Posted on 19-6-2003
Corps
In Court
Reuters, Tuesday 17 June 2003
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court will hear oral
arguments on Tuesday in what could be a landmark case to determine
if U.S. corporations can be sued for human rights abuses that
occur abroad.
The hearing stems from two 1996 lawsuits against Unocal Corp.
which claimed that villagers in rural Myanmar, formerly Burma,
were subjected to forced labor, rape, torture and murder by
the military during construction of a natural gas pipeline partially
funded by the oil company. Both lawsuits claimed violations
of state law and the law of nations under the Alien Tort Claims
Act, a once obscure statue written in 1789 that allows foreign
nationals to sue for human rights abuses in U.S. courts.
The case before the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
has galvanized parties on both sides, with numerous briefs filed
in support of the plaintiffs and Unocal. ``Unocal isn't the
first (such case), but it has garnered a lot of attention,''
said Laurel Fletcher, acting director of the Human Rights Clinic
at the University of California, Berkeley. ``It has raised squarely
the issue: What can U.S. companies do on foreign soil?''
Unocal is appealing to an 11-judge appeals panel of the Ninth
Circuit Court a decision handed down by a three judge panel
of the same court in September 2002 that said the company could
be sued.
The three judge panel, which overturned a lower court judge's
ruling that the company could not be sued, compared Unocal's
actions in Myanmar to the German armaments firm Krupp which
used slave labor during World War 2 and was tried for war crimes
afterward. It said a jury should be allowed to decide if Unocal
was liable for human rights violations. The State Department
has asked the court to dismiss the entire case. In its brief,
the Bush administration expressed concern that similar suits
could be brought against some of its closest allies in the country's
war on terror. It also cited the possibility that prisoners
in Guantanamo Bay could file suits against the U.S. government.
El Segundo, California-based Unocal has remained steadfast that
it holds no responsibility for the host nations' actions. Attorneys
for the plaintiffs' argue that Unocal knowingly entered into
a joint agreement with an oppressive military regime with a
suspect human rights record. The Los Angeles Times quoted plaintiffs
in the suit as saying the military abuses began only after the
pipeline construction began. ``Before they came and built the
pipeline, there were no soldiers,'' said one woman identified
as Jane Doe 2, ``When the pipeline came, it destroyed our lives.
We lost our home. We lost our livelihood. We lost everything.''
If the Ninth Circuit appeals panel rules in favor of the plaintiffs
some experts say the decision will be a financial blow to Unocal
and host of other multinational companies such as Coca-Cola
Co. and Exxon Mobil Corp. that face similar suits. Others say
a ruling against Unocal would have a limited impact. ``The decision
would be binding only in the Ninth Circuit,'' said Fred Lampert,
a business law professor at the University of California Hastings
College of Law in San Francisco.
Unocal has been fighting the lawsuit for nearly seven years.
|