Skip to main content

Can corporations be sued in U.S. courts for violations of international human rights law? This week, the U.S. Supreme Court is hearing a case that may have a profound impact on corporate accountability and human rights in this country.

The case is Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., and the plaintiffs allege that Shell Oil was complicit in human rights abuses in the Ogoni region of Nigeria. Specially, they say that the oil giant worked with that country’s then-military dictatorship in the early 90s to detain, torture and, by way of a trial in a kangaroo court, executed nine Ogoni activists who protested the company’s desecration of the Niger River delta.

The plaintiffs invoke the Alien Tort Statute of 1789 (ATS), which allows foreigners that do business in the U.S. to be held accountable for international human rights crimes they commit in other countries. Plaintiffs in the companion case, Mohammad v. Palestinian Authority, have sued under the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991, which allows for civil suits in the U.S. for torture and extrajudicial killings committed by officials in a foreign nation.

Kiobel brings together the subject of the rape of Africa and its people with and notions of corporate personhood. On the one hand, it seems fitting that a seminal human rights case would implicate brutal, corrupt Third World dictators and their corporate puppet masters. The whole thing conjures up images from one of the late Fela Kuti’s songs, “I.T.T.,” which stands for “International Thief Thief.” “Many foreign companies dey Africa carry all our money go,” Fela said:

Them go dey cause confusion (Confusion!)

Cause corruption (Corruption!)

Cause oppression (Oppression!)

Cause inflation (Inflation!)

Oppression, oppression, inflation

Corruption, oppression, inflation

Them get one style wey them dey use

Them go pick one African man

A man with low mentality

Them go give am million naira breads

To become of high position here

Him go bribe some thousand naira bread

To become one useless chief

Corporations ruin the land, wreck the environment and prop up petty dictators that will allow them to do it. And people of the developing world are exploited and murdered in the process. On the other hand, while corporations want us to believe that they are people too, they don’t want any of the responsibilities that come with it. The Supreme Court has come out in favor of corporate personhood. Moreover, the Citizens United decision has sanctioned the corruption of democracy and the buying of elections by the 1 percent of the 1 percent - the wealthy few running roughshod over the rights of the many, all in the name of so-called free speech.

The lower court in Kiobel sided with Big Oil. Opponents of corporate liability claim that this Alien Tort Statute case will drive corporations from less developed countries, make American businesses uncompetitive because their competitors are beyond the reach of the law, and deter foreign investment in the U.S. by corporations that want to avoid U.S. courts.

“Holding corporations liable for human rights violations is fully consistent with international law. At the heart of this case is the value we attach to the idea of the rule of law, an idea expressed in the following simple statement: ‘Be you never so high, the law is above you.’” said Navi Pillay, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in an amicus brief to the high court in this case.

“The battle for subjecting human rights violators to the rule of international law has been fought and won against natural persons, groups, organizations and States. On a proper understanding of contemporary international law, corporations are also subject to the rule of law on the international plane, in which they ubiquitously operate. Under that law, they are accountable for human rights violations. In particular, corporations are not immune from responsibility under international law if they engage in, or are complicit in, conduct amounting to international crimes such as genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes,” Pillay added.

According to Columbia University economist Joseph Stiglitz, recognizing corporate liability under the Alien Tort Statute is a matter of economic efficiency. “[I]t is now well-recognized that in a modern economy, the provision of appropriate incentives (to avoid injury to others) must extend beyond the imposition of liability to the person who commits the injury. In particular, corporations must be provided with incentives to discourage and deter their employees from engaging in such potentially harmful acts and to develop monitoring systems that ensure compliance with corporate policies.”

Stiglitz argues that corporations are best situated to effectively monitor harmful activity at a minimal cost. Further, given the limited resources of individual persons as opposed to their corporate employers, a system that imposes liability solely on individuals would be weak and ineffective.

“Furthermore, recognition of corporate liability would demonstrate commitment to a variety of widely shared principles and morals,” Stiglitz adds. “The liability imposed by the ATS reflects norms of human rights endorsed by international law. The United States values, and benefits from, the existence of such international norms. And the enforcement of these norms by the United States confirms and promotes their universality.”

For an often outdated U.S. Constitution which grants rights only sparingly - and has fallen out of favor in the world as a casualty to far superior human rights documents in Canada, South Africa and elsewhere - the Alien Tort Statute may well prove our saving grace. When corporations violate the laws of nations by torturing and killing people, the U.S provides a human rights mechanism to address it. But whether a corporation-friendly majority on the Supreme Court sees things the same way, well, that remains to be seen.

Originally posted to David A Love on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 06:06 AM PST.

Also republished by Community Spotlight.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Click here for the mobile view of the site