September 09, 2010
Advanced Search
OVERVIEW OF ACCOUNTABILITY FOR TORTURE
Home > Issues > Accountability for Torture
Accountability for Torture PDF Print E-mail

Obtaining accountability for those committing major human rights abuses, such as genocide, torture, and other crimes against humanity, has become a major focus of the work of Human Rights USA. We have filed criminal complaints in cases involving torture, and we have challenged the U.S. government's attempts to obtain amnesty for torturers in connection with the "war against terrorism." In addition, Human Rights USA has become amicus curiae (friend of the court) in the first criminal prosecution for torture under U.S. law, a huge step forward in the United States's implementation of the Convention Against Torture. The criminal prosecution is of Chuckie Taylor, son of Charles Taylor, who is accused of committing torture abuses in Liberia under his father's regime. This is only one of a half-dozen times that an amicus has been named in a criminal case at the trial level.

We sought and obtained amicus status, and have filed two amicus briefs, to weigh in on two legal issues raised by defendant Chuckie Taylor that challenged the basic framework of the judicial enforcement of human rights standards. First, Taylor claimed that cases involving human rights abuses that occurred in foreign countries could not be heard in U.S. courts. Second, Taylor argued that the Convention Against Torture -- the international treaty that was implemented by the criminal law allowing for prosecutors to file charges against Taylor -- did not apply in situations of armed conflict. Our positions on both of these issues were accepted by the court, which soundly rejected Taylor's arguments.  

Human Rights USA also has filed several groundbreaking civil actions under the Alien Tort Claims Act and Torture Victim Protection Act seeking civil remedies to compensate survivors of torture abuse, and to hold their abusers accountable. Our civil litigation aims to establish two important principles of human rights in U.S. courts. First, we are working to prevent impunity by holding high-level government officials accountable for directing human rights violations. Our case against the current Prime Minister of Cambodia, Hun Sen, was the first successful case of this kind against a sitting head of state. Second, we are enforcing the obligations of non-state actors, such as corporations doing business abroad, not to contribute to human rights violations. Human Rights USA represents journalists and writers who are in prison because Yahoo! Inc.'s Chinese subsidiary handed over their identifying internet user information to Chinese officials, resulting in their arbitrary arrest, long-term imprisonment, abuse, and torture.

For more information on these efforts, see:

 

 
Legal Materials by Issue

- Background Paper On U.S. Internet Companies' Code of Conduct

-2008 Year End Report

-Corporate Accountability A: HRUSA's current Complaint pending against Yahoo before the federal District Court for the Northern District of California (Xiaoning v. Yahoo)

-Corporate Accountability B: HRUSA's joint stipulated request to extend initial deadlines for Yahoo's reply and parties' case management conference (Xiaoning v. Yahoo)

-Corporate Accountability C: Court's grant of parites' joint stipulated request to extend deadlines (Xiaoning v. Yahoo)

-Corporate Accountability D: Yahoo's motion to bifurcate proceedings, delay initial discovery, and solicit the Executive Branch's views on foreign policy issues (Xiaoning v. Yahoo)

-Corporate Accountability E: HRUSA's memo opposing Yahoo's request to limit the time in which the court would hold hearings on Yahoo's motions to bifurcate proceedings and delay discovery (Xiaoning v. Yahoo)

-Corporate Accountability F: HRUSA's memo in opposition to Yahoo's attempt to delay proceedings (Xiaoning v. Yahoo)

-Corporate Accountability G: Court's order denying Yahoo's reuqest to limit the time in which the court would hold hearings on Yahoo's motions to bifurcate proceedings and delay discovery (Xiaoning v. Yahoo)

-Corporate Accountability H: Court order denying Yahoo's motion to bifurcate proceedings and delay initial discovery (Xiaoning v. Yahoo)

-Corporate Accountability I: HRUSA's brief addressing the impropriety of soliciting the State Department's Statement of Interest in our lawsuit against Yahoo (Xiaoning v. Yahoo)

-Corporate Accountability J: HRUSA's motion to begin initial and jurisdictional discovery, in response to Yahoo's motion to dismiss (Xiaoning v. Yahoo)

-Corporate Accountability K: U.S. government's notice to the court of its potential participation in HRUSA's lawsuit against Yahoo (Xiaoning v. Yahoo)

-Corporate Accountability L: Order of the court granting our motion to begin initial and jurisdictional discovery (Xiaoning v. Yahoo)

