미국의 외국인 불법행위법에 따른 책임

Individual human rights protection has become a central focus of the international legal community. How a state treats individuals, including its own citizens, is a matter of international concern and a proper subject for regulation by international law. Traditionally, the rights of individual citizens within a nation were generally beyond the scope of international law. However, after World War II, the existence of the United Nations has fostered an international network, in which states experience a heightened sense of opinio juris and with this, an increased sense of obligation to follow trends in international law. In addition, given the sharp growth of MNCs throughout the world, concerns have arisen with respect to corporate behavior and civil liability for overseas activity. These concerns have reached a critical mass and are manifested in the growing number of lawsuits filed pursuant to the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) against MNCs alleging the defendant’s conduct resulted in human rights abuses and are thus actionable in United States federal courts under the ATCA. The ATCA provides jurisdiction in United States district courts for an action by an alien, for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States. This Article will provide an overview and analysis of how the federal courts have interpreted ATCA cases. It is manifestly clear that the ATCA can be used against corporations in the appropriate case with potentially serious financial implications. That fact may encourage foreign nationals to bring their lawsuits in the U.S. courts and global businesses must assume that after Sosa they face a risk of liability in American courts for certain types of behavior abroad which may be equal to the risk such practices would create if occurring in the United States.