EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- As Death Toll Rises Beyond 500, Garment Factory Disaster 'Worst in World History'
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Pregnant Anti-War Soldier Sent to Prison
- Move Over, Koch Brothers: A Bigger, Darker Rightwing Funder Is Out to Destroy Public Education
- Move Over, Koch Brothers: A Bigger, Darker Rightwing Funder Is Out to Destroy Public Education
- Time for Big Green to Go Fossil Free
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
Popular content
Today's Top News
Corporations Should Be Held Liable for Human Rights Violations
Several NGOs have filed an amicus brief urging the United States Supreme Court to review the ruling of an appeals court that corporations, under international law, cannot be held liable for damages on account of serious human rights violations. The Supreme Court should take the case and hold that, if supported by the evidence, civil damages is an available remedy against corporations for aiding and abetting international wrongs.
Kiobel vs. Royal Dutch Petroleum is a lawsuit filed in 2002 by members of the Ogoni community complaining of human rights violations that took place in the 1990s. The Ogoni are approximately half a million people who live in a 650 square kilometers region in Rivers State, Nigeria. Traditionally, they made their living by fishing and as subsistence farmers, a way of life was threatened when Shell discovered oil in 1958.
The environmental effects of oil exploitation in Ogoni territory have been dire. Major oil spills have caused serious damage to the ground and threatened the livelihood of the Ogoni people. Gas flares produce a constant noise near Ogoni villages. Polluted air from the flairs produces acid rain and causes respiratory problems in the surrounding communities. These damages are underscored in the lyrics of an Ogoni song:
'The flames of Shell are flames of Hell,
We bask below their light,
Nought for us to serve the blight,
Of cursed neglect and cursed Shell.'
The Ogoni people have seen their livelihood threatened by rapacious oil exploitation in their land. In 1998, the United Nations Rapporteur accused both the Nigerian government and Shell of abusing human rights and failing to protect the environment in the Ogoni Region. However, both Shell and the Nigerian government have been unresponsive.
The survivors of serious human rights violations resorted to the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) as a way to seek civil compensation in U.S. Courts. The ATS allows non-U.S. citizens to bring civil suits in U.S. federal courts for wrongful acts that in violation of international law, regardless of the country where the wrong was perpetrated or the harm was suffered. Whereas criminal liability of legal entities remains a controversial issue under international law, corporate civil liability for egregious wrongs is a widely accepted principle of international law.
In September of 2010, a split panel decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the ATS does not apply to corporations but only to individuals. As indicated by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) in New York, this view is at odds with previous decisions of other federal courts, such as a relatively recent by the Seventh and District of Columbia circuit courts of appeals, holding that corporations can be held liable under the ATS. As recalled by the CCR, the majority of a panel in the District of Columbia case, held that corporations (such as EXXON Mobil on account of operations conducted in Indonesia), are not immune “for torts based on heinous conduct allegedly committed by its agents in violation of the law of nations.” As stated by Katherine Gallagher, a Senior Staff Attorney at the CCR: “The Second Circuit’s decision undermines fundamental concepts of accountability and leaves victims of the most serious human rights violations without a remedy.”
Making corporations immune from suits resulting from human rights violations will only ensure that these violations will continue to occur, unimpeded by any legal constraint. The Supreme Court should accept the case, opening up the possibility, in cases where the evidence supports such a finding, to hold corporations liable for damages under international law.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



3 Comments so far
Show AllGreat article!!!
If the Supreme Court can give corporations the rights of an individual (personhood), the corporations should also have the responsibilities. This is the first time I've seen such an article. Keep writing!
It's time to shut down the U.S. Murder Machine.
Stay Home Friday, July 29. If you can, stay home from work and do not go shopping.
Call Congress and tell them:
HANDS OFF OUR SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE & MEDICAID!
TAX THE RICH AND CORPORATIONS!
END THE WARS AND BRING OUR TROOPS AND DOLLARS HOME!
Contact Congress: 202-224-3121
Contact Obama: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact
Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
SPEAKER JOHN BOEHNER
(202) 225-0600
EMAIL: http://www.speaker.gov/Contact/
SENATE MAJORITY LEADER HARRY REID
Phone: 202-224-3542
EMAIL: http://reid.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm
SENATE MINORITY LEADER MITCH MCCONNELL
Phone: (202) 224-2541
EMAIL: http://mcconnell.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactForm
Expanding on what ontheres said, if they are going to have the rights of "persons" they should also suffer the consequences of being treated like persons: the corporate equivalent of jail, restitution and even the death sentence for as long as that applies to real persons. Jail might be stringent public oversight of corporate behavior; restitution would be non-tax-exempt fines to injured parties; a death sentence would be the dissolution of the corporation and all of it's assets.
Also, the principle officers should be personally held responsible for the decisions they make behind the corporate mask with the same kinds of punishment and lower level managers made to suffer in-kind for carrying out those policies. In other words, all parties acting on behalf of the corporation and shielded behind it's mask must be brought forward to face their actions as "persons".