The catalyst for this volume was a request to Scott (York U. Law School, Toronto) from Sudanese exiles for advice on transnational avenues for seeking justice against members of their government. The 26 contributions address the frames and foundations of human rights cases; jurisdiction and immunity; choice of law and causes of action; evolving international law on recourse against non-state actors; legitimacy, intervention, and forging of national histories; and the borders of tort theory. Includes tables of cases and legislation. Appends the UN Convention Against Torture, the US code on Alien Tort Claims and Torture Victims Protection Act, provisions of Private International Law (UK, 1995), and an update on developments related to the discussion of the Pinochet case. Distributed in the US by ISBS. c. Book News Inc.

English Abstract: This paper proposes the recognition of a new cause of action in tort for acts of torture as defined in international law. After discussing the normative particularities of torture as a hybrid public-private wrong, the author theories on the possibility and desirability of expanding the classical categories of intentional torts to accommodate a new nominate tort of torture. Following the current taxonomy of Canadian tort law, it is suggested that torture could coherently be conceived as a distinct form of trespass against the person or, alternatively, as an especially violent form of misfeasance in public office.French Abstract Cet article propose la reconnaissance d'une nouvelle cause d'action en responsabiliteacute; deacute;lictuelle pour les actes de torture tels qu'ils sont deacute;finis en droit international. Apregrave;s avoir discuteacute; des particulariteacute;s normatives de la torture en tant que tort hybride, soit public et priveacute;, l'auteur avance des theacute;ories sur la possibiliteacute; et l'opportuniteacute; d'eacute;largir les cateacute;gories classiques des deacute;lits intentionnels pour accueillir un nouveau deacute;lit de torture. Agrave; la suite de la taxonomie actuelle du droit canadien de la responsabiliteacute; deacute;lictuelle, il est suggeacute;reacute; que la torture puisse ecirc;tre conccedil;ue de maniegrave;re coheacute;rente comme une forme distincte d'intrusion contre la personne ou, subsidiairement, comme une forme particuliegrave;rement violente d'abus dans les fonctions publiques.

Advancing a bold theory of the relevance of tort law in the fight against human rights abuses, celebrated US law professor George Fletcher here challenges the community of international lawyers to think again about how they can use the Alien Tort Statute. Beginning with an historical analysis Fletcher shows how tort and criminal law originally evolved to deal with similar problems, how tort came to be seen as primarily concerned with negligence and how the Alien Tort Statute has helped establish the importance of tort law in international cases. In a series of cases starting with Filartiga and culminating most recently in Sosa, Fletcher shows how torture cases led to the reawakening of the Alien Tort Statute, changing US law and giving legal practitioners a tool with which to assist victims of torture and other extreme human rights abuses. This leads to an examination of Agent Orange and the possible commission of war crimes in the course of its utilisation, and the theory of liability for aiding and abetting the US military and other military forces when they commit war crimes. The book concludes by looking at the cutting-edge cases in this area, particularly those involving liability for funding terrorism, and the remedies available, particularly the potential offered by the compensation chamber in the International Criminal Court.

Torture is firmly prohibited by international law. It is a crime in all places and at all times. Indeed, torturers are considered 'hostis humani generis' (enemies of all humanity). When someone is tortured, it is an affront to human dignity. When torturers are not held accountable for their actions, it is an affront to justice. Impunity occurs when perpectrators of human rights abuses are not held accountable for their actions. It occurs when perpetrators refuse to acknowledge the wrongfulness of their conduct. It occurs when states refuse to accept responsibility for the acts of government agents. And it occurs when the international community allows perpetrators to go unpunished. Impunity is a problem in all countries, including the United States. For decades, the United Staes has condemned torture and other human rights abuses committed abroad. Yet it has failed to bring to justice the perpetrators of such abuses when they have entered the country. Accordingly, this report, which is part of Amnesty International's Campaign to Stop Torture, sets forth a multi-track strategy to ensure that the United States is not a safe haven for torturers.

Government accountability in the nineteenth century -- Bivens and government accountability in the twentieth century -- Human rights and War on Terror litigation -- Evaluating the effectiveness of Bivens litigation -- Evaluating justifications for judicial silence -- Congressional ratification of the bivens action -- Applying Bivens to conduct outside of the United States -- Overcoming qualified immunity -- Common-law solutions to judge-made problems.

This is the story of one of the most significant examples of human rights litigation in the U.S., presented as a documentary history. The pleadings and documents appear with minimal editing and are supplemented through commentary.