tossed out a lawsuit against Shell
      Oil Co. brought by the families of a group of Nigerians executed by the
      Nigerian government for protesting oil exploration in the country. The
      plaintiffs sued Shell under the ATCA for aiding and abetting the
      Nigerian military in numerous human rights abuses—including arbitrary
      arrest and detention, torture, and crimes against humanity—so that it
      could explore and extract oil in the area.

      In its 50-page decision the court found that while individuals have been
      held liable for human rights violations under the law of nations, the
      same has never been extended to include a corporation. “No corporation
      has ever been subject to any form of liability (whether civil or
      criminal) under the customary international law of human rights,” the
      court wrote. Translation: Lawsuits against corporations under the Alien
      Tort Claims Act should be dismissed because they lack proper
      jurisdiction to be heard.

      International companies may consider the decision a reprieve, yes—but it
      doesn’t let executives involved in such cases off the hook. “The dark
      lining of this decision is that we may now see more suits against
      officers and directors,” Bellinger says.

      The court stressed that actions under ATCA can still be brought against
      companies in state court, that Congress remains free to legislate in
      this area, and that such claims can still be brought against individual
      executives and employees of companies who commit or aid and abet
      violations of customary international law.

      “The door remains opened under the Alien Tort Statute for individual
      officers and directors to be sued,” Bellinger says. “The standard of
      proof would be higher to show individual officers and directors were
      actually knowledgeable, or intended to aid or abet human rights abuses
      in other countries.

      In an 88-page concurring opinion, Judge Pierre Leval said he agreed with
      the dismissal of the case, but expressed concern about the scope of the
      ruling. “The majority opinion deals a substantial blow to international
      law, and its undertaking to protect fundamental human rights,” he wrote.

      The concern is that ATCA has been effective at forcing companies to rein
      in human rights abuses. “Overall, because of this decade of litigation
      and a more general sensitivity to human rights and corporate social
      responsibility, most major U.S. and foreign companies have been much
      more careful about the impact of their activities on human rights,” says
      Bellinger.

      In a separate case, the Second Circuit also unanimously dismissed a
      similar lawsuit in Presbyterian Church of Sudan v. Talisman Energy.

      Supreme Court Review?

      The Kiobel decision is only binding in the 2nd Circuit, but it’s
      expected to carry much influence in other jurisdictions as well—and the
      2nd Circuit, based in New York, is among the most important in the
      country anyway. It could help eliminate the vast majority of alien tort
      cases against companies that are currently pending. “I would imagine
      over the next few weeks and months, we’ll see a lot more courts tossing
      out alien tort cases on this ground,” Drimmer says.

      But the final outcome is far from over. The plaintiffs still may still
      file for a review from the full court (an “en banc” review), or may
      appeal to the Supreme Court. “If it ultimately is appealed and upheld by
      the Supreme Court, that would be the end of human rights suits against
      corporations under the Alien Tort Statute,” Bellinger says.

      Whether the Supreme Court decides to take the case could depend on
      several factors, legal experts say, such as the Second Circuit’s en banc
      decision (assuming the full panel even decides to hear the case). In
      addition, the Seventh and Ninth Circuits also have ATCA cases pending,
      so the Supreme Court may wait until other jurisdictions have addressed
      this issue themselves.

      The Kiobel decision does brings the Second Circuit in conflict with the
      11th Circuit in Sinaltrainal v. Coca-Cola, which held that corporations
      could be held liable under ATCA. Because of this circuit split, “I
      actually think it’s likely that the Supreme Court will take this case on
      appeal,” Bellinger says.

      --
      Dan Clore

      New book: _Weird Words: A Lovecraftian Lexicon_:
      http://tinyurl.com/yd3bxkw
      My collected fiction: _The Unspeakable and Others_
      http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0035LTS0O
      Lord Weÿrdgliffe & Necronomicon Page:
      http://tinyurl.com/292yz9
      News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo

      Skipper: Professor, will you tell these people who is
      in charge on this island?
      Professor: Why, no one.
      Skipper: No one?
      Thurston Howell III: No one? Good heavens, this is anarchy!
      -- _Gilligan's Island_, episode #6, "President Gilligan"
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.