Now Program on Burma and the Alien Torts Claims Act

A while back I posted about the efforts of the Bush administration through John Ashcroft to torpedo the use of the Alien Torts Claims Act (ATCA) to seek redress in Federal Court for human rights abuses committed outside the USA. Last week on NOW with Bill Moyers, there was a segment that dealt with this issue and the specific case in Burma in which several Burmese citizens are suing the oil company, Unocal over allegations of complicity with slave labor that the Burmese military (which provided security for a oil pipeline that Unocal was building).  The link to the program itself is here along with a great deal of background on the subject.

According to Harold Hongju Koh, the incoming Dean of Yale Law School and a former Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor in the Clinton administration, the Ashcroft DOJ is seeking to have all decisions dealing with the ATCA and aliens suing for human rights abuses outside the US reversed. In the course of the program, Koh makes a sensible comment that the application of the this law should be examined on a case-by-case basis. Please don't just accept the opinion of two liberals on this subject. Here's what Republican Senator Arlen Specter had to say on the subject:

"The Alien Tort Claims Act has been interpreted to apply only to genocide, war crimes, piracy, slavery, torture, unlawful detention and summary execution. The Torture Victims Protection Act is limited to torture and summary execution.

There is no room for moral relativism. American credibility in the war on terrorism depends on a strong stand against all terrorist acts, whether committed by foe or friend. Our credibility in the war on terrorism is only advanced when our government enforces laws that protect innocent victims. We then send the right message to the world: the United States is serious about human rights."

This is one of many reasons is why I cannot accept the notion that this administration is genuinely concerned about human rights beyond its own narrow self-interests. Simply saying that you have "done more for human rights" doesn't make it a fact. Walk the walk a lot more consistently and you'll have credibility when you talk the talk.