Justices Reject Appeal Seeking Payments for Ex-Iran Hostages
by MATTHEW L. WALD, nytimes.comMay 29th 2012
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected the last legal appeal for former American hostages seeking compensation for their captivity in Iran three decades ago, leaving legislation newly introduced in Congress as the last chance to resolve their longstanding grievance.
A lower court, acting at the request of the State Department, previously blocked the hostages' effort to win compensation from Iran, holding that the agreement under which they were released barred such claims. The former hostages had sued under a 1996 law that they argued allowed them to seek damages, and in August 2001 they won a judgment of liability, because Iran did not appear in court to defend itself. But the State Department argued that its ability to conduct foreign policy would be compromised if damages were awarded.
The Supreme Court, as is its custom, did not give a reason for its decision on Tuesday.
Fifty-two Americans were held hostage for 444 days after Iranian radicals seized the American Embassy in Tehran in 1979.
"I would never have thought when I was getting kicked around in Iran that my own government would ever go to court to stop me," said David M. Roeder, a retired Air Force colonel who was the named plaintiff in the case. But after 12 years of legal wrangling, he said he was not surprised by the outcome.
"It's not just this administration or Clinton or even the Bush administration; there seems to be some sort of a weird hands-off-Iran policy," he said.
The approximately 100 people named in the suit, which included former hostages and some of their survivors, were seeking $10,000 a day, or $4.4 million each. According to their lawyers, money that was deposited in the United States by Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi of Iran before he was forced from power and then frozen by the Carter administration after the hostages were taken is still available.
Mr. Roeder and the other plaintiffs are hopeful that Congress will act again. On May 17, Representative Bruce Braley, an Iowa Democrat, and Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Florida Republican who is chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, introduced legislation that would double the fines against companies that are caught doing business with Iran. Half of the money would be used to compensate the former hostages. The bill would also let the president use frozen Iranian assets.
Mr. Braley, in a telephone interview, said that the court decision contradicted the Third Geneva Convention, which, he said, "prohibits us from absolving other countries of liability for engaging in the torture of U.S. citizens."
He did not say how much money he thought would be raised by doubling the fines for violating anti-Iran sanctions, but he said, "Any revenue is going to be a lot more than these hostages have received during the long period of time they've been waiting for justice." Mr. Braley's district includes the residence of one former hostage, Kathryn L. Koob. Mr. Braley said he would seek support from other lawmakers who represented districts where former hostages lived.
Original Page: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/30/us/politics/supreme-court-rejects-appeal-by-former-iran-hostagess.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
Shared from Pocket
Victor Cuvo, Attorney at Law
No comments:
Post a Comment