Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Freely speculating on the future of the ATS in a multipolar world

Harvard Law School is hosting in a couple of weeks what is certain to be a very interesting small conference on the Alien Tort Statute. I was lucky enough to be one of the invitees, addressing the issue of corporate liability under the ATS. I address the issue of corporate liability under the ATS, but am actually interested in it from a broader perspective, the "jurisprudential" perspective on the distinct and sharply divided "communities of interpretive authority" over such issues in the ATS as the status of corporate liability. I have written elsewhere recently (in the European Journal of International Law; I think a link directly to the paper in this post here) of the "fragmentation of communities of interpretation and authority" in international law. The ATS seems to me to offer a striking example of that. (Cross posted at OJ and VC.)

Corporate liability can be thought of as a "hinge" issue in ATS jurisprudence - a "hinge" that under (an amalgamated reading of) current holdings serves to link "international law" to "domestic law," as required by the two parts of the ATS. I don't think it is at all a correct reading of either international law or domestic law, but it seems to me an (arguably) accurate reading (there are always variations and cross-currents) of current cases and their holdings on corporate liability, including, for example, the latest Talisman ruling from the Second Circuit.

In addition to that, however, I conclude the paper (this is still in first draft, believe me, and far from even going up on SSRN as a working draft) with a speculation about whether the case law developing around corporate liability in the ATS will remain stable in a world in which the US chooses decline and allows the emergence of a genuinely multipolar world, a world in which China is a much, much bigger player, as in creditor and debtor:
I do not think, however, that the final chapter has been written on corporate liability under the ATS. In the real world, I do not think that the pushback has begun to be felt in the US or in US courts. At that point, I suspect that some will wonder whether (from the standpoint of the 'progressive integrity' of international law, the perspective I am freely (and perhaps overly-imaginatively) attributing to a Professor Greenwood or Crawford on the basis of their Talisman declarations, not from a vastly more skeptical position such as my own) the jurisprudence of the ATS has not actually undermined a systematic development of international law norms with respect to civil liability, tort liability, corporate liability, and specific bodies of norms such as labor or the environment. The future historian of international law might well conclude that the era of ATS jurisprudence, far from advancing broadly shared norms, actually undermined the possibility of firmly enacting them, in what turned out to be a final gasp of US legal hegemony, before the Era of US Indebtedness, ‘Choosing Decline’, and Multipolarity set in.
What happens, for example, when ATS suits start to be brought against Chinese corporations, for actions having no connection to the US save for the ATS itself? For very, very serious, uncontestable even abuses of labor, land, environment and other things in, say, Africa. The strictly legal questions would have been long settled under the jurisprudence of the ATS in lawsuits against MNCs based out of the US itself, Europe, Canada, or elsewhere in the industrialized democratic world (and whether those countries liked it or not). What happens then? The US government has taken a remarkably hands off attitude toward such litigation, under presidents of both parties – offering statements of interest on occasion, but not typically seeking, on some principled basis, simply to nip such litigation in the bud, rigorously and in every case in which there is no greater traditional jurisdictional base of the United States apart from the ATS itself, as contrary to the foreign policy interests or prerogatives of the political branches.
Were China to weigh in, down the road, in a world of a debtor US, would the rules being made today remain stable? I have my doubts. I raise China as the most obvious real-politik example of a party that might have both the means and the inclination to make its displeasure known by rattling, even just a bit, the debtor’s chains in the global market of Treasury debt. What the might the US government, for example, say in a statement of interest to a court, in response to a court following well-established ATS precedents of corporate and secondary liability, but this time in a case against a Chinese corporation, in the world as newly defined by Secretary of State Clinton in one of her early statements – declining in particular to get too worked up about human rights as central to the US relationship with China?
The rules currently being evolved by US courts, departing from norms as understood by much of the rest of the world, seem to me rules of corporate liability made for a world in which the “universal” and the “international” can be imagined to be enacted through the ATS – mostly, however, because there is still an American hegemony. One can call that hegemony “universal” and “international,” I suppose – provided, however, that one cloisters oneself as strictly as possible within those particular communities of authoritative legal interpretation in which ‘universal’ and ‘hegemonic’ categories do not brush up against each other and catch each other out. Ironies and antinomies of the ATS - yet again.


Anonymous said...

Hi Ken.

I just wanted to drop by to say hello...

CharleyCarp said...

Hi. I wanted to leave a comment of the VC post about the Italian prosecution. Mentioning Spain, you just over the single most important aspect of the Italian case: the conduct at issue took place in Italy. It's the worst sort of exceptionalism to claim that employees of the US government not otherwise entitled to immunity by treaty may nonetheless commit crimes -- and kidnapping is a crime -- in Italy without accountability.

None of the conduct under discussion for Spanish prosecution took place in Spain. Those prosecutions are suspect to the traditional view. But then so would a US Administration's prosecution of, say, a Yemeni, for an attempted terrorist attack on a Thai hotel.

CharleyCarp said...

Jump over.

Baba said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mitra said...

It is pretty long article. just one question. What do you mean by '...allows the emergence of a genuinely multipolar world...'? Is that mean US become less secure under the ATS? | United States Bankruptcy Court

Unknown said...

Blogs are so informative where we get lots of information on any topic. Nice job keep it up!!

nursing dissertation

college singles said...

Thank you for this post, we are a online dating website blog network, which college students read our blog, so thanks and well post this article on our blog. Jennifer @ University of Syracuse college singles.

Term papers said...

Nice post !! I really liked it ..

Term Papers said...

Its quite appreciable to share such information

Anonymous said...

Cool blog you got here. I'd like to read something more concerning this matter. Thank you for posting that information.
Joan Stepsen
New technology gadgets

Unknown said...

Blogs are so informative where we get lots of information on any topic. Nice job keep it up!!
antque scientific and medical

dating website said...

I was going to write a similar blog concerning this topic, you beat me to it. You did a nice job! Thanks and well add your RSS to come categories on our blogs. Thanks so much, Jon website

bankruptcy records said...

War is necessary. So are debt collection agencies for that matter. After all, no one wants to deal with either of them, but there's a Reason for such things. War sometimes is necessary to simply protect yourself from aggression. My CPA in Tucson and I were talking the other day, and he agrees - sometimes strength and difficulty are needed to keep others at bay, who would do us harm if they could. We've almost all but forgotten how Vulnerable we all felt on 9/11... but I fear we may feel that fear again... only too soon.

texas bankruptcy record said...

I'm a bit concerned that we'll see more confrontations on the horizon, especially with the economic frailties that are beginning to encompass countries' massive debt. Unfortunately, it seems war is man's only answer some times... sad but true. collection agencies

Anonymous said...

逼真按摩棒,振動按摩棒 ,

Gabriella said...

Thanks for the article car shipping | car
| auto transport

I would book mark your blog

xiamenb2c02 said...

Top quality of ecco shoes are developed for discerning customers.Enjoy a great selection of newest ecco shoes on sale,free shipping,110% price guarantee.Top quality of ecco shoes is your best chooice for daily life and working,sport,and so on.And hot sale now winter Boots .fashion on the outside,warm on the inside.