Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-9nbrm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-18T23:32:56.699Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Kiobel and Corporate Complicity– Running with the Pack

Part of: Agora: Reflections on Kiobel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2018

Anne Herzberg
Anne Herzberg*
Affiliation:
The Jerusalem-based research institute
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Many human rights activists have lamented the outcome of Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. Reacting to the opinion, Human Rights Watch expressed concern that Kiobel “significantly reduce[s] the possibility that corporations can be held accountable in US courts for human rights abuses committed abroad.” The Center for Constitutional Rights issued a statement that it was “deeply troubled by the Supreme Court's decision to undercut 30 years of jurisprudence.”

Information

Type
Agora: Reflections on Kiobel
Information
AJIL Unbound , Volume 107 , 2013 , pp. 41 - 48
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2013

References

1 Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 133 S.Ct. 1659 (2013).

2 Human Rights Watch, US: Supreme Court Limits Suits Against Rights Abusers Abroad (Apr. 29, 2013), at http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/04/29/us-supreme-court-limits-suits-against-rights-abusers-abroad.

3 Center for Constitutional Rights, Kiobel Decision: Supreme Court Limits US Courts’ Ability to Use Human Rights Law to Address Human Rights Abuses Committed Abroad (Apr. 17, 2013), at http://www.ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/kiobel-decision%3A-supreme-court-limits-us-courts%E2%80%99-ability-use-humanrights- law-address-human-rights-a.

4 Amnesty International, US: Supreme Court Ruling on Shell in the Niger Delta Severely Limits Access to Justice in Human Rights Cases (Apr. 17, 2013), at https://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/us-supremecourt- ruling-shell-niger-delta-severely-limits-access-justice-hu; see also Arvnid Ganesan, Human Rights Watch, Corporate Crime and Punishment (2012), available at http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/02/28/ corporate-crime-and-punishment; Brief of Amici Curiae International Human Rights Organizations and International Legal Experts in Support of Petitioners, Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 133 S.Ct. 1659 (2013) (No. 10-1491), available at http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/supreme_court_preview/ briefs/10-1491_petitioner_amcu_international.authcheckdam.pdf; Amnesty International, Business and Human Rights (undated), at http://amnesty.org/en/business-and-human-rights; International Commission of Jurists, Business and Human Rights (undated), at http://www.icj.org/themes/business-and-human-rights.

5 Approximately a dozen civil lawsuits and criminal complaints have been filed in Europe and Canada seeking liability against a corporation for aiding and abetting violations of international humanitarian law, international human rights, and criminal law committed by a foreign state abroad. Almost all have been dismissed; a few cases are still pending. This article summarizes the most recent decisions.

6 Anvil Mining Ltd. v. Canadian Ass’n Against Impunity, [2012] C.A. 117, para. 81 (Can. Que.), available at http://www.canlii.org/fr/qc/qcca/doc/2012/2012qcca117/2012qcca117.html (in French) [hereinafter Caai].

7 See id., paras. 16–17. According to the company's website, Anvil was acquired by Minmetals Resources Ltd. in March 2012. See http://www.anvilmining.com/index2.html.

8 See Caai, supra note 6, paras. 21–26.

9 Id., para. 26.

10 See id., paras. 57–58, 67–68. The court's analysis regarding a “real and substantial” connection to Quebec mirrors that of Kiobel which stated that claims must “touch and concern the territory of the United States” to rebut the presumption against extraterritorial application of the Alien Tort Statute. See Kiobel v. Dutch Petroleum Co., 133 S.Ct. 1659, 1669 (2013). Caai also harkens to Breyer's concurrence in Kiobel requiring that “the defendant’s conduct substantially and adversely affect[] an important American national interest.” See id. at 1671 (Breyer, J., concurring.). The “touch and concern” principle also factored in the Bil’in case, discussed infra.

11 See Caai, supra note 6, para. 85.

12 See id., paras. 96–103. Under the forum necessitatis principle, the Quebec court could exercise jurisdiction only in exceptional circumstances, such as where there is an “absolute impossibility at law or practical impossibility” in bringing suit in the other forum. Id., para. 98.

