To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
In this world, where everything and everyone is for sale, we must sustain independent media we can trust. If you believe independent journalism is critical to protecting democracy and the common good, please support Common Dreams this Giving Tuesday! We wouldn't exist without you.
"The verdict does not bring back the husbands and sons who were killed," said one attorney, "but it sets the record straight and places accountability for funding terrorism where it belongs: at Chiquita's doorstep."
In what case litigants are calling the first time an American jury has held a U.S. corporation legally liable for atrocities abroad, federal jurors in Florida on Monday found that Chiquita Brands International financed a Colombian paramilitary death squad that murdered, tortured, and terrorized workers in a bid to crush labor unrest in the 1990s and 2000s.
The federal jury in West Palm Beach, Florida found the banana giant responsible for funding the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC) and awarded eight families whose members were murdered by the right-wing paramilitary group $38.3 million in damages.
EarthRights International, which first filed the case—Doe v. Chiquita—in 2007,
called the verdict "a milestone for justice."
"The jury's decision reaffirms what we have long asserted: Chiquita knowingly financed the AUC, a designated terrorist organization, in pursuit of profit, despite the AUC's egregious human rights abuses," the group said.
"By providing over $1.7 million in illegal funding to the AUC from 1997 to 2004, Chiquita contributed to untold suffering and loss in the Colombian regions of Urabá and Magdalena, including the brutal murders of innocent civilians," EarthRights added. "This historic verdict also means some of the victims and families who suffered as a direct result of Chiquita's actions will finally be compensated."
One of the plaintiffs in the case called the verdict the "triumph of a process that has been going on for almost 17 years, for all of us who have suffered so much during these years."
Plaintiffs' attorney Agnieszka Fryszman said that "the verdict does not bring back the husbands and sons who were killed, but it sets the record straight and places accountability for funding terrorism where it belongs: at Chiquita's doorstep."
The U.S. labor reporting site More Perfect Unioncalled the verdict "an unprecedented win against corporate violence, which could [be] the first of many."
A Chiquita spokesperson toldFruitnet that the company plans to appeal the verdict.
The AUC was formed in 1997 via the union of right-wing paramilitary groups battling leftist guerrillas—mainly the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and National Liberation Army (ELN)—in the South American nation's civil war. Closely linked to Colombia's U.S.-backed military, the AUC—some of whose members were trained by Israelis—was designated a terrorist organization in 2001 by the U.S. State Department, which cited its "massacres, kidnappings of civilians, and participation in the trafficking of narcotics."
In 2007, Chiquita pleaded guilty in federal court to funding the AUC and agreed to pay a $25 million fine. The company admitted to paying the AUC via its wholly owned Colombian subsidiary, Banadex, which was also its most profitable operation. Chiquita recorded these transactions as "security payments" or payments for "security" or "security services" in its corporate records.
Chiquita said that it began making the payments after Carlos Castaño, who led the AUC at the time, implied that Banadex's employees and property could be harmed. However, despite—critics say because of—the payments, AUC members brutally targeted Banadex workers in what victims and their advocates say was an effort to suppress labor unrest.
An earlier lawsuit described the fate of one victim, who is identified by the pseudonym "Pablo Pérez":
In the early morning hours of November 1, 1997, a group of heavily armed paramilitaries dressed in camouflaged uniforms stormed Pablo Pérez's home in the village of Guacamayal, in the banana zone of Magdalena, while he was sleeping. The paramilitaries broke down the door to the home, found and seized him, tied him up, and forced him to accompany them at gunpoint, beating him as they kidnapped him. His corpse was found the following morning with signs of torture and two gunshots, one to the head and one to the body.
According to plaintiffs in that case, in 2001 a ship carrying 3,000 AK-47 assault rifles and 5 million rounds of ammunition left Nicaragua and, instead of heading to its declared destination in Panama, dropped off the arms at a Banadex-run port in Turbo, Colombia. Castaño called the procurement "the greatest achievement by the AUC so far."
The earlier lawsuit states that in addition to using the money provided by Chiquita to "drive the leftist guerrillas out of the Santa Marta and Uraba banana-growing regions," AUC militants would "resolve complaints and problems with banana workers and labor unions."
