Question

Chiquita Banana, Blood Banana: Should the company have been punished by the U.S. government for what they did in Columbia? Should they take some responsibility for what happened to the people at the hands of the militia? If so, why, or why not?

Answer 1

MIAMI faced with probably billions of bucks in legal legal responsibility, Chiquita manufacturers worldwide is asking a federal appeals courtroom to block lawsuits filed against it within the U.S. Via countless numbers of Colombians whose spouse and children have been killed in that country bloody, a long time-lengthy civil struggle.

The produce massive, which lengthy had large banana plantations in Colombia, has admitted paying a correct-wing Colombian paramilitary group $1.7 million over a seven-year period. The Charlotte, N.C.-established company insists it used to be blackmailed into paying or risking violence towards its own operations and employees, although in 2007 Chiquita pleaded guilty to U.S. Crook fees that it had supported terrorists. It paid a $25 million great.

The Colombian complaints, consolidated for pretrial action earlier than a federal judge in West Palm seaside, need Chiquita held in charge for countless numbers of deaths at the hands of the AUC, the Spanish acronym for the right-wing United Self-safeguard Forces of Colombia. The Colombian family have gained a number of key pretrial rulings, however now Chiquita is taking its combat for dismissal to a brand new level.

In essence, Chiquita needs the eleventh U.S. Circuit courtroom of Appeals to dismiss the complaints due to the fact, the company claims, each murder can not be tied certainly to the organization. Its no longer ample, Chiquita legal professionals say in court papers, to count on the enterprise repayments to the AUC supposed Chiquita knew about and supported those individual killings.

Chiquita also says the Colombian cases should be tossed on account that of a U.S. Supreme court ruling last April in a case referred to as Kiobel vs. Royal Dutch Petroleum, which imposed new limits on the capability of foreigners to make use of American courts to seek accountability and monetary damages for human rights abuses.

Any choice with the aid of the 11th Circuit is probably going months away, including to years Colombian household contributors have already been waiting for the lawsuits to be resolved. The cases were consolidated in Florida in 2008.

Three women who misplaced household to the AUC and are among the plaintiffs in proceedings towards Chiquita agreed to communicate through mobilephone recently with The associated Press from the city of Apartado, Colombia. They spoke on that their names now not be used seeing that they fear retribution from former paramilitary contributors, many of whom still are living within the discipline and have strong political connections.

Human rights agencies say many former paramilitary members have reorganized into what are called emerging criminal bands worried in extortion and racketeering.

Some of the women, a 48-year-historical who makes a small income sitting for a neighbors youngster, mentioned paramilitary troops descended on her house in 2000 at the same time her husband and a pal have been working of their backyard. The troops requested identification papers and demanded to understand whether or not there were weapons for the leftist guerrillas hidden in the residence. She stated they ransacked the home and located none, and he or she fled with the couple boy or girl little one.

When he let me go, I ran with my girl and jumped over the (garden) wall. I don't even understand how I did that. never completed it before, the woman stated between sobs.

When she again to her house with neighbors, she found her husband shot useless on their kitchen floor. Now, she said, the Chiquita lawsuit gives her some hope for justice and a greater life for herself and her two youngsters.

i am fighting for my youngsters, so that they can have some help in spite of everything this time, the girl stated.

A further girl, a forty five-yr-historical single mom of three, makes a dwelling promoting lunches from condo to house. She said right-wing paramilitary infantrymen originally forced her household off their land in 1997, accusing them of being sympathetic to the leftists. Not long after, she stated, her 17-year-historic brother used to be brutally overwhelmed and fatally shot.

it is nonetheless horrible for us. My mother died the next year of sadness, she stated. The bitterness is on no account erased.

regardless of these horrific reports and 1000's more, Chiquita attorneys say the Colombians do not allege a single incontrovertible fact that hyperlinks Chiquita to any of the acts of violence at hindrance, much much less that advocate Chiquita wanted the violence to happen.

high phases of generality are all that plaintiffs have furnished, Chiquita says within the filing.

Lawyers for the Colombians say that argument conflicts with U.S. Crook regulation, which most commonly makes the excessive-level resolution maker in a conspiracy more accountable than anyone who was once easily following these orders. That must apply in this civil case as good, they are saying. Chiquita, they argue, knew the AUC was killing civilians even though it didn't comprehend the specifics.

It does no longer make plenty of sense since then the individuals who gave the orders, however didn't be aware of the victims names, usually are not responsible, and most effective the specific set off-pullers have performed whatever improper, mentioned Paul Wolf, who represents a few thousand Colombian plaintiffs.

Nonetheless, Chiquita facets to a latest eleventh Circuit ruling that a former Bolivian safeguard minister couldn't be held in charge for extrajudicial killings although he used to be in a helicopter directing army personnel the place to fireside weapons. The court docket ruled there wasn't a enough connection between the ministers orders and the deaths that resulted.

The repayments to the AUC weren't the first made by using Chiquita towards the backdrop of Colombia long civil clash. Beforehand, the leftist revolutionary militia of Colombia recognized via its Spanish FARC acronym demanded countless numbers of hundreds of thousands of bucks in repayments from Chiquita and different corporations or their employees and operations can be attacked.

The AUC was once formed in 1997 to unite several right-wing militias to fight FARC and its supporters. The ensuing crusade, supported with the aid of prime Colombian political leaders, ultimately resulted in 50,000 commonly civilian deaths and a few infamous massacres, Colombian prosecutors say.

Chiquita, the most important U.S. Banana seller, first had banana operations in Colombia in 1899. The enterprise offered its Colombian subsidiary Banadex in 2004.

Chiquita 2nd argument includes the Supreme courtroom latest decision involving the Alien Tort Statute, a regulation courting to 1789 used by legal professionals representing victims of torture, extrajudicial killings and war crimes to search damages in U.S. Courts. That law makes it possible for claims for violations of the laws of countries, U.S. Treaties and the Torture Victims security Act.

Chiquita contends that expenditures in the Colombian lawsuits have no connection to the U.S. Under the new Supreme court selection.
instead, they involve allegations that Colombian guerrilla and paramilitary groups tortured and killed Colombians in Colombia, the manufacturers court filing says, which means a U.S. Federal judge has no jurisdiction.

The Colombians legal professionals, nevertheless, argue that Chiquita differs from the Dutch oil manufacturer within the Kiobel case when you consider that it's based in the U.S., choices about making the AUC payments had been made in this country andChiquita does a robust U.S. Business. Wolf said the eleventh Circuit would hindrance a ruling that would bolster human rights circumstances that suffered a blow within the Supreme courtroom.
it's an opportunity to establish and fundamental precedent and maintain this field of human rights regulation,Wolf stated.