-Criminal Accountability for Torturers: Amicus brief in the Chuckie Taylor case, supporting the constitutionality of the federal torture statute, which criminalizes acts of torture in compliance with the Convention AgainsTorture (U.S. v. Chuckie Taylor)

-Criminal Accountability for Torturers: Amicus Brief on the Proposed Jury Instructions on the Definition of Torture (U.S.A v Chuckie Taylor)

-Criminal Accountability for Torturers: HRUSA's second amicus brief responding to Chuckie Taylor's argument that the Convention Against Torture (CAT) does not apply during armed conflict. We explained that the CAT obligations are non-derogable, even during times of war or internal strife

-Criminal Accountability for Torturers: Request to Attorney General for Investigation and Prosecution of Crimes Against Detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo

-Criminal Accountability for Torturers: Request to Attorney General for Investigation and Prosecution of Crimes Committed through "Rendition to Torture"

-Criminal Accountability for Torturers: Request to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to Investigate the Immunity and Habeas-Stripping Provisions of the Military Commissions Act

-Foreign Officials Immunity: Xia Deren and Liu Qi: Complaint filed against high-level Chinese officials for major human rights abuses in that country

-Foreign Officials Immunity: Xia Deren and Liu Qi: HRUSA's brief addressing federal district court jurisdiction to hear claims for human rights abuses committed overseas

-Foreign Officials Immunity: Xia Deren and Liu Qi: Magistrate judge's recommendation that the federal District Court enter declaratory judgment against defendants, that they violated international human rights law

-Foreign Officials Immunity: Xia Deren and Liu Qi: Our brief addressing the question of whether the court can adjudicate claims of torture under Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain standards, and whether filing suit against sitting officials raises political questions not addressable by the court

-Foreign Officials Immunity: Xia Deren and Liu Qi: The magistrate judge's amended recommendation, in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, that the federal District Court enter declaratory judgment against defendants. The District Court adopted the judge's recommendations

-Head of State Immunity: Our complaint filed against the sitting Prime Minister of Cambodia, Hun Sen, seeking to hold him accountable under U.S. and international law for acts of torture and other human rights abuses (Abney v. Hun Sen)

-Head of State Immunity: Our response to Hun Sen's attempt to dismiss the lawsuit against him for torture and other human rights abuses. This response details all of our objections to Hun Sen's defenses (Abney v. Hun Sen)

-HRUSA's Letter to President-elect Obama Urging Him Not to Abandon Criminal Investigations or Prosecutions for Torture

-Justice for Abuses in Liberia: HR USA's third Amicus Brief on the Proposed Jury Instructions on the Definition of Torture (U.S.A v Chuckie Taylor)

-Justice for Abuses in Liberia: HRUSA's second amicus brief responding to Chuckie Taylor's argument that the Convention Against Torture (CAT) does not apply during armed conflict. We explained that the CAT obligations are non-derogable, even during times of war or internal strife

-Justice for Abuses in Liberia: Our amicus brief in support of the prosecution of Chuckie Taylor, arguing that the federal torture statute which criminalizes acts of torture, in compliance with the Convention Against Torture, is constitutional (U.S. v. Chuckie Taylor)

-Justice for Abuses in Liberia: U.S. Government's Superceding Indictment against Chuckie Taylor, providing more specific allegations against Taylor for his acts of torture and major human rights abuses (U.S. v. Taylor)

-Special Missions Immunity: Our brief requesting default judgment against Chinese official Bo Xilai, arguing that the act of state doctrine and the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act are not valid defenses to serious human rights abuses (Weixum v. Bo Xilai)

-Special Missions Immunity: Our supplemental brief explaining that "special diplomatic immunity" is not a type of immunity recognized under customary international law, and cannot be used as a defense for acts of torture (Weixum v. Bo Xilai)

-Special Missions Immunity: Our supplemental brief on the legislative history of the Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA) and arguing that Congress intended for sitting government officials to be liable for acts of torture (Weixum v. Bo Xilai)

-Special Missions Immunity: State Department's brief asserting that Chinese Minister Bo Xilai is immune from suit under a novel theory of so-called "special missions" immunity, and that the court should dismiss the case because it interferes with foreign policy (Weixum v. Bo Xilai)

Home | About Us | Issues | Who We've Helped | Get Involved | News | Calendar | Contact Us | Site Map