Villagers from Myanmar’s Tenasserim region, the rural area through which an American oil company built a new pipeline, alleged that the Myanmar Military forced them, under threat of violence, to work on and serve as porters for the project. For instance, John Doe IX testified that he was forced to build a helipad near the pipeline site in 1994 that was then used by company officials who visited the pipeline during its planning stages. John Doe VII and John Roe X described that the construction of helipads at Eindayaza and Po Pah Pta, both of which were near the pipeline site, were used to ferry executives and materials to the construction site, and were constructed using the forced labor of local villagers, including Plaintiffs John Roes VIII and IX, as well as John Does I, VIII and IX, who testified that they were forced to work on building roads leading to the pipeline construction area. Finally, John Does V and IX testified that they were required to serve as “pipeline porters”—workers who performed menial tasks such as such as hauling materials and cleaning the army camps for the soldiers guarding the pipeline construction.

Plaintiffs also alleged, in furtherance of the forced labor program just described, that the Myanmar Military subjected them to acts of murder, rape, and torture. For instance, Jane Doe I testified that after her husband, John Doe I, attempted to escape the forced labor program, he was shot at by soldiers, and, in retaliation for his attempted escape, that she and her baby were thrown into a fire, resulting in injuries to her and the death of the child. Other witnesses described the summary execution of villagers who refused to participate in the forced labor program, or who grew too weak to work effectively. Several Plaintiffs testified that rapes occurred as part of the forced labor program. For instance, both Jane Does II and III testified that while conscripted to work on pipeline-related construction projects, they were raped at knife-point by Myanmar soldiers who were members of a battalion that was supervising the work. Plaintiffs finally allege that American firm’s conduct gives rise to liability for these abuses. What must these plaintiffs prove in order to pursue an Alien Tort Claims Act case against the U.S. oil company? What must the U.S. try to show in order to successfully defend itself? Should the law impose an obligation on the oil company to “police” how the host country’s military fulfills a national agreement to assist the oil company in building the pipeline?