Monday
Apr202009
Families Of Torture Victims Sue Iraqi Government
Monday, April 20, 2009 at 6:27PM
In 1993, Kenneth Beaty, a U.S. citizen who was working as an oil-rig drilling supervisor in Kuwait was arrested by Iraqi border guards when he asked for directions at an Iraqi check-point. In 1995, William Barloon, who held a job as an aircraft maintenance supervisor in Kuwait, was also arrested by Iraqi border guards for entering Iraq. Both were taken to the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, where they were allegedly denied food, water, medical care and toilet facilities.
Beaty and Barloon brought suits against Iraq and won the case. Then in 2003, the families of these so-called victims filed a case to sue the Iraqi government for emotional distress caused to the children of these men.
According to U.S. law, foreign states cannot, generally, be sued by individuals in the U.S., but there are exceptions - namely if the country is designated as a sponsor of terror by the U.S.
In 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait and was put on the U.S. list of countries that sponsor terror. As a result Iraq’s immunity was taken away, and United States courts were able to file lawsuits against the nation.
However, with the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 and subsequent collapse of Saddam Hussein’s government, the status of Iraq as a terror state became unclear. That year, Congress enacted the Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act, which repealed certain restrictions against terrorist states. The point of this act was to assist Iraq in reconstruction efforts. However, the EWSAA included arguably unclear wording, stating that “any other provision of law that applies to countries that have supported terrorism” should be made inapplicable in Iraq.
The Supreme Court heard from both sides of the argument - victims of torture who believe they deserve retribution from Iraq, and those who think that Iraq is classified as a sovereign nation and that individuals in the U.S. have no right to sue. The case is titled Republic of Iraq v. Beaty, and the decision is forthcoming.
In total, there are $3 billion worth of lawsuits pending, if the Supreme Court rules that U.S. courts have jurisdiction to hear suits against Iraq.
Beaty and Barloon brought suits against Iraq and won the case. Then in 2003, the families of these so-called victims filed a case to sue the Iraqi government for emotional distress caused to the children of these men.
According to U.S. law, foreign states cannot, generally, be sued by individuals in the U.S., but there are exceptions - namely if the country is designated as a sponsor of terror by the U.S.
In 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait and was put on the U.S. list of countries that sponsor terror. As a result Iraq’s immunity was taken away, and United States courts were able to file lawsuits against the nation.
However, with the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 and subsequent collapse of Saddam Hussein’s government, the status of Iraq as a terror state became unclear. That year, Congress enacted the Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act, which repealed certain restrictions against terrorist states. The point of this act was to assist Iraq in reconstruction efforts. However, the EWSAA included arguably unclear wording, stating that “any other provision of law that applies to countries that have supported terrorism” should be made inapplicable in Iraq.
The Supreme Court heard from both sides of the argument - victims of torture who believe they deserve retribution from Iraq, and those who think that Iraq is classified as a sovereign nation and that individuals in the U.S. have no right to sue. The case is titled Republic of Iraq v. Beaty, and the decision is forthcoming.
In total, there are $3 billion worth of lawsuits pending, if the Supreme Court rules that U.S. courts have jurisdiction to hear suits against Iraq.
Reader Comments