JURIST - Paper Chase: Friday, January 27, 2012

[JURIST] Judge Carl Barbier of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana [official website] Thursday issued an order [text, PDF] that British Petroleum (BP) [corporate website] will be held liable for a portion of the damages owed by Transocean [corporate website] stemming from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill [BBC backgrounder; JURIST news archive]. BP will be required to indemnify Transocean against damages created by the pollution itself that are awarded throughout the litigation [materials] pending against it. BP will not be required to pay an punitive damages or civil fines as a result of these suits. The court did not rule as to whether BP or Transocean would be held strictly liable, negligent or grossly negligent for the equipment failure and subsequent oil spill that created the pollution. Transocean is the company that owned the Deepwater Horizon oil rig that was contracted by BP, which subsequently caused the oil spill. This ruling is separate from a ruling issued [JURIST report] by Barbier in August, which permits punitive damages against BP, but that ruling pertained to claims brought against BP directly.

Last summer Barbier dismissed [JURIST report] consolidated racketeering claims against BP in connection with the spill brought under the US Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) [text]. In February of last year, Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood [official website] asked the district court to order the Gulf Coast Claims Facility (GCCF) [official website] to fulfill its legal obligations to aid victims of the spill and to remedy inadequate claims mechanisms [JURIST report]. The GCCF began processing claims in August following the completion of negotiations [JURIST reports] between BP and the US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website]. Former Alabama Attorney General Troy King filed a lawsuit [JURIST report] in August 2010 against BP for damages to the state's coast and economy, claiming that the oil giant has failed in its efforts to accept responsibility for the oil spill. In July 2010 a class action lawsuit [JURIST report] was filed against the company in a Louisiana state court alleging that its negligent actions led to the spill and that BP was further negligent in its oversight of the cleanup effort, resulting in volunteers falling ill due to inadequate protective equipment. One month prior, US Attorney General Eric Holder [official website] announced that the DOJ would review whether any criminal or civil laws were violated [JURIST report] by BP.

[JURIST] Guatemalan Judge Carol Flores ruled Thursday that ex-dictator Rios Montt must stand trial for charges of genocide and crimes against humanity. The judge heard the prosecutor's initial statements Wednesday and decided Thursday that the evidence was sufficient to go to trial. Montt is being charged for crimes committed throughout the country's 36-year civil war [BBC timeline], which officially ended in 1996. Montt was a general in the military who became dictator after a coup in 1982 but lost power a year later as a result of another coup. His charges are based on 72 incidents that caused 1,771 deaths under Montt's military command. Judicial officials decided Saturday that Montt will be forced to testify [JURIST report] at his trial.

The Guatemalan Civil War resulted in more than 200,000 deaths, 95 percent of which the military was responsible for according to a UN report [text, in Spanish]. The majority of those who were killed were part of Guatemala's indigenous Mayan population. Two former police officers [JURIST report] and four former soldiers [JURIST report] were convicted in 2010 and 2011 of charges relating to these crimes. Spain attempted to charge Montt [JURIST report] with war crimes in 2008, but failed because it lacked jurisdiction over the case. Montt had ignored warrants [JURIST report] put out by Spain for his arrest in 2006 because he claimed he was not aware of any crimes committed by his men during the war.

[JURIST] US Representative Edward Markey (D-MA) [official website; press release] and seven other lawmakers Thursday sent a letter [text, PDF] to Google CEO Larry Page [NYT backgrounder] containing 11 questions regarding consumer privacy rights as affected by Google's new privacy policies [corporate website]. The letter states that the privacy policy and Google's consolidated data sharing system raise questions about whether consumers can opt out of the new system, either globally or on a product-by-product basis. As Co-Chairman of the Congressional Bipartisan Privacy Caucus, Markey also expressed concerns as to whether Google's new policies violate the settlement [JURIST report] reached with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) [official website] last year:

Google's new privacy policy should enable consumers to opt-out if they don't want their use of YouTube to morph into YouTrack. Consumers—not corporations—should have control over their own personal information, especially for children and teens. I plan to ask the Federal Trade Commission whether Google's planned changes to its privacy policy violate Google's recent settlement with the agency.

Markey emphasized the degree to which consumers rely on Google and the importance of protecting the user's privacy. The FTC settlement resulted after privacy concerns arose over Google's controversial Buzz social networking tool rollout. According to its statement announcing the new privacy policy to members, Google's policy changes are directed across all of their services with the intention of creating a better user experience.

