U.S. SUPREME COURT: CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE. I AGREE, HENCE THEY SHOULD ACCEPT HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS AS PEOPLE
ACCORDING TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT IN CITIZENS UNITED V. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION (2010), CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE. I AGREE TO THIS PROPOSITION OR CONCEPT. THE COURT IS RIGHT. PEOPLE THINK THROUGH, PLAN AND ESTABLISH, RUN CORPORATIONS. THEREFORE, CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE WHEN LOOKING FROM A SIMPLE CREATIVE, BUSINESS AND LEGAL STANDPOINT. WE ALSO KNOW OBVIOUSLY THAT, CORPORATIONS ARE SIMPLY INANIMATE; LEGAL ENTITIES; THEY DON'T THINK OR SPEAK. CORPORATIONS DON'T WALK, EAT NOR ESTABLISH AND RUN THEMSELVES. THEY AREN'T PEOPLE FROM A LIVING THING OR BEING THAT BREATHES STANDPOINT-VAGUE NAME THEY HAVE.
GIVEN THE SUPREME COURT'S PROPOSITION AND BUSINESS THINKING, HOWEVER, IT'S TIME THE OWNERS, SHAREHOLDERS, PRESIDENTS AND DIRECTORS OF CORPORATIONS COME TO TERMS WITH THEIR OWN REALITY AND ACCEPT CORPORATE LIABILITY. THIS IS ESPECIALLY WHEN IN VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AS THEY ARE LIABLE WHEN IN VIOLATION OF DOMESTIC/NATIONAL LAWS, WHICH MOSTLY AGREE WITH AND INCORPORATE THE FORMER. THESE OWNERS OF CORPORATIONS AND OTHER BIG-WINGS SHOULD OWN UP THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES BECAUSE CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE AS CERTIFIED BY LAW-THE SUPREME COURT.
CORPORATIONS SHOULD NOT ONLY BE ALLOWED THE FREE PASS TO BE PEOPLE TO SPEND MONEY RECKLESSLY AND BUY ELECTIONS,THUS DESTROYING THE ELECTORAL CUM POLITICAL FABRIC OR FRAMEWORK OF AMERICA, ETC. AND FORCING LEADERSHIP AND DEMOCRACY FROM THE GRASSROOTS TO BECOME MONEY CONTEST. THEY SHOULD AS WELL AND EXPEDITIOUSLY BE PEOPLE ACROSS THE BOARD WITH THE AIM OR OBJECTIVE OF DOING RIGHT BY EVERY PEOPLE: INDIVIDUALS, COMMUNITIES AND ETHNIC NATIONALITIES OR GROUPS; ORGANIZATIONS AND NATION-STATES, AND NOT JUST THEMSELVES ALONE.
MEANING, IF CORPORATIONS ARE THE PEOPLE WHICH THEY ARE, HAVE FREE PASS TO DO BUSINESS EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD BECAUSE THEY ARE PEOPLE, THEY ALSO SHOULD BE WILLING AND ABLE (OR MAKE TO, OR AS WITH THEIR CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (CSR) MANIFESTOS THAT SHOULD NOT PRECLUDE HUMAN RIGHTS) TO DO RIGHT BY ALL PEOPLES. THIS IS IRRESPECTIVE OF COLOR AND LANGUAGE, NATIONALITY, GROUP, RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL AFFILIATION OR SEX AMONG OTHER VARIATIONS. DOING THE CONTRARY MEANS DISCRIMINATION (CORPORATE), WHICH AMERICAN AND INTERNATIONAL LAW PROHIBIT, THOUGH THEY EXIST.
ON A MORE SERIOUS NOTE, THE PIRATES OF YESTER-YEARS (AS WITH LEADERS OF MILITIA OR REBEL GROUPS, GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS OR REGULAR INDIVIDUALS) WHICH THE FIRST U.S. CONGRESS ENVISAGED IN ITS 1789 ALIEN TORT STATUTE (ATS) OGONIS HAVE USED IN THE KIOBEL ET AL CASE TO TRY TO BRING THEIR TORMENTOR TO JUSTICE, ARE THE $HELLS OF TODAY! $HELL OIL, AS PIRATES' INCORPORATED; HOW ABOUT THAT? IT'S CONSISTENT OR COMPATIBLE INDEED!
LIKE THE MANY $HELL'S ARGUMENTS/BRIEFS I HAVE READ IN THIS CASE, IT'S BIZARRE, DESPICABLE WHEN I SAT AT THE SUPREME COURT MONDAY, OCT. 1 AND HEARD $HELL'S LAWYER KATHLEEN SULLIVAN AND THE OBAMA SOLICITOR-GENERAL, DONALD VERRILLI JR. ASKING THE JUSTICES TO NOT ALLOW THESE EGREGIOUS CRIMES TRIED IN USA.
