MANY moviegoers are familiar with the classic Hollywood film “Mutiny on the Bounty.” The movie tells the story of a mutiny that took place during the British Empire on a Royal Navy ship in 1790. The ship was heading to Tahiti in the southern Pacific Ocean when some of the sailors, fed up with the abuse of the captain, decided to mutiny and threw the captain along with his supporters into a small boat.
Last month, history repeated itself. However, this time it was not in the middle of the Pacific Ocean but in the US Congress. The US Senate and House of Representatives passed an act called Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism (JASTA).
On September 28, the House of Representatives passed the bill with 348 in favor and 77 against. It needed 284 to pass. The Senate passed the bill with a resounding majority, 97 in favor and only one against. With the passage of this act, US courts are now allowed to hold foreign governments responsible if they are found to have played a role in funding or assisting terrorism. The act also narrows the scope of the legal doctrine of sovereign immunity, making it possible to allow claims against a foreign state or official for death, injuries and damages as a result of an act of international terrorism.
Passing this controversial bill, which was an act of mutiny on the part of Congress, raises many valid questions. Why did members of the US president’s party, the Democrats, vote almost unanimously against the will of the president? Did they not believe the president when he said that if the bill were passed it would present a great threat to US interests?
These questions lead to another very serious and legitimate question: If the president really considered the act to be a serious threat to US interests, why didn’t he get the needed support to reject it before sending it back to Congress? It seems that only time will provide an answer these questions. Also worthy of note is that the result shows unprecedented bipartisan cooperation between Republicans and Democrats in having the act passed. Out of 12 acts vetoed by the president, this is the only time that Congress has united to override the presidential veto.
The act, which is now in effect, will cause great damage to American interests inside and outside the US. Economically speaking, investors, regardless of whether they are countries or individuals, will rethink plans to invest in the US. Those already with assets in the US will seriously think about relocating them elsewhere. Law firms now remain the only light at the end of the tunnel, the only hope for those who may be affected by JASTA. People who will be affected have hope in the US judiciary. One solid and unarguable fact that comes to the surface is that the US political system has not only betrayed American interests, it has also foolishly betrayed the trust of the nation’s close allies.
Mohammed Y Al-Fal
