Mar 1, 2012 - Issue 461 |
|||||
|
|||||
Are Corporations
People Who Kill People?
|
|||||
Can
corporations be sued in 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 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 Kiobel brings together the subject of the
rape of 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 “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 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 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 BlackCommentator.com Executive Editor, David
A. Love, JD is a journalist and human rights advocate based in |
|||||
|
|
||||