Google has had several legal battles in the last year, with consumer privacy rights often at issue. In August the Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] announced that the agency had reached a $500 million settlement [JURIST report] with Google for permitting Canadian pharmaceutical companies to advertise to and target US consumers. In July a federal judge extended settlement negotiations [JURIST report] over a 2005 copyright suit filed against Google over its Google Books [corporate website] book scanning project. Also in July another federal judge ruled that Google could appeal a decision permitting a wiretapping lawsuit [JURIST report] over Google's Street View [corporate website] service to proceed. Google was accused of violating user privacy by using WiFi networks to collect data for the service, a charge that came as a result of a multistate investigation that began in June of 2010. There have been international rulings on the Street View service as well. A Swiss court ruled the service constituted a violation of privacy, while a German court ruled it did not [JURIST reports].

[JURIST] Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] Thursday reported the recent deaths of several Libyan detainees who were apparently tortured while in custody [press release]. The deaths come amid allegations of widespread torture and ill-treatment of detainees accused of being pro-Gaddafi loyalists and fighters during the Libyan conflict [JURIST backgrounder] last year. AI conducted extensive interviews with detainees in and around Tripoli, Misrarah and Gheryan, many of whom showed visible marks indicative of torture, and whose accounts of maltreatment are consistent with their patterns of injury. AI reports that both official military and security entities as well as the multitude of unrecognized armed militias are responsible for the torture and subsequent deaths. Despite repeated requests by AI since May and its October report calling for an end to the torture of Libyan detainees [report, PDF; press release], AI claims the new Libyan government has not taken adequate steps to investigate such human rights violations:

So far there has been a complete failure on the part of those in power to take concrete steps to end torture and other ill-treatment of detainees and to hold accountable those responsible for such crimes. We don't underestimate the challenges faced by the Libyan transitional authorities in establishing control over the multitude of armed militias operating throughout the country, but we must see them taking decisive action on torture. In the interests of building a new Libya based on respect for human rights, this issue cannot be left at the bottom of the pile.

AI concludes its most recent report by urging the Libyan government to abolish all non-official detention facilities and bring them under the control of legal authorities, to conduct investigations into the alleged torture practices and other maltreatment, to remove from detention facilities persons engaged in such activities and to provide detainees access to fair trials, lawyers and medical support.

Allegations of war crimes and human rights violations have been widespread in the aftermath of the Libyan conflict. On Thursday UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay [official website] expressed concern [JURIST report] over human rights violations in the country, urging that all detention facilities to be brought under the control of the Ministry of Justice and the General Prosecutor's Office. Last week a coalition of Middle Eastern human rights organizations accused [JURIST report] the parties involved in the Libyan conflict to be in violation of human rights by using excessive force against protesters and cruel treatment of detainees. In September the Libyan NTC vowed to investigate allegations of human rights after AI [advocacy website] published a report [JURIST report] alleging that both sides of the Libya conflict are responsible for human rights abuses and warning the NTC to act quickly to investigate the charges. In August Libyan Prime Minister Al Baghdad Ali Al-Mahmoudi requested that the UN create a "high-level commission" to investigate human rights abuses allegedly committed by NATO [JURIST report].

[JURIST] Brazil prosecutors plan to file criminal charges, in addition to the $11 billion civil suit, against Chevron [corporate website] officials for the 2,400 barrel oil spill [Global Voices backgrounder] off the coast of Brazil in the Campos Basin in November. Brazilian officials state that Chevron acted irresponsibly [Reuters report] and took substantial risks in the Frade oil field in the Campos Basin. Up to 12 Chevron officials are expected to be indicted. In contrast, British Petroleum (BP) [corporate website] agreed to set aside $20 billion [JURIST report] for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill [BBC backgrounder; JURIST news archive], which was 1,000 times larger than the Frade spill, and no BP officials have faced criminal charges.

Chevron is also currently appealing an $18 billion fine [JURIST report] for pollution in the Amazon jungle. The judgment against Chevron was upheld in January by a three-judge panel of the Provincial Court of Justice of Sucumbios in Lago Agrio, Ecuador. The $18 billion fine, one of the largest in the history of environmental contamination suits, was originally set at $8.6 billion [JURIST report] but was more than doubled for Chevron's refusal to pay "moral reparations" to the Ecuadorian government, as required by the original ruling. The Amazon Defense Coalition [advocacy website], plaintiffs in the suit, have responded that the first judgment was a reaffirmation of how Chevron's greed and criminal misconduct in dumping billions of gallons of toxic waste into the river has led to death and disease. Damages were initially awarded in February by the Provincial Court of Justice of Sucumbios which found that Texaco, which was acquired by Chevron in 2001, polluted large areas of the country's rain forest.