You are on page 1of 2

FILARTIGA V.

PENA-IRALA, COURT OF APPEALS, SECOND CIRCUIT, 30 JUNE  Whether act of torture is part of international concern, thus, under the customary
1980 international law?
 Whether a violation of the law of nations arises only when there has been “ a
OVERVIEW: violation by one or more individuals of those standards, rules or customs if (a)
affecting the relationship between states or between an individual and a foreign
On April 6, 1979, the suit was brought by an alien residing in the United States state and (b) used by those states for their common good and/or in dealing per
charging a former official of Paraguay then visiting the United States. The complaint se”
alleged torture of the plaintiff's brother leading to his death. The court of appeals ruled
that deliberate torture perpetrated by a person invested with official authority was a
THE RULING OF THE COURT:
violation of customary law supporting the jurisdiction of the district courts over "a civil
action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations." The court
further declared that "indeed, for purposes of civil liability, the torturer has become like the First Issue
pirate and slave trader before him hostis humani generis, an enemy of all mankind". The
court found that torture perpetrated by a person invested with official authority violates  The Court ruled that in light of the universal condemnation of torture in
universally accepted human rights norms, regardless of the nationality of the parties. numerous international agreements, the renunciation of torture as an instrument
of official policy by virtually all of the nations of the world (in principle if not in
FACTS OF THE CASE: practice) we find that an act of torture committed by a state official against one
held in detention violated established norms of the international law of human
The Filartiga are citizens of the Republc of Paraguay. They alleged that their rights, hence the law of the nations.
17year old son Joelito was kidnapped and tortured to death by Norberto Pena-Irala in  Also, the Supreme Court enumerated the appropriate sources of international
Paraguay. Filártiga claims this was done in retaliation for his father's political activities law. The law of nations “may be ascertained by consulting the works of jurists,
and beliefs. Filártiga brought a criminal case in Paraguayan court, but his attorney was writing professedly on public law; or by the general usage and practice of
arrested , threatened with death, and supposedly disbarred without just cause. Four nations; or by judicial decisions recognizing and enforcing that law.”
years later, another man confessed to the murder, claiming he found Joelito and his wife
together, and said the crime was one of passion, but he was never convicted, and also
 The Court emphasized the ruling in The Paquete Habana which reaffirmed that
the evidence showed that Joelito's death "was the result of professional methods of
where there is no treaty, and no controlling executive or legislative act or judicial
torture."
decision, resort must be had to the customs and usages of civilized nations; and
as evidenced of these, to the works of jurists and commentators, who by years
In 1978, Dolly Filártiga came to the US and applied for political asylum. While
of labor, research and experienced, have made themselves peculiarly well
Peña also entered the United States under a visitor’s visa but remained in the US beyond
acquainted with the subjects of which they treat. Such works are resorted to by
the term of their visas. Dolly learned of Pena and reported it to the Immigration and
judicial tribunals, not for the speculations of their authors concerning what the
Naturalization Service, Peña then was arrested for staying past the expiration of his visa.
law ought to be, but for trustworthy evidence of what the law really is.
When Peña was taken to the Brooklyn Navy Yard pending deportation, Dolly lodged a
civil complaint in U.S. courts for Joelito's wrongful death by torture.
 The Court ruled that although there is no universal agreement as to the precise
extent of the human rights and fundamental freedoms guaranteed to all by the
The Filartiga argued that Peña's actions had violated wrongful death statutes,
charter, there is at present no dissent from the view that the guaranties include,
the United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the American
at a bare minimum, the right to be free from torture. This prohibition has become
Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, and other customary international law.
part of customary international law, as evidenced and defined by the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights.
Peña claimed the U.S. courts had jurisdiction to hear the case under the Alien
Tort Statute, which grants district courts original jurisdiction to hear tort claims brought by
 Likewise, the Court having examined the sources from which customary
an alien that have been "committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the
international law is derived the usage of nations, judicial opinion and the works
United States".
of jurists, the Court concluded that official torture is now prohibited by the law of
nations. The prohibition is clear and unambiguous, and admits of no distinction
Although the district court initially stayed Peña’s deportation, it ultimately between treatment of aliens and citizens.
granted Peña’s motion to dismiss the complaint and allowed his return to Paraguay,
ruling that, although the proscription of torture had become “a norm of customary
Second Issue
international law,” the court was bound to follow appellate precedents which narrowly
 The Court stated “the sphere of domestic jurisdiction is not an irreducible sphere
limited the function of international law only to relations between states.
of rights which are somehow inherent, natural, or fundamental. It does not
create an impenetrable barrier to the development of international law. Matters
of domestic jurisdiction are not those which are unregulated by international law,
but those which are left by international law for regulation by States. There are,
ISSUES: therefore, no matters which are domestic by their “nature”. All are susceptible of
international regulation and may become the subjects of new rules of customary
law of treaty obligations.”

You might also like