- Following 17 years of legal proceedings, victims of paramilitary violence in Colombia have obtained justice, as a jury found the banana company Chiquita Brands International liable for financing the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC) paramilitary group.
- Between 1997 and 2004, Chiquita paid the AUC around $1.7 million to protect them against a rival paramilitary group, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), which had threatened its employees and business operations; meanwhile, the AUC’s death squads murdered several thousands of people.
- The ruling is historic because it’s the first time an American jury has held a major U.S. corporation liable for complicity in serious human rights abuses in another country; victims’ families will receive $38.3 million in compensation.
- According to the victims’ legal team, this new ruling opens the way for thousands of others to seek restitution.
After winning a historic lawsuit, nine victims of paramilitary violence in Colombia have finally obtained justice, 17 years after they filed cases against the banana company Chiquita Brands International for financing the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, or AUC, paramilitary group. According to experts, this verdict represents an important legal precedent in matters of reparation and justice for thousands of other families who have filed similar lawsuits against Chiquita. The victims’ family members will be awarded $38.3 million in compensation.
On June 10, a Florida jury ruled that Chiquita knowingly financed the AUC in Colombia’s Urabá and Magdalena regions from 1997-2004. During this time, it was widely known that the group had carried out massacres and violence against civilian communities in and around the banana zones where Chiquita was operating, Marissa Vahlsing, EarthRights International director of transnational litigation, said in a press conference.
The ruling is historic because it’s the first time an American jury has held a major U.S. corporation liable for complicity in serious human rights abuses in another country.
The jury also rejected that the payments, which totaled at least $1.7 million, were made under duress, as the company had claimed. “This was not, as Chiquita claimed, a relationship of extortion,” Vahlsing said. “This was a partnership, a business partnership where they aligned themselves with a terrorist group that was openly committing atrocities against civilians.”
Over the six-week trial, the jury heard testimonies from more than 60 witnesses, including more than 20 current or former Chiquita employees or executives. According to the testimony of one victim, who remained anonymous for security reasons, the AUC killed her mother, as well as her stepfather, who worked on a banana farm.
“The stepfather was dragged behind the cab and mercilessly executed,” the testimony stated. “The mother, in panic, desperately tried to flee; she ran aimlessly, but crashed into a pole, while the paramilitaries shot her to death.”
The decision by the Florida jury means that the victims and families who suffered as a direct result of Chiquita’s actions will finally be compensated, the legal team said in the press conference. It also sets a legal precedent for hundreds of similar lawsuits against the company that will go on trial in the coming months, said Marco Simons, EarthRights’ general counsel. In legal terms, this is known as a bellwether case, as it opens the way for the resolution of other claims. The next trial, which involves 10 more victims, will begin July 15.
Chiquita did not respond to Mongabay’s requests for comments before the date of publication.
A legal precedent
In the late 1980s, Chiquita began to expand its operations in Colombia. The banana company was able to purchase cheap land in the Urabá and Magdalen regions because of the ongoing violence by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, guerrilla group. The FARC was responsible for thousands of massacres and violence against civilian communities at the time, and its presence had a large impact on multinational companies, large landowners and everyday people who had to flee for safety.
According to information presented in the trial, throughout the late 1980s and early 1990s, the FARC threatened Chiquita employees and its business operations. Instead of reporting this to the military or police, or putting a hold on business altogether, the jury found that Chiquita turned to the AUC to fight back against the FARC and to protect its personnel and operations. Like the FARC, it was widely known that the AUC was carrying out massacres and violence against civilian communities in the area.
“There’s no question that Colombia was a very dangerous operating environment for Chiquita,” Simons said in a press conference. “But rather than take steps to reduce that conflict, reduce their exposure to conflict or extricate themselves if they could not, they essentially threw gasoline on a fire by financing the worst actors in this conflict — the most brutal armed group in Colombia.”
In 2001, the U.S. Department of Justice outlawed the AUC and declared it a foreign terrorist organization. From that point on, no U.S. company was allowed to provide support to the AUC. Two years later, Chiquita came forward and admitted it had been making payments to the AUC. The U.S. Department of Justice fined Chiquita $25 million for its illegal payments to the AUC but the victims of violence were never given any restitution until now. Chiquita withdrew from Colombia in 2004.
According to Simons, there have been thousands of claims filed against Chiquita. Some of the cases were filed by different lawyers across the U.S., representing approximately 4,500 affected families and were consolidated under a single case in Florida in 2007.
“It’s unlikely that all 4,500 deaths will go on trial,” he said in a press conference. “But the reason this is called a bellwether is because it’s intended to try to set the direction for resolution of other claims.” This may happen through other trials, he explained, “or it might help to point the way towards a global settlement.”
Banner image: Image by Line Knipst via pexels.com
FEEDBACK: Use this form to send a message to the author of this post. If you want to post a public comment, you can do that at the bottom of the page.
Credits