13 Bil’in (Village Council) v. Green Park Int’l Inc., No. 500-17-044030-0 (Can. Montreal Sup. Ct. July 7, 2008).

14 See Al Haq, Press Release: Bil’in Village Council v. Green Park (2009), available at http://www.alhaq.org/ advocacy/targets/accountability/70-bilin-v-green-park/471-bilin-village-council-v-green-park (case overview).

15 Further Amended and Particularized Motion Introducing a Suit, para. 9, Bil’in (Village Council) v. Green Park Int’l Inc., No. 500-17-044030-0 (Can. Montreal Sup. Ct. Jan. 23, 2009), available at http://www.alhaq.org/ images/stories/PDF/accoutability-files/the_claim.pdf.

16 See id. at 34–35; see also Defendants’ Exception to Dismiss Action, para. 10, Bil’in (Village Council) v. Green Park Int’l Inc., No. 500-17-044030-0 (Can. Montreal Sup. Ct. June 22, 2009) (on file with author).

17 Courtroom Intifada: How Palestinian Villagers Quest to Regain Lost Land Has Ended in Court (Al Jazeera broadcast June 3, 2009), at http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/peopleandpower/2009/06/2009621104411512. html.

18 John Reynolds, Remarks at the Accountability for IHL Violations Forum, Al Quds University, Jerusalem (Mar. 2009).

19 Further Amended and Particularized Motion, supra note 15, para. 13.

20 See id., paras. 15–22.

21 Bil’in (village council) v. green park int’l inc., no. 500-17-044030-0, judgment (can. montreal sup. ct. sept. 18, 2009) (cullen, j.), available at http://www.jugements.qc.ca/php/decision.php?liste!39887605& doc!0fb6adf4d6c912c6af300dbad4e2c354a4831d66a546fcd5167ea497485443ff [hereinafter bil’in Trial Judgment].

22 Id., para. 139.

23 Id., paras. 299–300.

24 Id., para. 335; see also Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 133 S.Ct. 1659, 1674 (Breyer, J., concurring) (suggesting reliance on the principles of exhaustion, forum non conveniens, and comity to “minimize international friction”).

25 Bil’in Trial Judgment, supra note 21, para. 317.

26 Id.

27 Id.

28 Id., paras. 326, 327.

29 Bil’in (Village Council) v. Green Park Int’l Inc., [2010] C.A. 1455, para. 51 (Can. Que.), available at http://www.jugements.qc.ca/php/decision.php?liste!69437636&doc!227F3616B495ADDF20D4DEA0A5D509 505A8C1759ED918A3F747A3C483979FAE2&page!1.

30 Id., para. 86.

31 Bil’in (Village Council) v. Green Park Int’l Inc., [2011] 1 S.C.R. vi (Can.) (dismissing application with costs), available at http://scc.lexum.org/decisia-scc-csc/scc-csc/scc-l-csc-a/en/item/10463/index.do.

32 See Individual Complaint to the Human Rights Committee Under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Bil’in (Village Council) v. Canada (Feb. 28, 2013), available at http://globalinitiative-escr.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/130228-NRC-Individual-Complaint-ICCPR-Canada-ETOs-FINAL.pdf; see also Tom Blackwell, West Bank Village Accuses Canada of Breaking Human-Rights Laws, NAT’L POST (Can.), June 7, 2013, at http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/06/04/west-bank-village-accusescanada-of-breaking-human-rights-laws.

33 Association France-Palestine Solidarite´ v. Socie´te´ Alstom Transport SA, Judgment, Cour d’appel de Versailles de 22 mars 2013, available at http://www.dreuz.info/2013/04/la-cour-dappel-de-versailles-olp-c-alstom-et-veoliadeclare-que-loccupation-par-israel-nest-pas-illegale (English translation available online at http://www.intjewish lawyers.org/main/files/Versailles%20Court%20of%20Appeals%20ruling%20doc%20English%20.pdf).

34 The three companies were not signatories to the contract but had formed an Israeli company that subsequently won the government tender to build the light rail. The companies were also involved in its construction and maintenance.

