D. CLAIMS ON BEHALF OF NON-U.S. NATIONALSThe majority of the Havlish Plaintiffs are U.S. nationals who are asserting claimsagainst <strong>Iran</strong> under the FSIA. See Third Amended Complaint 4-186. Family membersof the victims who were not U.S. citizens on September 11, 2001, have asserted claimsagainst <strong>Iran</strong> under the Alien Tort Statute (―ATS‖, also called the Alien Tort Claims Act,or ―ATCA‖), 28 U.S.C. §1350.The ATS, adopted in 1789 as part of the original Judiciary Act, simply assertedthat ―‗[t]he district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alienfor a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the UnitedStates.‘‖ Wiwa v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 226 F.3d 88, 103-04 (2nd Cir. 2000)."[T]he law of nations . . . has always been part of the federal common law . . . ,‖ Filartigav. Pena-Irala, 630 F.2d 876 (2nd Cir. 1980), and the Supreme Court has recognized thata claim for violation of an ―international norm‖ is actionable under the ATS where thenorm has not ―less definite content and acceptance among civilized nations than thehistorical paradigms familiar when §1350 was enacted [in 1789].‖ Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 U.S. 692, 732 (2004), citing favorably Filartiga, supra, at 890 (―[F]orpurposes of civil liability, the torturer has become — like the pirate and slave traderbefore him — hostis humani generis, an enemy of all mankind‖); Tel-Oren v. LibyanArab Republic, 726 F. 2d 774, 781 (D.C. Cir. 1984)(Edwards, J., concurring)(suggestingthat the ―limits of section 1350‘s reach‖ be defined by ―a handful of heinous actions —each of which violates definable, universal and obligatory norms‖); and In re Estate ofMarcos Human Rights Litigation, 25 F. 3d 1467, 1475 (9th Cir. 1994)(―Actionableviolations of international law must be of a norm that is specific, universal, andobligatory‖). Thus, after examining the history of the statute, the High Court explained7
that torts such as piracy, violation of safe conduct, and assaults on ambassadors wereactionable under the ATS in 1789, 6 and that, today, ―courts should require any claimbased on the present-day law of nations to rest on a norm of international characteraccepted by the civilized world and defined with a specificity comparable to the featuresof the 18th-century paradigms we have recognized.‖ Id. at 725. Plaintiffs here submitthat the acts of hijacking (in the nature of piracy) and crashing passenger aircraft intomajor commercial and government buildings (in the nature of interference with safeconduct) clearly must satisfy that standard.Moreover, in passing the Torture Victims Protection Act of 1991 (―TVPA‖), 28U.S.C. §1350 App., Congress expanded the ATS by creating ―liability under U.S. lawwhere under ‗color of law, of any foreign nation‘ an individual is subject to ‗extra judicialkilling.‘‖ Wiwa at 104-05. Further, the ATS reaches private parties whose actions aretaken under the color of state authority or violate a norm of international law recognizedas extending to the conduct of private parties. Kadic v. Karadzic, 70 F.3d 232 (2nd Cir.1995). Thus, the Havlish Plaintiffs who are not U.S. nationals properly assert tort claimshere against all Defendants under the ATS.II.PROCEDURAL HISTORY OF HAVLISHThis action was initiated in the United States District Court for the District ofColumbia on February 19, 2002. Plaintiffs served <strong>Iran</strong> and the agency andinstrumentality Defendants (listed in note 1, supra) with summonses and copies of the6 One of the inferences the High Court drew ―from the history is that Congress intended the ATS tofurnish jurisdiction for . . . actions alleging violations of the law of nations. Uppermost in thelegislative mind appears to have been offenses against ambassadors . . . ; violations of safe conductwere probably understood to be actionable . . . , and individual actions arising out of prize captures andpiracy may well have also been contemplated.‖ Sosa, 542 U.S. at 720 (citation omitted).8