"Among other things, when individual banana workers became 'security problems,' Chiquita notified the AUC, which responded to the company's instructions by executing the individual," the document states. "According to AUC leaders, a large number of people were executed on Chiquita's instructions in the Santa Marta region."
Chiquita has a long history of deadly repression against workers. Formerly the United Fruit Company (UFC)—the infamous "Octopus"—the New Orleans-based behemoth monopolized land and markets throughout Latin America in the 20th century. Through slick marketing campaigns, UFC introduced the previously unknown banana to consumers in North America and beyond. The company propped up so-called "banana republics"—extraction economies characterized by state repression, severely stratified social classes, and compliant local plutocracies—throughout the region.
UFC stopped at nothing, including participation in U.S.-backed coups, to protect its property and profits. By the 1930s, UFC controlled around 90% of the U.S. banana import business. It owned or controlled nearly half of Guatemala's land in the 1940s.
In Colombia, where UFC workers earned the approximate equivalent of $1 per month, UFC refused to negotiate with workers who went on strike in 1928 in Ciénaga, near Santa Marta. U.S. and UFC officials falsely portrayed the strike as communist subversion and Colombia's right-wing government deployed 700 troops to crush the labor action. The U.S. Embassy subsequently informed then-Secretary of State Frank Kellogg that "I have the honor to report... that the total number of strikers killed by the Colombian military exceeded 1,000."
Violence against Colombian banana workers continued into the 21st century, often with impunity for the perpetrators. Litigants in Doe v. Chiquita said Monday's jury decision marked the beginning of a new era of accountability.
"This verdict sends a powerful message to corporations everywhere: profiting from human rights abuses will not go unpunished," EarthRights International general counsel Marco Simons said in a statement. "These families, victimized by armed groups and corporations, asserted their power and prevailed in the judicial process."
Civil libertarians applauded Wednesday as a U.S. congressional committee held a hearing to "examine how the fossil fuel industry is weaponizing the law to stifle First Amendment-protected speech" and thwart climate action.
"Thirty-two states and the District of Columbia have enacted commonsense anti-SLAPP legislation."
At issue during the hearing were strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs), which are described by one advocacy group as "an all-too-common tool for intimidating and silencing criticism through expensive, baseless legal proceedings."
Democratic lawmakers, activists, and community leaders explained during the hearing how the fossil fuel industry "uses SLAPPs to target environmental activists and nonprofits to deter them from speaking out against proposed fossil fuel pipelines and other projects that contribute to climate change."
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), chair of the House Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, announced plans to introduce legislation to deter SLAPPs.
"Wealthy and powerful corporate entities are... dragging citizens and public interest opponents through meritless but protracted and expensive litigation to expose anyone who dares stand up to them to financial and personal ruin," Raskin said during his opening remarks.
"It is crucial that Congress protect the rights of American citizens and civic groups to engage in lawful political protest and organizing without being subjected to ruinously expensive and meritless retaliatory litigation," he added.
Anne White Hat, a Sicangu Lakota Indigenous woman who has been involved in anti-fossil fuel struggles from Standing Rock to Louisiana, is one of 16 activists who faced up to five years in prison for their activism against the Bayou Bridge pipeline.
Last year, a local district attorney threw out the charges against the activists and vowed to never prosecute them under the state's critical infrastructure law, a tool used by oil-producing states like Texas and Oklahoma to deter protests.
White Hat described the fear of constantly "wondering if they're gonna come knocking on the door to take me to jail and having to make plans for my children."
"In terms of just being out there and going out, it really is a chilling effect on us as frontline organizers," she added. "It also impacts other First Amendment rights like freedom of religion. One of the gentlemen involved in our lawsuit was denied the right to travel to go to practice his religious activities."
On Monday, Common Dreams reported that the fossil fuel industry has targeted more than 150 climate activists and community leaders in recent years with SLAPPs lawsuits and other forms of "judicial harassment," according to a report published by the legal advocacy group EarthRights International.
The report noted that public officials including Democratic Texas gubernatorial candidate Beto O'Rourke--who was sued for defamation earlier this year by Energy Transfer Partners CEO Kelcy Warren over criticism of the company's pipeline profits--have been targeted, along with frontline climate campaigners.
For activists caught up in SLAPP litigation, legal costs can be crushing for individuals and small groups as cases drag on for years.