35 At http://www.unglobalcompact.org.

36 Association France-Palestine Solidarite´, supra note 33, at 5–6.

37 Id. at 17.

38 See id. at 20; see also Raphael Ahern, French Court's Light Rail Ruling Breaks No Legal Ground, Scholars Say, TIMES OF Israel, Apr. 29, 2013, at http://www.timesofisrael.com/french-ruling-on-jerusalems-light-rail-addsnothing- new-scholars-say.

39 Association France-Palestine Solidarite´, supra note 33, at 21.

40 Id. at 21–22.

41 See id.

42 See id.

43 See id. at 26–27.

44 See id. at 27–28.

45 Al Haq, Criminal Complaint Lodged Against Dutch Company for Construction of Settlements and ‘The Wall’ (Oct. 14, 2010), at http://www.alhaq.org/advocacy/targets/accountability/71-riwal/472-criminal-complaint-lodged-against-dutch-company-for-construction-of-settlements-and-the-wall.

46 See id.

47 Openbaar Ministerie, Geen verder onderzoek naar kraanverhuurder (No further testing for crane hire) (May 14, 2013), at http://www.om.nl/algemene_onderdelen/uitgebreid_zoeken/@160903/verder-onderzoek/. In Kiobel, the British and Dutch governments filed an amicus brief on behalf of Royal Dutch Petroleum. They argued against the exercise of universal jurisdiction and declared that no rule of international law imposed direct liability on corporations. Brief of the Governments of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Kingdom of the Netherlands as Amici Curiae in Support of the Respondents, Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 133 S.Ct. 1659 (2013) (No. 10-1491), available at http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/4587212_1_UK-Netherlands-amicus-brief-ISO-respondents-filed-2-3-12-2.pdf.

48 See Openbaar Ministerie, supra note 47. In response to a parliamentary question regarding involvement of Dutch companies in Israeli settlements, the Dutch government responded that while it considers settlements illegal and discourages Dutch involvement, “Dutch companies are not prohibited to engage in these types of economic relationships. The responsibility lies with the companies themselves.” Press Release of the Dutch Government, Questions and Answers, Aanhangsel van de Handelingen, Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal (Appendix of Acts, second chamber of the states-general) (Sept. 16, 2013), at https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/ah-tk- 20122013-3223.html?zoekcriteria!%3fzkt%3dEenvoudig%26pst%3d%26vrt%3dnegatief%2bbouw%2bad vies%2bisrael%26zkd%3dInDeGeheleText%26dpr%3dAfgelopenDag%26sdt%3dDatumBrief%26ap%3d% 26pnr%3d1%26rpp%3d10&resultIndex!7&sorttype!1&sortorder!4.

49 European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), Nestle´ Has Nothing to Fear from Swiss Legal System, ECCHR Special Newsletter, May 10, 2013, at 2, available at http://www.ecchr.de/index.php/nestle- 518.html.

50 Information Platform Human Rights.ch, No Test Case After All—No Charges Filed Against Nestle´ in Switzerland (May 29, 2013), available at http://www.humanrights.ch/en/Switzerland/Foreign-Affairs/Foreign-Trade/ Transnational/idart_9188-content.html.

51 Id.

52 ECCHR, supra note 49, at 2.

53 Business & Human Rights Resource Centre, Nestle´ Response Re Suit Alleging Its Complicity in Murder of Colombian Trade Unionist (Mar. 7, 2012), available at http://business-humanrights.org/Links/Repository/ 1011578.

54 Information Platform Human Rights.ch, supra note 50.

55 European Coalition for Corporate Justice, Update in the Nestle´ Case: Prosecutor Under Court Review ( June 14, 2013), at http://www.corporatejustice.org/UPDATE-in-the-Nestle-Case.html.

56 ECCHR, Update in the Nestle´ Case: Prosecutor Under Court Review, ECCHR Special Newsletter, May 17, 2013, at http://www.ecchr.de/index.php/nestle-518.html.

57 See Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 133 S.Ct. 1659, 1668 (2013) (quoting United States v. La Jeune Eugenie, 26 F.Cas. 832, 847 (C.C.D. Mass. 1822) (No. 15,551)); see also id. at 1674 (Breyer, J., concurring) (same).