By Sarah Joseph
Because the mid-1980s, starting with the unsuccessful Union Carbide litigation within the united states, litigants were exploring methods of protecting multinational businesses [MNCs] chargeable for offshore human rights abuses within the courts of the company’s domestic states. the top profile instances were the human rights claims introduced opposed to MNCs (such as Unocal, Shell, Rio Tinto, Coca Cola, and Talisman) lower than the Alien Tort Claims Act within the usa. Such claims additionally elevate concerns below established foreign legislation (which is without delay acceptable in US federal legislations) and the Racketeer prompted and Corrupt agencies [RICO] statute. one other criminal entrance is located within the united states, England and Australia, the place courts became extra keen to workout jurisdiction over transnational universal legislations tort claims opposed to domestic companies, and now a corporation’s human rights practices are being in some way specific less than alternate practices legislation in groundbreaking litigation in California opposed to sportsgoods producer Nike. This new research examines those advancements and the procedural arguments which were used to dam litigation, in addition the clues which might be gleaned from instances that have settled. The research is critical for human rights sufferers in an effort to be aware of the bounds of attainable on hand felony redress. it's also very important for MNCs, which needs to now take human rights under consideration in dealing with the felony dangers (as good as ethical and recognition hazards) linked to offshore initiatives.
Read or Download Corporations and Transnational Human Rights Litigation PDF
Similar human rights books
Are civil conflicts and coups d'etat issues of foreign hindrance, or questions of nationwide curiosity merely? How can the more and more universal perform of condemnation and intervention through the United countries and person States into occasions of maximum political violence be understood? Will civil clash at some point be thought of unlawful less than foreign legislation, within the related means as overseas warfare?
In an age of globalization, loose alternate may be synonymous with prosperity for all. but too frequently, small farmers, indigenous peoples, individuals with HIV, and others are skipped over of the image. This e-book proposes a brand new approach to make loose exchange paintings for everybody. It examines how exchange pacts can gain humans, yet may also threaten their simple human rights to entry foodstuff, medications, and schooling, or to guard their cultural historical past.
The assumption of cultural background as an 'international public strong' may be traced again to the Preamble of the 1954 Hague conference for the security of Cultural estate within the occasion of Armed clash, in line with which "damage to cultural estate belonging to any humans whatever skill harm to the cultural history of all mankind".
During this daring e-book, A. Naomi Paik grapples with the heritage of U. S. felony camps that experience limited humans outdoors the limits of felony and civil rights. faraway from the social and political groups that might warrantly basic felony protections, those detainees are successfully rightless, stripped of the best even to have rights.
- The End of Imagination
- Human Rights and Civil Liberties in the 21st Century (Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice)
- The Degradation of the International Legal Order?: The Rehabilitation of Law and the Possibility of Politics
- Fire in the Heart: How White Activists Embrace Racial Justice (Oxford Studies in Culture & Politics)
- The Right to Leave and Return and Chinese Migration Law
- In the Wake of Neoliberalism: Citizenship and Human Rights in Argentina (Stanford Studies in Human Rights)
Additional resources for Corporations and Transnational Human Rights Litigation
40 Eg John Doe I v Unocal Corp 2002 US App LEXIS 19263 (9th Cir 2002) 14208 (Unocal 2002). 41 Eg ibid. 42 This is implicit in Paez J’s decision in Doe I v Unocal Corp 963 F Supp 880 (CD Cal 1997). 43 Eg Xuncax v Gramajo 886 F Supp 162 (D Mass 1995) 184–85. 44 Eg Xuncax v Gramajo 886 F Supp 162 (D Mass 1995) 184–85. This view is not unanimous. See below, text at n 109. 45 Abdullahi v Pfizer No 01 Civ 8118, 2002 US Dist LEXIS 17436 (SDNY September 16, 2002) 16–18. 46 Wiwa v Royal Dutch Petroleum Co No 96 Civ 8386, 2002 US Dist LEXIS 3293 (SDNY Feb 22, 2002) 25.
23 S Zia-Zarifi, ‘Suing Multinational Corporations in the US for Violating International Law’ (1999) 4 University of California at Los Angeles Journal International Law and Foreign Affairs 81, 91. 24 Ratner, above n 15, at 104. 25 See ibid at 102–3 and 108–9. 26 343 F 3d 140 (2d Cir 2003). The court conducted a thorough examination on the question of whether intra-national pollution breaches customary international law; it decided that it did not. 27 More relevant to the discussion at hand are the findings regarding the content of customary international law by courts in ATCA litigation.
53 Sarei v Rio Tinto 221 F Supp 2d 1116 (CD Cal 2002) 1162. 54 Estate of Rodriguez v Drummond 256 F Supp 2d 1250 (WD Al 2003) 1264; the court was only willing to find that such rights activated ATCA for the purposes of preliminary proceedings in the litigation. Thus, the court indicated that the matter could be re-argued at the merits stage of the proceedings. 55 Wiwa v Royal Dutch Petroleum Co, No 96 Civ 8386, 2002 US Dist LEXIS 3293 (SDNY Feb 22, 2002) 36. The right to life, as formulated in article 6 of the ICCPR, was also found to be part of customary international law, and therefore within the law of nations, in Estate of Winston Cabello v Armando Fernandez-Larios 157 F Supp 2d 1345 (SD Fla 2001) 1359.