- Page 2: FOREIGN STATE DEFENDANTS: ::THE ISL
- Page 15 and 16: In order to revise its pleading to
- Page 17 and 18: cooperated and coordinated with, an
- Page 19 and 20: Indeed, the 9/11 REPORT notes a num
- Page 21 and 22: senior Hezbollah operative. Also in
- Page 23 and 24: Timmerman 2nd Affid. 124. 14Althoug
- Page 25 and 26: facilitating the travel of the 9/11
- Page 27 and 28: officials provided direct and mater
- Page 29 and 30: after September 11, 2001, in the fo
- Page 31 and 32: instrument of foreign and domestic
- Page 33 and 34: Perhaps the leading expert on Iran
- Page 35 and 36: INTERPOL, Edgar A. Adamson attests,
- Page 37 and 38: 2. THE ROBERT BAER PUBLICATIONSForm
- Page 39 and 40: Iran provided material and direct s
- Page 41 and 42: Iran‘s anticipation of a retaliat
- Page 43 and 44: every year since 1984. Ex. 3, Byman
- Page 45 and 46: Testimony of Witness X, February 23
- Page 47 and 48: unning through the contemporary Mid
- Page 49 and 50: We Know, p. 127; Ex. 6, Lopez-Tefft
- Page 51 and 52: Department reports on global terror
- Page 53 and 54: terrorist recruits from a variety o
- Page 55 and 56: and al Qaeda, of the ―most formid
- Page 57 and 58: predictable occurrence.‖ Ex. 6, L
- Page 59 and 60:
The factual reality - as found by t
- Page 61 and 62:
Zawahiri met with Imad Mughniyah, w
- Page 63 and 64:
The historic 1993 meeting in Kharto
- Page 65 and 66:
continuing terrorist training of al
- Page 67 and 68:
the issuance of INTERPOL Red Notice
- Page 69 and 70:
investigators concluded the operati
- Page 71 and 72:
symbols. Ex. 6, Lopez-Tefft Affid.
- Page 73 and 74:
worldwide terrorism is ―a report
- Page 75 and 76:
AND TERRORIST TRAVEL, pp. 65-66. Mo
- Page 77 and 78:
see Ex. 2, Timmerman 2nd Affid. 148
- Page 79 and 80:
that the ―senior Hezbollah operat
- Page 81 and 82:
actual foreknowledge of the plannin
- Page 83 and 84:
Thus, Iran‘s facilitation of the
- Page 85 and 86:
the present day. Testifying before
- Page 87 and 88:
January 16, 2009; Ex. 2, Timmerman
- Page 89 and 90:
The January 16, 2009, Treasury desi
- Page 91 and 92:
Indeed, Iran permitted al Qaeda to
- Page 93 and 94:
The fact is that many important ―
- Page 95 and 96:
little other than KSM‘s own self-
- Page 97 and 98:
terrorism operations against the U.
- Page 99 and 100:
of Mughniyah‘s offices in Beirut.
- Page 101 and 102:
provided material support to al Qae
- Page 103 and 104:
Walter S. Batty, Jr. (PA Bar No. 02
- Page 105 and 106:
APPENDICESPLAINTIFFS’ FIRST MEMOR
- Page 107 and 108:
APPENDICESPLAINTIFFS’ FIRST MEMOR
- Page 109 and 110:
APPENDICESPLAINTIFFS’ FIRST MEMOR
- Page 111 and 112:
APPENDICESPLAINTIFFS’ FIRST MEMOR
- Page 113 and 114:
APPENDICESPLAINTIFFS’ FIRST MEMOR
- Page 115 and 116:
APPENDICESPLAINTIFFS’ FIRST MEMOR
- Page 117 and 118:
APPENDICESPLAINTIFFS’ FIRST MEMOR
- Page 119 and 120:
APPENDICESPLAINTIFFS’ FIRST MEMOR
- Page 121 and 122:
APPENDICESPLAINTIFFS’ FIRST MEMOR
- Page 123 and 124:
APPENDICESPLAINTIFFS’ FIRST MEMOR
- Page 125 and 126:
APPENDICESPLAINTIFFS’ FIRST MEMOR
- Page 127:
APPENDICESPLAINTIFFS’ FIRST MEMOR