AlienTortClaims.InternationalLawUpdate

AlienTortClaims.Inte - 126 Volume 14 August 2008 international law update ALIEN TORT CLAIMS ACT In case by West African plantation workers charging

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
126 Volume 14, August 2008 international law update © 2008 Transnational Law Associates, LLC. All rights reserved. ISSN 1089-5450, ISSN 1943-1287 (on-line) | www.internationallawupdate.com ALIEN TORT CLAIMS ACT IN CAsE by WEsT ±fR²CAN PLANTAT²ON ³ORkERs ChARg²Ng PEsT²C²DE MAkERs AND UsERs ³²Th gENOC²DE, CR²MEs AgA²NsT hUMAN²Ty AND RAC²AL D²sCR²M²NAT²ON UNDER A LIEN T ORT C LAIMS A CT (±´µ±), ¶²NTh µ²RCU²T f²NDs ThAT CURRENT sTATE Of ·.S. AND ²NTERNAT²ONAL LA³ DOEs NOT sUPPORT sUCh CLA²Ms Dole Food Company, Inc. entered into an agreement with Société d’Etat pour le Développement de la Production des Fruitières et Légumes (Sodefel), an entity of the Ivory Coast government. It allegedly called for Sodefel, which owned and operated the plantations, to grow fruit according to Dole Food’s speci± cations; these included the use of DBCP produced by Dow Chemical Company, Shell Oil Company or AMVAC Chemical Corporation (collectively Defendants). Akebo Abagninin, and other African nationals who have worked on Ivory Coast plantations (Plainti² s) sued the Defendants in a California federal court. Plainti² s allege that exposure to DBCP caused male sterility and low sperm counts and that Defendant AMVAC had been aware of these risks since the 1950s. ³ e Plainti² s’ alleged the Defendants’ commission of genocide and Crimes against Humanity under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA), 28 U.S.C. § 1350.2. Plainti² s’ also claimed racial discrimination and unlawful distribution of pesticides. Defendant Dow Chemical, joined by AMVAC, moved for judgment on the pleadings. ³ e district court then dismissed the Plainti² s’ claims for genocide and unlawful distribution of pesticides for failing to allege a violation of applicable norms of international law. ³ e court determined that genocide required a speci± c intent to destroy a particular racial or other identi± able group of victims. ³ e court rejected Plainti² s’ argument that the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court required only knowledge of the e² ects of DBCP, because the statute did not constitute a norm of international law under ATCA. ³
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/11/2012 for the course GENERAL ST 410 taught by Professor Huck during the Fall '11 term at Berea.

Page1 / 3

AlienTortClaims.Inte - 126 Volume 14 August 2008 international law update ALIEN TORT CLAIMS ACT In case by West African plantation workers charging

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online