Reply Declaration on Issues of International Law, Laws of War, Corporate Liability in International Law in Agent Orange ATS Litigation, February 2005
American University - Washington College of Law; Stanford University - The Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace; Brookings Institution - Governance Studies
VIETNAM ASSOCIATION, ET AL., V. DOW JONES COMPANY, ET AL., Eastern District NY, Judge Jack B. Weinstein, February 8, 2005
This reply declaration elaborates the November 2, 2004 declaration on behalf of corporate defendants by Kenneth Anderson in the Agent Orange product liability ATS case heard before Judge Jack B. Weinstein. I have posted the declaration and this reply declaration to SSRN because of frequent requests for them from academics and because the declaration has been cited in scholarship.
The reply declaration addresses the use of Agent Orange in the Vietnam War and the claim that its use in that period violated the laws of armed conflict. It discusses treaty and customary law of poison and poisoned weapons, issues of proportionality in the law of war, and sources of evidence for customary international law. In addition, it amplifies on views stated in the declaration that corporate and civil liability do not exist in international law, and discusses their status in international law with how these concepts are treated in US district court cases under the Alien Tort Statute.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 26
Keywords: Agent Orange, products liability, Vietnam War, Weinstein, customary interanational law, proportionality, corporate liability in international law, Alien Tort Statute, ATS, international law, laws of war, international humanitarian law, poison, poisoned weapons, Hague Regulations, Geneva Protocol
JEL Classification: K10, K13, K23, K32, K33Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: May 8, 2006
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.484 seconds