TO CONTAIN AND ENGAGE: HOW THE U.S. SHOULD ADDRESS CHINA’S HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS

Under the United States Alien Tort Statute, which permits non-U.S. citizens to bring lawsuits in U.S. courts for human rights violations that are violations of the law of nations, plaintiffs have filed claims against multinational oil and gas corporations for the direct or complicit commission of such violations carried out by the government of the country in which the corporation operated. In addition to exercising jurisdiction over U.S. corporations, U.S. courts have exercised jurisdiction in cases involving non-U.S. defendants for alleged wrongful conduct against non-U.S. plaintiffs committed outside the U.S.The exercise of jurisdiction by U.S. courts over non-U.S. defendants for alleged wrongful conduct against non-U.S. plaintiffs committed outside of the U.S. raises serious questions as to the jurisdictional foundation on which the power of U.S. courts to adjudicate them rests. Defences that foreign defendants can raise against the exercise of jurisdiction by the U.S. courts are an objection to the extraterritorial assertion of jurisdiction, the act of state doctrine, the political question doctrine, forum non conveniens, and the principle of comity. These defences are bolstered by the support of the defendant’s home government and other governments.

Download Full-text

ISSUES OF PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW AND CIVIL PROCEDURE ARISING OUT OF THE U.S. CIVIL SUITS FOR FORCED LABOR DURINGWORLD WAR IITo What Extent Do U.S. Conflict and Procedural Rules Obstruct Private Liability for Wartime Human Rights Violations?

Yearbook of Private International Law ◽

10.1515/9783866537149.2.137 ◽

2009 ◽

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Civil Procedure ◽

Forced Labor ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Private International Law ◽

The U.S

Download Full-text

Should or Must?: Nature of the Obligation of States to Use Trade Instruments for the Advancement of Environmental, Labour, and Other Human Rights

Alberta Law Review ◽

10.29173/alr302 ◽

2007 ◽

Author(s):

Stephen J. Powell

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Transnational Corporations ◽

Harm Principle ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

International Treaties ◽

The U.S ◽

Alien Tort Statute

This article examines whether customs, treaties, and historical facts have caused the ethical human rights obligations of economically powerful states to assume a legal quality. The author argues that the legal quality of these obligations may arise from the global harm principle of international law and human rights obligations found in treaties. As a consequence, states may be held accountable for the human rights violations of transnational corporations. Further, the author examines the possibility of pursuing claims under the U.S. Alien Tort Statute for torts committed in violation of international treaties as another avenue for enforcing human rights obligations.

Download Full-text

After Pinochet: Foreign Sovereign Immunity in Respect of Serious Human Rights Violations - The Decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the Al-Adsani Case

German Law Journal ◽

10.1017/s2071832200015066 ◽

2002 ◽

Vol 3 (6) ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Markus Rau

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

The United States ◽

Federal Courts ◽

Class Action ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

International Human Rights ◽

Universal System ◽

International Human ◽

Civil Courts ◽

The U.S

For want of an effective and accessible universal system for redress of international human rights abuses, victims of human rights violations increasingly seek reparations in domestic civil courts. In the United States in particular, the federal courts, since the 1980 Filártiga decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, have already decided on a remarkable number of civil suits alleging human rights violations committed abroad, the most recent example of this trend being a class action of members and supporters of opposition political groups in Zimbabwe who invoke the so-called Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) against President and Foreign Minister Robert Mugabe with respect to alleged acts of torture. According to the proponents of such lawsuits, international human rights litigation in domestic civil courts can serve as an important tool in the worldwide effort to enforce international norms concerned with the protection of the individual which may complement criminal prosecutions of the offenders. As stated by Professor Stevens, who has litigated many of the international human rights cases in the U.S. federal courts, \\\“civil lawsuits for human rights violations […] serve a role similar to tort litigation in a domestic forum: to offer victims of violence a legal remedy which they control and which may satisfy needs not met by the criminal law system.\\\”