"More than six years from when the first SLAPP was filed against us, [we are] still forced to invest time and resources into these legal battles that otherwise would have been used to protect communities and the environment from toxic pollution and the existential threat of climate change," Greenpeace general counsel Deepa Padmanabha said at Wednesday's hearing.
Padmanabha and others who testified Wednesday called on Congress to pass federal anti-SLAPP laws to prevent First Amendment abuses and protect the rights of people and advocacy groups to participate in the democratic process.
"Now is a critical moment for Congress to act and introduce federal anti-SLAPP legislation," she asserted. "Thirty-two states and the District of Columbia have enacted commonsense anti-SLAPP legislation, and all were introduced in a bipartisan or nonpartisan fashion."
"While federal legislation might not put an end to all SLAPPs," added Padmanabha, "it would be a significant step towards becoming a nation of justice where our fundamental right to speak truth to power is protected."
Indigenous water defenders and their allies on Tuesday celebrated a Minnesota court ruling protecting a Line 3 protest camp from illegal government repression.
"This is a piece in the long game and we aren't afraid."
Hubbard County District Judge Jana Austad issued a ruling shielding the Indigenous-led Giniw Collective's Camp Namewag--where opponents organize resistance to Enbridge's Line 3 tar sands pipeline--from local law enforcement's unlawful blockades and harassment.
The ruling follows months of litigation on behalf of Indigenous water protectors, whose legal team last year secured a temporary restraining order issued by Austad against Hubbard County, Sheriff Cory Aukes, and the local land commissioner for illegally blocking access to Camp Namewag.
"Today David beat Goliath in a legal victory for people protecting the climate from rapacious corporate destruction," Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, director of the Center for Protest Law & Litigation at the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, said in a statement.
\u201cVICTORY! Court Rules MN Sheriff\u2019s Blockade of #Line3 Water Protector Camp Was Illegal and Bars Ongoing Efforts to Obstruct Access @zhaabowekwe @GiniwCollective @WinonaLaduke @EarthRightsIntl https://t.co/nmNVHMkwwb\u201d— Center for Protest Law & Litigation \u2696\ufe0f (@Center for Protest Law & Litigation \u2696\ufe0f) 1663094377
"The outrageous blockade and repression of an Indigenous-led water protector camp were fueled by massive sums of money flowing from the Enbridge corporation to the sheriff's department as it acted against water protectors challenging Enbridge's destruction of Native lands," she added.
Indigenous activist and Giniw Collective founder Tara Houska, who is a plaintiff in the case, said that "15 months ago, I was woken up at 6:00 am and walked down my driveway to a grinning sheriff holding a notice to vacate my yearslong home."
"That day turned into 50 squad cars on a dirt road and a riot line blocking my driveway," she recalled. "Twelve people--guests from all over who came to protect the rivers and wild rice from Line 3 tar sands--were arrested and thrown into the dirt."
Houska continued:
Today's ruling is a testament to the lengths Hubbard County was willing to go to criminalize and harass Native women, land defenders, and anyone associated with us--spending unknown amounts of taxpayer dollars and countless hours trying to convince the court that the driveway to Namewag camp wasn't a driveway. It's also a testament to steadfast commitment to resisting oppression. This is a piece in the long game and we aren't afraid. We haven't forgotten the harms to us and the harms to the Earth. Onward.
Winona LaDuke, co-founder and executive director of Honor the Earth and a former Green Party vice presidential candidate, stated that "we are grateful to Judge Austad for recognizing how Hubbard County exceeded its authority and violated our rights."
"Today's ruling shows that Hubbard County cannot repress Native people for the benefit of Enbridge by circumventing the law," she added. "This is also an important victory for all people of the North reinforcing that a repressive police force should not be able to stop you from accessing your land upon which you hunt or live."
EarthRights general counsel Marco Simons asserted that "the court's ruling is a major rebuke to police efforts to unlawfully target water protectors and to interfere with their activities protesting the Line 3 pipeline."
"Blocking access to the Namewag camp exemplifies a pattern of unlawful and discriminatory police conduct incentivized by an Enbridge-funded account from which the police can seek reimbursement for Line 3-related activities," he continued.
"Police forces should protect the public interest, not private companies," Simons added. "Cases like this highlight the dangers of allowing the police to act as a private security arm for pipeline companies."