SULLIVAN'S CORE REASONS: THE ATS DIDN'T INTEND TO CORRECT OR PUNISH CORPORATIONS BUT INDIVIDUALS,AS THOUGH CORPORATIONS ESTABLISH AND RUN THEMSELVES. WHEN SHE IS PAID FOR HER LEGAL SERVICES A ROBOT KNOWN AS CORPORATION DO NOT PAY HER. HUMAN BEINGS/PEOPLE DISCUSS, NEGOTIATE WITH HER OR HER REPRESENTATIVE (S) AND PROCESS HER PAYMENT. SO WHILE SOME MAY EXPRESS SYMPATHY FOR THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT FOR ITS NATIONAL OIL INTEREST, OR THE NEED FOR SOME TO THINKER THE RECENT SUBJECT MATTER (EXTRATERRITORIALITY, WHICH THE ATS, AS THE NAME IMPLIES ALREADY SETTLED) IN THE KIOBEL V. $HELL CASE. THIS CASE BOILS DOWN TO THE 2010 SUPREME COURT RULING, THAT CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE, AS CITED ABOVE. THIS IS A CONCEPT GOV. MITT ROMNEY BOUGHT AND, AGAIN, I AGREE BECAUSE CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE.
NOTE THAT SULLIVAN ALSO REASONED THAT CORPORATIONS AREN'T LIABLE UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW, AND THAT THE CRIMES $HELL IS DEFENDING WERE NOT COMMITTED IN USA SO HER CLIENT SHOULD BE LET LOOSE TO COMMIT FURTHER CRIMES DESPITE THE CHECKS AND BALANCES PUT IN PLACE BY THE ATS. IT IS TRUE THAT THE ATS DID NOT SAY EXPRESSLY THAT CORPORATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO ITS PROVISIONS/JURISDICTION. IT ALSO DID NOT SAY THEY ARE NOT. SO SULLIVAN'S/$HELL'S ARGUMENTS ARE IRRELEVANT, ESPECIALLY WHERE CRIMES PROHIBITED BY THE LAW OF NATIONS,WHICH THE ATS SUBSCRIBES HAVE BEEN COMMITTED. THERE IS NO SERIOUS SOCIETY THAT WILL GRANT EXPRESS PASSPORT TO CORPORATIONS (OR ANY GROUP/PERSONS) TO KILL BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT MENTIONED DIRECTLY IN THE LAWS SET FORTH AGAINST KILLING AND RELATED OFFENSES/CRIMES.
AS WITH PIRATES, IF CORPORATIONS CAN BE LIABLE UNDER DOMESTIC OR NATIONAL LAW,THEN NOTHING BARS THEM FROM BEING LIABLE WHEN THEY COMMIT OR AID AND ABET THE COMMISSION OF CRIMES AGAINST THE LAW OF NATIONS SUCH AS TORTURE, EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING, OTHER CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY AND GENOCIDE $HELL IS CHARGED WITH,THUS DEFENDING. IN ADDITION, $HELL OWNERS AND SOME OTHER OWNERS OF CORPORATIONS OR MANAGEMENT HAVE PIRATES' ATTITUDES AND THESE ATTITUDES ARE OBVIOUS AS CAN BE SEEN IN THE MANNER OGONIS (NIGER DELTANS) AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT ARE TREATED BY $HELL, EXXON MOBILE AND OTHER WESTERN CORPORATIONS IN NIGERIA.
MEANWHILE, THE OBAMA GOVERNMENT'S ARGUMENT THROUGH ITS SOLICITOR-GENERAL WAS THAT AMERICA SHALL SUFFER ADVERSE ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES FROM NIGERIA, OTHER NATIONS. THIS IS, OF COURSE, AN UNFOUNDED PROPOSITION, AS NO SUCH EVIDENCE EXIST AFTER SOSA V. ALVAREZ MACHAIN DECISION IN 2004, ETC. ALSO, USA WILL REMAIN A BIG AID GIVER TO NIGERIA DESPITE THE OIL RESERVES THE ILLEGAL/BRITISH-FRAUDULENTLY CREATED COUNTRY STOLE FROM NIGER DELTANS, CAUSING CORRUPTION, UNTOLD HARDSHIP,ENVIRONMENT RUINATION AND DEATH TO THE PEOPLE.
