Corporate Liability for Human Rights Abuses: Analyzing Kiobel & Alternatives to the Alien Tort Stature

By Haider, Ziad | Georgetown Journal of International Law, Summer 2012 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Corporate Liability for Human Rights Abuses: Analyzing Kiobel & Alternatives to the Alien Tort Stature


Haider, Ziad, Georgetown Journal of International Law


TABLE OF CONTENTS

  I.  INTRODUCTION
 II.  ATS LITIGATION: Tim SECOND WAVE
III.  KIOBEL: ANALYSIS AND IMPLICATIONS
      A. International Law and the Scope of Corporate Liability
         1. International Tribunals
         2. International Treaties
         3. Works of Publicists
      B. Fault Lines
         1. Interpreting Silence in International Law
         2. Deferring to Municipal Law
         3. Interpreting Domestic Precedent
      C. Petitions for En Banc and Panel Rehearing
         1. Comity
         2. Frivolity
      D. Navigating the Circuit Split
 IV.  CORPORATE LIABILITY BEYOND KIOBEL
      A. A TS Effectiveness
      B. Alternate Forms of Relief
         1. ATS Relief
         2. Non-ATS Relief
         3. Proposed Federal Statute
  V.  CONCLUSION

I. INTRODUCTION

Are corporations liable for human rights abuses under international law? Not according to the Second Circuit. Its highly controversial decision in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. (1) has clouded the future of human rights lawsuits against corporations in U.S. federal courts under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS). (2) Kiobel held that the ATS does not provide subject matter jurisdiction over corporations "because the customary international law of human rights does not impose any form of liability on corporations." (3) Human rights advocates have decried Kiobel's immunization of corporations and invoked Judge Leval's concurrence in contesting the majority's analysis of corporate liability under international law. Conversely, some scholars have hailed Kiobel as an important "first crack" (4) in an unsubstantiated judicial consensus regarding corporate liability under the ATS, Nonetheless, the Second Circuit rejected (5) the plaintiffs' petitions (6) for en banc review and panel rehearing. Following a circuit split, the Supreme Court granted certiorari, hearing oral arguments on Kiobel on February 28, 2012. Less than a week later, the Court ordered the case to be rebriefed and reargued to address the broader question of the ATS's extraterritorial application. (7)

This Note has two goals. First, it provides a systematic analysis of Kiobel itself. Kiobel is a novel and landmark case in defining the scope of corporate liability under the ATS--a statute that has become "the major contemporary battleground for scholars and advocates debating the proper role of customary international law in the U.S. judicial system." (8) In an era of prolific transnational economic and legal activity, Kiobel entails a fascinating, sharply worded, and spirited debate on the duties that corporations as private actors owe under international law, as well as key insights into how an influential U.S. court interprets international law and the scope of its authority to create legal remedies. Grappling with these issues is critical for scholars and practitioners of international law. This Note will help equip them with the understanding to do so.

Second, in the wake of Kiobel's narrowing of the scope of liability for corporations under the ATS, this Note seeks to step back and explore the ATS's effectiveness as a litigation tool against corporations. It will discuss other avenues of relief and associated challenges within the ATS such as suing corporate officers and directors, as well as outside the ATS such as initiating state law claims. It will further propose two novel statutory alternatives to the ATS that would impose corporate civil liability--modeled on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act--and individual criminal liability for violations of the law of nations.

This Note will proceed as follows. Part I will provide a brief historical overview of the ATS and its application to corporations as part of the so-called second wave of ATS litigation, thus framing the context for Kiohel. Part II will comprehensively analyze Kiohel, the subsequent denial of en banc review and panel rehearing, and the ensuing circuit split--all leading up to the Supreme Court hearing the case.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Corporate Liability for Human Rights Abuses: Analyzing Kiobel & Alternatives to the Alien Tort Stature
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?