Dissidents of Myanmar File Rights Suit Against Unocal

Dissidents fighting the military regime in Myanmar filed a lawsuit Tuesday in Los Angeles accusing Unocal Corp. of human rights violations and money laundering through its participation in a $1.2-billion pipeline project in the embattled Asian country once known as Burma.

The lawsuit--filed in U.S. District Court on behalf of Myanmar’s exiled government officials and the Federation of Trade Unions of Burma--accuses the El Segundo-based energy giant of violating California tort law, a federal money-laundering statute and a series of international human rights treaties.

David Garcia, a Unocal spokesman, called the claims “false, irresponsible and frivolous” and said the lawsuit was motivated “solely by political considerations.”

Unocal and its partners, Total of France, Myanma Oil & Gas Enterprise and PTT Exploration & Production of Thailand, are constructing the huge pipeline to transport natural gas from a large offshore field through Myanmar to Thailand. They deny any human rights violations and call their project a big boost to the local economy.

The plaintiffs want Unocal to withdraw from the project and pay unspecified damages to the tens of thousands of Burmese they say have been harmed by the pipeline.

The Unocal action is one of several U.S. lawsuits filed in recent years against U.S. firms doing business abroad. John Bonifaz, a Boston attorney working on behalf of the Burmese dissidents, is also representing a group of Amazon Indians and settlers in a class-action lawsuit accusing Texaco of damaging the environment in the Amazon region. That case is being tried in U.S. District Court in New York.

Bonifaz said Unocal, through its joint venture, is liable for any human rights violations committed in the construction of the pipeline. He said the company is also violating the federal money-laundering statute by working with a regime that has profited from forced labor.

“If Unocal lined up with a criminal entity in the United States, it would have to find itself liable for those actions,” he said.

The outcome of these cases could have tremendous implications for U.S. firms, particularly those doing business in countries where authoritarian governments control the economy and natural resources, according to Robert Benson, a law professor at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles and a specialist in environmental and human rights law.

“This case is not only about Unocal and Burma,” he said. “The bigger question is, is corporate capital going to be responsible for the human rights consequences in the countries where it is going to invest?”

But oil industry analysts appeared unconcerned about the implications for Unocal and questioned the legal basis for the suit.

“This isn’t serious litigation,” said Mark Gilman, a vice president at UBS Securities in New York. “There is no U.S. law that prohibits in any shape, way or form [Unocal’s] activities.”

The Unocal case is part of a grass-roots campaign by supporters of popular Burmese opposition leader and Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, whose government won an election in 1990 but was blocked from taking office by the military rulers who had seized control in a bloody coup several years earlier.

A recent crackdown by Myanmar’s military leaders has increased the calls for the U.S. Congress to take action. A conference committee of the House and Senate is scheduled to meet next week to hash out the details of a foreign aid bill that includes a resolution restricting U.S. investment and government aid to Myanmar unless the human rights situation improves.

Activists have used shareholder resolutions to try to force companies such as Unocal, Texaco and PepsiCo to pull out of Myanmar or at least provide shareholders with more information about their investments in that country. Pepsi agreed to sell its stake in a Myanmar bottling franchise earlier this year but still sells syrup to the factory for production under license.

Activists have succeeded in getting “selective purchasing laws” passed in Santa Monica, Berkeley, San Francisco, Oakland and the state of Massachusetts. Similar laws, which restrict government officials from purchasing goods from companies doing business in Myanmar, are being considered in New York City and Takoma Park, Md.