|
Katharine (Katie) Redford, Esq. is a human rights lawyer and activist who is credited with spearheading a movement to hold international companies accountable for overseas abuse in their home court jurisdictions in the Western world, and in doing so, opened up new possibilities in human rights law. She is the co-Founder and US Office Director of (EarthRights International )(ERI), a non-profit group of activists, organizers, and lawyers with expertise in human rights, the environment and corporate and government accountability. Redford is a graduate of the University of Virginia School of Law (UVA), where she received the Robert F. Kennedy Award for Human Rights and Public Service. She is a member of the Massachusetts State Bar and served as counsel to plaintiffs in ERI's landmark case Doe v. Unocal. Redford received an Echoing Green Fellowship 〔Echoing Green website, 2005 Fellows (http://www.echoinggreen.org/fellows/katherine-redford)〕 in 1995 to establish ERI, and since that time has split her time between ERI's Thailand and US offices. In addition to working on ERI's litigation and teaching at the EarthRights Schools, Redford currently serves as an adjunct professor of law at both UVA 〔University of Virginia website, Human Rights Program (http://www.law.virginia.edu/html/news/2003_fall/humanrightsprogram.htm)〕 and the Washington College of Law at American University.〔Washing College of Law website, Faculty (http://www.wcl.american.edu/faculty/redford/)〕 She has published on various issues associated with human rights and corporate accountability, in addition to co-authoring ERI reports such as ''In Our Court'', ''Shock and Law'', and ''Total Denial Continues''. In 2006, Redford was selected as an Ashoka Global Fellow.〔Ashoka Website, 2006 Fellows (http://ashoka.org/node/3710)〕 ==Human Rights Law== Redford introduced a simple and powerful idea into the human rights movement: that corporations can be brought to court for their role in overseas abuse. While American and European courts have customarily declined to hear cases where abuses have occurred outside their jurisdiction, Redford and her team at (EarthRights International ) (ERI) broke their reluctance by uncovering legal tools and strategies that overcome the barrier of jurisdiction. In 1994 Redford turned in a law school paper suggesting the use of an ancient federal statute to fight human rights abuses in Burma, The Alien Torts Claims Act. The act dates back to 1789, when George Washington signed the fledgling nation's first Judiciary Act. An obscure provision in it appears to give foreigners the right to sue in federal court over violations of international law. Though the act has been used to sue individuals, it has never been used successfully to sue a corporation for human rights abuses. Her professor gave her an A but warned that such a case would never occur. That student paper, ''"Using the Alien Torts Claims Act: Unocal v. Burma,"'' became the basis of the groundbreaking case John Doe I, et al. v. Unocal Corp., et al. In March 1997 it became the first case in which jurisdiction was granted over a corporation for human rights abuses overseas. Unocal eventually settled the case out of court.〔Bloomberg News, December 14, 2004, "Unocal Settles Rights Suit in Myanmar" (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/14/business/14unocal.html?_r=2&scp=1&sq=unocal+settles+burma&st=nyt&oref=slogin&oref=slogin)〕 In 1995 Redford received seed money from Echoing Green〔 to launch (EarthRights International ) (ERI) with Tyler Giannini and Ka Hsaw Wa. ERI began its work with offices in Thailand and Washington, D.C., as a nonprofit organization that works at the intersection of human rights and the environment—which it defines as “earth rights”—by documenting abuses, mounting legal actions against the perpetrators of earth rights abuses, providing training for grassroots and community leaders, and launching advocacy campaigns. ERI brought the case of John Doe I, et al. v. Unocal Corp., et al., to both state and federal courts in California. Most legal experts believed the case would never fly and at first it appeared they may be right. But seeing possibilities where the experts could not, Redford persevered throughout the protracted, ten-year-long legal battle. ERI had their case dismissed in 2000, fought back and won by appeal,〔New York Times, September 19, 2002, "Court Tells Unocal to Face Rights Charges" (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C03E5D91330F93AA2575AC0A9649C8B63&scp=2&sq=unocal+human+rights&st=nyt)〕〔Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Richard A. Paez and Ronald S.W. Lew, District Judges, Presiding, Argued and Submitted December 3, 2001, Filed September 18, 2002(http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3D534390583B882F88256C380004FE18/$file/0056603.pdf?openelement)〕 the right to continue. As the years passed, the case gained traction. Redford trudged forward, putting in countless hours of legal work, fundraising and research, and building coalitions with likeminded organizations such as Center for Constitutional Rights. After several years of fighting an uphill battle without losing hope, the rewards finally came, in 2004. Unocal agreed to settle the lawsuit.〔〔Environment News Service, December 17, 2004 "Unocal Settles Out of Court With Myanmar Villagers" (http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/dec2004/2004-12-17-02.asp)〕 It was the first time in history that a major multinational corporation had settled a case of this type for monetary damages. In the landmark settlement, the company agreed to compensate the Burmese villagers who sued the firm for complicity in forced labor, rape, and murder. By combining human rights law and environmental law, ERI had come up with a new and untested strategy that succeeded where older solutions had failed. Their story was documented in the 2006 documentary film ''Total Denial''. Equally importantly, the Unocal case set a strong legal precedent. As a result of ERI’s efforts, a series of rulings in the California Federal Court 〔 established that a corporation can indeed be held liable in U.S. courts for encouraging human rights violations by a foreign government. This put corporations on notice and forced them to consider their actions abroad. Unocal attempted to recover the damages from its insurer.〔EarthRights International website, Legal Feature (http://www.earthrights.org/legalfeature/us_court_calls_abuses_committed_in_construction_of_chevrons_pipeline_military_terrorism.html)〕 The insurer did not pay, but instead reviewed its policies to ensure that it would not be liable to cover damages for murder, rape, and torture. Then banks began reviewing their liability for funding the projects. Thus, liability for abuse becomes an important business issue, not merely the preoccupation of a few activists. Today Redford and her team at ERI use the Unocal case as a model to fight corporate misbehavior. Working in partnership with other legal organizations and private lawyers, they seeks to remedy abuses of earth rights—all over the world. For instance, Redford and ERI are currently working with the victims of human rights abuses associated with the activities of the oil company Chevron in Nigeria to fight the case against Chevron in federal court in San Francisco. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Katie Redford」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|