Human Rights and Corporate Wrongs
Show Less

Human Rights and Corporate Wrongs

Closing the Governance Gap

Simon Baughen

The effects of globalisation, together with the increase in foreign investment and resource development within the developing world, have created a context for human rights abuses by States in which transnational corporations are complicit. This timely book considers how these ‘governance gaps’, as identified by Professor John Ruggie, may be closed. Simon Baughen examines the status of corporations under international law, the civil liability of corporations for their participation in international crimes and self-regulation through voluntary codes of conduct, such as the 2011 UN Guiding Principles.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 3: Suing in the US (2): The Alien Tort Statute 1789 and statutory causes of action

Simon Baughen


In this chapter we shall consider statutory provisions in the US which provide a cause of action in relation to conduct that violates international law. The first, and most famous provision, is the Alien Tort Statute 1789 (ATS) whose jurisdictional grant has been held to allow the development of a cause of action based on violations of a limited category of jus cogens norms of customary international law. The scope of the statute has recently been restricted by the Supreme Court’s ruling in Kiobel that it does not have extra-territorial reach. Second, there is the Torture Victims Protection Act 1991 (TVPA) which gives a civil right of action to any national in respect of torture. Third, there are two statutory provisions which give US nationals civil rights of action in respect of injuries or death sustained as a result of terrorism. Fourth, there is a statutory right of action granted to the victims of human trafficking. The statute provides that: ‘The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.' The statute was probably enacted in response to the Marbois incident of 1784 involving verbal and physical assaults on the French Ambassador, Longchamps, by a French citizen.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.