or
Join Now!
|
|
Home/Government/Politics
|
| Forum |
Ask A Question |
Question Board |
FAQs |
Search |
Return to Question Board
| Question Details |
Asked By |
Asked On |
| so now the US thinks it's laws apply to Australia |
paraclete |
06/30/06 |
AWB to face $1bn lawsuit
From:
By Caroline Overington
June 30, 2006
US and Canadian wheat farmers are preparing a $1 billion damages claim against Australian wheat exporter AWB, using racketeering laws designed to hobble the mafia. The farmers will claim they suffered lost income because AWB was paying illegal kickbacks to Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq.
If it succeeds, the action would cripple AWB, a company mostly owned by Australian wheat farmers.
The action will be led by Atlanta lawyer Roderick E. Edmond and his Australian colleague, former Adelaide crown prosecutor and human rights lawyer, Michael Hourigan.
The lawyers plan to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organisations Act, passed by the US Congress in 1970 to eliminate organised crime. The aim of RICO was to destroy the mafia and, more recently, terrorist organisations, but American lawyers have used the act for civil actions since the 1980s.
The law covers bribery, kickbacks and extortion. It applies only when there is a pattern of criminal activity, rather than a "one-off crime".
AWB is accused of funnelling $290 million to Saddam's regime over four years, from mid-1999 until the US-led invasion ended the UN's oil-for-food program in March 2003.
Under the RICO law, any person who succeeds in establishing a claim can automatically receive three times their actual damages, plus costs.
The action will be taken on behalf of a handful of farmers in the first instance but thousands of US and Canadian wheat farmers could join the classaction.
The lawyers would have to prove that AWB's action in paying kickbacks to Saddam's regime was criminal and that the financial damage they suffered was a direct result of AWB kickbacks.
AWB has admitted making the payments to a Jordanian trucking company, Alia. But executives claim the company thought the payments were for legitimate transport costs and did not know Alia was a front for Saddam.
Mr Edmond is a former US army captain turned private attorney who used the RICO Act in 2004 to launch a class action on behalf of Iraqis tortured by US forces at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad.
Mr Edmond has also acted for the widow of one of the US postal workers who died after anthrax was put in the mail in late 2001.
Mr Hourigan is an Adelaide-born human rights lawyer and UN crimes investigator. He travelled to Baghdad in 2004, found many of the victims of torture and their families, and videotaped the evidence.
In 1996, Mr Hourigan was asked to lead a UN team investigating the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. The investigation inspired the 1998 BBC documentary When Good Men Do Nothing.
The legal action comes just weeks after prominent US congressman Norm Coleman was savaged by colleagues for refusing to take action against AWB.
Mr Coleman is head of the US Senate's permanent investigations sub-committee. He planned a probe into AWB's wheat sales to Iraq in 2004, but it was scrapped after the Howard Government sent its then US ambassador, Michael Thawley, to lobby on behalf of AWB. Mr Thawley told Mr Coleman the claims were baseless and malicious.
Mr Coleman, a Republican and strong supporter of US President George W. Bush, has been accused of dropping the probe to protect John Howard, an ally in the Iraq war.
He denies the claim, saying he did not pursue an investigation into AWB's wheat sales because the UN was already conducting its own probe. A UN inquiry into the scandal, known as the Volcker report, found that AWB was the biggest single supplier of illicit funds to Saddam's regime under the oil-for-food program.
Last year, the Howard Government established the Cole inquiry to investigate the scandal and it, too, has uncovered evidence that some executives at AWB were aware that Saddam was corrupting the program.
Australia's trade with Iraq, worth $800 million a year, has been severely damaged by the scandal, which has also prompted calls for AWB to be stripped of its monopoly over Australian wheat exports.
Iraq is refusing to deal with AWB. It recently agreed to buy wheat from a new consortium, Wheat Australia, for a very cheap price.
AWB is now refusing to supply Wheat Australia with any more wheat for future deals. |
Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/30/06 3:26 pm:
>>I object to any american disrespecting the soverignity of my nation<<
Understood, I would feel the same way. However, this doesn't have anything to do with Australian 'sovereignty' since AWB is a business - a publicly traded company - and in this case are being sued by another business. I think you must have some unexplained deep-seated hatred for the United States considering your numerous critical posts. I'm sure it's a "Christian hatred" though.
Steve
Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 06/30/06 3:55 pm:
the scary thing about AWB is it's direct ties to the Aussie gvt. The equivalent for comparison might be something like the Tenn. Valley Authority ,a private/ public company.From it's web site :
The company is the exclusive manager and marketer of all Australian bulk wheat exports through what is known as the Single Desk. A legal monopoly. To make a comparison ...imagine ADM as the sole national manager of the soy market .
When one says that AWB was elbow deep in the oil for food scandal it really means the Australian Gvt. was . They do not make decisions like that unless the top rung of the gvt. knows about it . Howard has dodged the bullet so far on this (and I hope he continues to do so ) but it is unlikely his office was not involved
Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 06/30/06 4:12 pm:
the trial will not be held in Australia because that Law doesn't exist here, we don't have mafia activity of the type found in america.
You don't have any racketeering? I find that contention highly unlikely ;in fact paying bribes is a rackateering offense. Now I do not think that US laws applies in this case but I am pretty confident their are laws against bribery .
Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 07/01/06 1:30 pm:
Clete, I personally don't care how or where "AWB will be ultimately dealt with," what's ridiculous is your indictment of our country and our country alone - when our country doesn't have a thing to do with it. Direct your disgust appropriately, Clete. If you can't see that you really need to take your blinders off.
|
| |
|
Your Options |
Additional Options are only visible when you login! !
|
|
|
|
