Do human rights complaints damage German business interests?
In a new commentary report, ECCHR analyzes the Federal Government's negative
attitude towards compensation claims filed in the USA by victims of the South
African Apartheid. The complaints have been filed against Daimler Benz on the
basis of the company's support of the Apartheid regime and the human rights
crimes it committed. ECCHR Program Director Miriam Saage-Maaß concludes in the
report that the Federal Government's position is neither legally nor
politically viable. The compensation claims do not violate German venue
jurisdiction, nor would Germany would be a suitable alternative forum for the
complaints. In addition, international trade interests are not being
jeopardized by the proceedings.
Compensation claim against Daimler and Rheinmetall
Economic support of the Apartheid-regime: simply business as usual?
On 30 November 2009 ECCHR jointly submitted an Amicus Brief to the US District Court of the
Southern District of New York together with the Center for Constitutional
Rights (CCR), Ecumenical Service for Advocacy Work on Southern Africa (KASA), Co-ordination
for Southern Africa (KOSA) and Medico International.
The Brief supports the claims for compensation of victims of the South African Apartheid regime against eight German, European and American companies and banks which were filed in the United States.
This Amicus Brief stresses the significance of ATS litigation for the international movement for human rights and accountability. It also argues that victims of human rights violations have a right under international law to an effective remedy and to reparations.
The Brief supports the claims for compensation of victims of the South African Apartheid regime against eight German, European and American companies and banks which were filed in the United States.
This Amicus Brief stresses the significance of ATS litigation for the international movement for human rights and accountability. It also argues that victims of human rights violations have a right under international law to an effective remedy and to reparations.
The current Apartheid litigation
Below you will find
the opinion piece of Miriam Saage-Maaß, Program Manager for Business and Human
Rights department of ECCHR, discussing the
recent judgment of the Southern District of New York from April 2009, and the
background to the case regarding compensation for Apartheid victims.
In April, the Court declared the claims in principle admissible against the defendants. Only the claim against the credit institutes was dismissed. An important aspect regarding the decision is that it distinguishes between corporate behaiour that will trigger civil liability and behaviour that will not.
In April, the Court declared the claims in principle admissible against the defendants. Only the claim against the credit institutes was dismissed. An important aspect regarding the decision is that it distinguishes between corporate behaiour that will trigger civil liability and behaviour that will not.