Download Full-text

The Fourth Restatement, International Law, and the “Terrorism” Exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act

The Restatement and Beyond ◽

10.1093/oso/9780197533154.003.0019 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 391-410

Author(s):

Beth Stephens

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Foreign Relations ◽

The United States ◽

Executive Branch ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Sovereign Immunity ◽

The Law ◽

The U.S

This chapter evaluates the “terrorism” exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). The Fourth Restatement of Foreign Relations Law of the United States sets out to “restate” the law of the United States and “relevant portions of international law,” not to critique U.S. law or settle debates about the content of international law. However, that task is complicated when the law of the United States triggers questions about unresolved international law issues. The “terrorism” exception to the FSIA illustrates this complexity. Congress, the executive branch, and the judiciary have employed the exception as a politically motivated weapon to target disfavored states, while excluding U.S. allies, politically powerful states, and the United States itself from the reach of the statute. The text of the Fourth Restatement merely restates the U.S. law governing the “terrorism” exception, without identifying international law concerns or analyzing the issues they raise. The chapter, by contrast, offers a critique of the “terrorism” exception, focusing on the statute as written, as amended to reach particular targets, and as applied in practice. A well-crafted statutory exception to sovereign immunity for state human rights violations would be a welcome addition to human rights accountability. The “terrorism” exception falls far short of that goal.

Download Full-text

Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act—denial of immunity for extrajudicial killing—Cuban liability for shooting down civil aircraft—punitive damages—retroactive application of statute recognizing cause of action for human rights violations

The American Journal of International Law ◽

10.2307/2998145 ◽

1998 ◽

Vol 92 (4) ◽

pp. 768-773

Author(s):

Bernard H. Oxman ◽

Stephen J. Schnably

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Air Force ◽

District Court ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Punitive Damages ◽

Civil Aircraft ◽

Extrajudicial Killing ◽

The U.S

Alejandre v. Republic of Cuba. 996 F.Supp. 1239.U.S. District Court, S.D. Fla., December 17, 1997.On February 24, 1996, the Cuban Air Force deliberately shot down two unarmed civil aircraft piloted by members of the Miami-based organization Brothers to die Rescue. The incident resulted in the loss of four lives and evoked widespread international condemnation. It prompted Congress to enact the controversial Helms-Burton Act on March 12, 1996, tightening the U.S. embargo against Cuba in effect since 1962.

Download Full-text

Social representations of human rights violations: Further evidence

Swiss Journal of Psychology ◽

10.1024//1421-0185.60.2.89 ◽

2001 ◽

Vol 60 (2) ◽

pp. 89-98 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Alain Clémence ◽

Thierry Devos ◽

Willem Doise

Keyword(s):

Cluster Analysis ◽

Human Rights ◽

Costa Rica ◽

Young People ◽

Social Representations ◽

Social Reality ◽

Questionnaire Study ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

High Tolerance ◽

Individual Actions

Social representations of human rights violations were investigated in a questionnaire study conducted in five countries (Costa Rica, France, Italy, Romania, and Switzerland) (N = 1239 young people). We were able to show that respondents organize their understanding of human rights violations in similar ways across nations. At the same time, systematic variations characterized opinions about human rights violations, and the structure of these variations was similar across national contexts. Differences in definitions of human rights violations were identified by a cluster analysis. A broader definition was related to critical attitudes toward governmental and institutional abuses of power, whereas a more restricted definition was rooted in a fatalistic conception of social reality, approval of social regulations, and greater tolerance for institutional infringements of privacy. An atypical definition was anchored either in a strong rejection of social regulations or in a strong condemnation of immoral individual actions linked with a high tolerance for governmental interference. These findings support the idea that contrasting definitions of human rights coexist and that these definitions are underpinned by a set of beliefs regarding the relationships between individuals and institutions.

Download Full-text