IT'S THIS SAME ATS THE CHIEF ABIOLA FAMILY AND OTHERS OF NIGERIA USED TO DRAG FORMER HEAD OF STATE ABDUSALAMI ABUBAKAR TO USA COURT, AND IT SETTLED OUT OF COURT UNDER FORMER PRESIDENT OLUSEGUN OBASANJO, I BELIEVE. $HELL ALSO SETTLED THE WIWA ET AL V. $HELL IN 2009 UNDER THIS LAW OR JURISDICTION. THERE ARE FRESH PRECEDENT TO THE APPLICATION OF THE ATS,WHEREAS THE OBAMA LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE COULD NOT POINT TO ONE PRECEDENT JUSTIFYING GOVERNMENT FEAR. THE ONLY ISSUE HERE THEREFORE, IS CORPORATE FEAR (HENCE PRESSURE) FOR LIABILITIES THAT MAY ARISE DUE TO SUSPECTED OR POSSIBLE DECADES OF CRIMINAL/DEADLY ACTIVITIES FOR PROFIT-MAKING ABROAD.
NO ADVERSE ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES NOR STRAINED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NIGERIA HAS ENSUED NOR WOULD ENSUE CONTRARY TO USA GOVERNMENT'S ARGUMENT, WHICH THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL CLAIMED WAS "PERSUASIVE" WHEN ASKED HIS COMPELLING REASONS, INSTEAD OF REFERRING TO ANY CASE-LAW TO THIS EFFECT. IN SHORT, THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA DID NOT AND IS NOT PUTTING FORWARD ANY SOVEREIGNTY OR EXTRATERRITORIAL ARGUMENT IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE IT'S NON SEQUITUR CONSIDERING INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THE PROVISIONS OF ATS.
UNFORTUNATELY, OBAMA GOVERNMENT WILL FEEL COMFORTABLE IF THIS ROGUE, TERRORIST AND DEADLY $HELL AND ITS LIKES/USA CORPS,WHICH HAVE COMMITTED OR MAY COMMIT SIMILAR CRIMES IN AFRICA FOR PROFIT AND AMERICAN BENEFIT ARE SET FREE. LIKE $HELL,THIS GOVERNMENT WILL FEEL SATISFIED IF THESE EXPLOITATIVE AND OPPRESSIVE CORPORATIONS COMMIT TORTURE, CRIMES AGAINST HUMAN AND GENOCIDE/CORPSNOCIDE IN AFRICA AND OTHER DEVELOPING COUNTRIES AND ALLOWED UNCHECKED.
IRONICALLY, USA HAS HUMAN RIGHTS AS ONE OF ITS MOST IMPORTANT FOREIGN POLICIES. IT IS DISAPPOINTING THAT OBAMA/HIS ADMINISTRATION,WHICH SUPPORTED OUR CASE IN FEBRUARY WHEN WE FIRST APPEARED BEFORE THE COURT SEEMS TO HAVE TURNED DUE TO WHAT APPEARS TO BE CORPORATE PRESSURE. MEANWHILE, LET IT BE KNOWN THAT ANY GOVERNMENT/GROUP,WHICH SUPPORT $HELL IN THIS CASE SUPPORTS TORTURE AND GENOCIDE AGAINST OGONI AND OTHER CORPORATELY OPPRESSED GROUPS AROUND THE GLOBE. BY THIS FACT OBAMA AND HIS ADMINISTRATION ARE SUPPORTING THESE CRIMES TO THE DETRIMENT OF THE OPPRESSED, DISADVANTAGED, WEAK AND POOR.
FINALLY, THE ONLY HOPE NOW IS THE SUPREME COURT WHICH IS INDEPENDENT OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH YET DEPENDENT AS JUSTICES ARE DIVIDED ON PARTY/PHILOSOPHICAL, IDEOLOGICAL LINES. THE CONSOLATION, THOUGH, IS THE LEGALISTIC PRECEDENT, CREDIBILITY AND MORALITY TEST OF THE COURT, HENCE THE NEED FOR THE PRESERVATION OF THE STARE DECISIS DOCTRINE. THESE HONORABLE AND RESPECTED JUSTICES HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY, DUTY TO HELP STOP TORTURE AND GENOCIDE BY UPHOLDING HISTORICAL PRECEDENTS, WHICH INCLUDES THEIR OWN LEGAL AND MORAL AUTHORITY AND LEGACY IN SOSA ABOVE.
IF THEY RULE IN FAVOR OF THE PLAINTIFFS, THE COURT MUST HAVE SENT A SERIOUS SIGNAL/CORRECTIVE MESSAGE TO THE ENVIRONMENTALLY RACIST, POLLUTANT AND KILLER CORPORATION-$HELL AND ITS LIKES. IF TO THE CONTRARY,THEN $HELL AND OTHER SUCH CORPS SHALL BE EMBOLDENED AND GRANTED THE FREE PASSPORT AS PIRATES/KILLERS' INCORPORATED TO KILL FOR PROFIT WITHOUT RECOURSE OR LOOKING BACK. THIS WILL BE A GREAT BLOW, SETBACK TO HUMAN RIGHTS, AND IT WILL BE UNFORTUNATE!