Corporate Convenience and 
War on Terrorism 
Mute Voices of Human Rights 

Drillbits & Tailings v.7, n.7, 5sep02

Three precedent-setting cases filed under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) in pursuit of U.S. corporations for human rights abuses abroad are all facing a tide of misguided priorities and decisions by both U.S. courts and the U.S. State Department. The ATCA is a law that allows these foreign individuals to use U.S. courts to hold U.S.-based companies accountable for violating international law.

The three cases involve the pursuit of Unocal in Burma, ExxonMobil in Indonesia and ChevronTexaco in Ecuador filed on behalf of Indonesian and Burmese villagers and Indigenous Peoples from the Amazon rainforest of Ecuador who have all suffered at the expense of oil and gas extraction by these companies.

On August 16, Indigenous Peoples from Ecuador lost their appeal aimed at reinstating nine-year-old litigation against Texaco for toxic activities and dumping that devastated the environment and deleteriously impacted the health of their people. The U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an earlier ruling dismissing two class-action lawsuits reasoning that the United States was not the proper place for the litigation, and that Ecuador would be a more convenient location.

New York-based Texaco, a legacy company of the now ChevronTexaco, drilled in Ecuador for twenty years until 1992. During that time over 300 wells were opened, and 1,800 miles (2,897 kilometers) of trails and 300 miles (482 kilometers) of roads were cut through the pristine forests. Over 600 pits filled with toxic waste were created, left open to wash out with heavy rains.

Massive amounts of toxic chemicals were dumped onto roads, into streams and wetlands, polluting the people's drinking, fishing and bathing sources. Over 30,000 people have suffered injuries and health complications ranging from long-term persistent skin rashes, flus, stomach irritations, and swollen throats in addition to extreme exposure to cancer-causing pollutants.

The decision that Ecuador is the more appropriate venue dodges the court's responsibility to try such involving the violation of international law. Public and private interests are strong factors working against the recognition of U.S. courts as an appropriate forum for such cases despite the ATCA.

The theme of convenience and "other" interests muting the ATCA also permeates in the case against ExxonMobil, in which the war on terrorism may be conveniently used by ExxonMobil to dodge responsibility. The lawsuit filed in June 2001, on behalf of eleven survivors of human rights violations in Aceh, an Indonesian province north of the island of Sumatra, provided testimony that villagers were tortured and murdered by soldiers specifically hired and paid for by the company to guard its natural gas facilities.

On May 10, 2002, the court granted an appeal filed by ExxonMobil with which the court sent a letter to William Howard Taft IV, legal advisor at the State Department, asking whether the case would impact U.S. interests in Indonesia. The State Department responded with an "opinion" that is technically non-binding, stating in a letter that a decision against ExxonMobil may "risk a potentially serious adverse impact on significant interests of the US, including interests directly related to the struggle against international terrorism." The State Department had the option to remain neutral, but instead sided with ExxonMobil in its response to Judge Oberdorfer on July 29, 2002 arguing that the case should be dismissed.

Following suit, Unocal recently made an appeal arguing similarities between the two cases. "As in Exxon Mobil, the litigation seeks to penalize an American company for investing in a country with a record of human rights abuses," Unocal said. "It could have a chilling effect on investment and efforts to induce the host country to improve human rights." On August 8, less than two weeks after the State Department intervened on behalf of ExxonMobil, a Los Angeles judge granted the request by Unocal to ask the State Department to intervene in the lawsuit filed on behalf of Burmese villagers originally scheduled to be heard on September 26 of this year.

California-based Unocal Corporation has been under litigation for abuses committed by the Burmese military on behalf of Burma's state owned oil company, which is Unocal's partner in the construction of the Yadana pipeline. A California Superior Court judge ruled on June 11 that Unocal would go to trial for complicity in forced relocation and labor, rape, torture and murder. Despite the original ruling only two months ago, the case has been moved to February 4, 2003 perhaps allowing Unocal the opportunity to capitalize on the convenience of foreign policy relations to override the responsibility of its atrocities.

SOURCES:

• "A Long Way to Find Justice" by Elliot Schrage, Washington Post, July 14, 2002
• "Amazon Indians Lose Appeal of Texaco Case Ruling" by Gail Appleson, Reuters, August 19,2002
• "Exxon Welcomes US Backing on Lawsuit" Agence France Presse, August 8, 2002
• "Oil Giant Welcomes State Dept. Bid To Block Rights Abuses Lawsuit" by Patrick Goodenough, Cybercast News Service, August 9, 2002
• "Rights Groups Hit US Stand on ExxonMobil" by Jim Lobe, Inter Press Service, August 7, 2002
• "US Tries to Halt Rights Lawsuit," Financial Times, August 6, 2002
• "Bush Backtracks on Corporate Responsibility " Human Rights Watch News, August 7, 2002
• "U.S. Backs Oil Giant on Lawsuit in Indonesia" by Jane Perlez, August 8, 2002
• "Judge Lets Unocal Ask State Dept. to Intervene in Myanmar Lawsuit" by Sonni Efron, Los Angeles Times, August 9, 2002
• "White House Sets New Hurdles for Suits Over Rights Abuses" the Wall Street Journal, August 7, 2002.

To subscribe send a BLANK EMAIL to: englishdrillbits-subscribe@topica.com