As far as the name of the law – the Alien Tort Statute, 1789 suggests, the purpose is to bring before U.S. courts the issue of torts committed by U.S. citizens abroad to be tried at home rather under corresponding lex loci. However, the applicability of the statute would be bound by international treaties, whether the alien nation where the tort had been committed permits the acceptance of the law or whether it claims exclusive jurisdiction over any and all acts committed within its boundaries by foreign citizens.
Two hundred years have passed since the issue of the statute and within those two hundred years many new nations and foreign economic powers have been born and ceased to exist – each with their own set of concepts over crime, jurisdiction, sovereignty, and relationships with the United States of America.
In as much as law should reflect reality and society, there is a strong case for severe amendment or repeal of the Alien Tort Statute, because concepts of sovereignty have changed internationally and nations are now more assertive on their issues.
There is one broad perspective however: all laws passed by a nation are for the benefit of their own citizens and residents. The Alien Tort Statute cannot be interpreted in a manner that gives non-residents and non-citizens benefits to the detriment of citizens or residents of USA. But that was how it had been happening for the last twenty years.
In the last hearing before the Supreme Court, at least one issue – whether the law applied to corporations or to individuals – was set to be resolved with the majority of the panel leaning towards the applicability of the law only upon individuals and not upon the corporations. However, during the debate some broader issues impinged upon the decision-making including the issue whether U.S. courts at all have the jurisdiction to hear lawsuits for alleged genocide, war crimes and other abuses abroad.
We believe that the United Nations and the International Criminal Court, Hague had been created for such issues with the backing of the government and support of USA. The trial of such crimes, which were not specifically committed against the interests of the nation or citizenry of USA, if brought to court within US, could be construed as needless interference in an international process setup with the consent of most civilized countries of the world.
In as much as we understand the purpose behind creation of laws, the Alien Tort Statute would have been to protect U.S. citizens from being tried in foreign courts, but the interpretations have turned around and the law is being used more for allowing foreign citizens to sue U.S. entities within U.S.
However, with the change in technology, concepts of globalization and international issues have also undergone radical changes. Previously human rights were an unknown concept. At the time the Alien Tort Statute was passed, few countries had any laws at all regarding the protection of human rights, and non-governmental international human rights organizations which served as watchdogs were unheard of except those like the UN formed by governments of the world.
We always had international organizations like Red Cross or the Salvation Army, which kept to their own affairs of helping people in the manner they deemed fit, but rarely interfered in the judicial process or tried to champion the cause of the oppressed by political and legal campaigns. However, the new organizations are quite different, as also the economies and nations which are watched by these organizations.
It might be insane to say this, and definitely not Lawcrossing’s view on the matter, but it is my personal opinion that maybe the U.S. government would never have had to send soldiers to the Gulf or Iraq or any other part of the world and bleed the taxpayers and the nation, if the Alien Tort Statute was not there, and big business with gas and oil interests could find their own solutions to protect their investments on foreign soil without being scared of being tried back at home for what they did in idiotstan.
In the past two decades, according to Reuters, more than 120 lawsuits against 59 corporations have been filed in U.S. courts against 59 corporations for alleged wrongful acts in 60 foreign countries.
