hide message

Welcome to the Resource Centre

We make it our mission to work with advocates in civil society, business and government to address inequalities of power, seek remedy for abuse, and ensure protection of people and planet.

Both companies and impacted communities thank us for the resources and support we provide.

This is only possible because of your support. Please make a donation today.

Thank you,
Phil Bloomer, Executive Director

Donate now hide message

This piece of content is part of multiple stories. We recommend you read this content in the context of one of the following stories:

[PDF] Esther Kiobel, et al. v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, et al. - Petitioners' Supplemental Reply Brief

Author: Paul Hoffman, Schonbrun DeSimone Seplow Harris Hoffman & Harrison LLP, Carey D'Avino, Berger & Montague, P.C., Published on: 31 August 2012

Following a comprehensive review of the text, history and purpose of the Alien Tort Statute (“ATS”), this Court held that the ATS is a jurisdictional statute authorizing federal courts to remedy certain universally proscribed violations of the law of nations. Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain…In particular, this Court endorsed the line of cases following Filartiga v. Pena-Irala…which consistently applied the ATS to human rights violations occurring on foreign soil…Respondents and their amici essentially seek to reverse Sosa, to overrule Filartiga and its progeny, and to nullify the ATS as a means of redressing universally condemned human rights violations…[T]he First Congress passed the ATS so that our country would not become a safe haven for pirates or other enemies of mankind. Respondents offer no persuasive reason to abandon this Nation’s commitments to human rights and the enforcement of the law of nations.

Read the full post here

Related companies: Shell