Jump to content

Bankin Alperin v. Vatican

Daga Wikipedia, Insakulofidiya ta kyauta.
Bankin Alperin v. Vatican
class action (en) Fassara
Bayanai
Ƙasa Tarayyar Amurka
Muhimmin darasi The Holocaust da Ustaše (en) Fassara
Described at URL (en) Fassara content.next.westlaw.com…
Defendant (en) Fassara Institute for Works of Religion (en) Fassara

Alperin v. Bankin Vatican wani ƙarar aji ne da bai yi nasara ba wanda waɗanda suka tsira daga Holocaust suka shigar a kan Cibiyar Ayyukan Addini ("Bankin Vatican" ko "IOR") da kuma odar Franciscan ("Order of Friars Minor"). An shigar da karar a San Francisco, California ranar 15 ga Nuwamba, 1999.

Kotun ta yi zargin cewa bankin Vatican da na Franciscan sun amince da wawashe kadarorin da gwamnatin Ustaše ta wawashe a Croatia a lokacin yakin duniya na biyu. Kotun gunduma ta Amurka ta yi watsi da shari’ar da farko a shekara ta 2003 bisa ga cewa ta gabatar da wata tambaya ta siyasa. Duk da haka, a cikin 2005, Kotun Daukaka Kara ta Amurka don Sashe na Tara ta dawo da wani ɓangare na shari'ar, tana mai da hankali kan yadda take kula da da'awarta a ƙarƙashin Dokar Laifin Laifin Alien Tort (ATCA) da Dokar Kariya ta Ƙasashen Waje (FSIA).

A shekara ta 2007, an yi watsi da wani bangare na korafin da ake yi wa bankin Vatican bisa kariyar kariyar da aka yi, kuma an yi watsi da sauran kararrakin da ake yi wa bankin saboda rashin isasshiyar alaka (dangi) da Amurka. Kotun ta tara ta amince da wannan shawarar a watan Fabrairun 2010.

A wannan lokacin, Dokar Franciscan kawai ta kasance a matsayin wanda ake tuhuma. A cikin Maris 2011, Sashe na Tara ya tabbatar da korar da kotun gunduma ta yi na da'awar a kan Franciscans. Ba a kara daukaka karar ba. Don haka, babu wani bangare na karar da ya kai ga shari’a, kuma ba a kafa ko daya daga cikin zarge-zargen da masu kara suka yi a kotu ba.


Mahallin tarihi

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Kwalejin Pontifical Croatian na St. Jerome a Rome Manyan labarai: Zinare na Nazi da limaman Katolika tare da Ustaše Gaskiyar gaskiyar da ake zargi a cikin da'awar ita ce mambobi na Ustaše, ƙungiyar fascist na Croatia, sun ɓoye adadi mai yawa na zinare da aka sace a Kwalejin Pontifical Croatian na St. Jerome (Makarantar Croatian kusa da Vatican) da kuma cewa daga baya an koma zuwa wasu kayan waje na Vatican da / ko Bankin Vatican.[1] 2] Ko da yake wannan zinariyar za ta kai darajar dubban ɗaruruwan dalar Amurka ta 2008, amma ana zargin ta ƙunshi kaso kaɗan na zinariyar da aka wawashe lokacin Yaƙin Duniya na Biyu, mafi yawan abin da 'yan Nazi suka kwashe.[2] a cewar Phayer, "manyan ma'aikatan Vatican sun san inda zinariyar take," ko da yake bai bayar da wata shaida da za ta goyi bayan wannan ikirari ba kuma bai ambaci sunayen wasu mutane da watakila ke da hannu a ciki ba.,[3]

Shari’ar ta yiwu ne ta hanyar wani umarni na 1997 da shugaban Amurka Bill Clinton ya bayar, wanda ya umurci dukkanin sassan gwamnatin Amurka da su bude bayanan yakin duniya na biyu don tantance jama’a.[4] An bayar da wannan odar ne bayan shaidun da ke nuna cewa bankunan Switzerland na lalata bayanan ajiyar Yahudawa.[5] kasashe goma sha hudu na Turai, Kanada, da Argentina sun bi sawu, amma birnin Vatican ba su yi haka ba.[6] yamacin shaidun da suka bayyana tun lokacin da aka ba da umarnin zartarwa ba su samuwa ga Hukumar Maido da Zinare ta Uku kafin ta wargaje. Duk da haka, Yugoslavia na daga cikin wadanda aka mayar da su.[7]

Hujja

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

=Masu kara

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

An kawo aikin aji a madadin "dukkan Sabiyawa, Yahudawa, da 'yan ƙasa na Tarayyar Soviet (da magadansu da masu amfana) waɗanda suka sha wahala" a hannun Ustaše. Wadanda suka shigar da karar sun yi ikirarin cewa su ne wadanda Ustaše ta aikata laifukan sirri ko na dukiya. Ƙungiyoyi huɗu da ke wakiltar waɗanda suka tsira daga Holocaust ko batutuwan haƙƙin ɗan adam an ba su suna a matsayin masu gabatar da kara.[8] Wadanda suka tsira daga Ustaše da danginsu na kusa da ke zaune a California sun kawo karar da bankin Vatican da sauran su a kotun tarayya ta Amurka, Alperin v. Bankin Vatican.[9], jimillar yuwuwar ajin, da Kotun ta gane da'awar, da ta haɗa da "sama da 300,000 tsohon bawa da ma'aikatan tilastawa, fursunoni, sansanin taro, da waɗanda suka tsira daga ghetto"[10] [11] Abubuwan da suka haifar da wannan mataki sun hada da "sauyi, wadata ba bisa ka'ida ba, ramawa, 'yancin yin lissafin kudi, take hakkin dan Adam, da kuma keta dokokin kasa da kasa". An tabbatar da ikon yin magana a ƙarƙashin dokar tarayya, California.

Wadanda ake tuhuma

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Wadanda ake tuhumar sun hada da Bankin Vatican, amma ba birnin Vatican ba (tunda sunan birnin Vatican zai iya kai ga korar karar da aka shigar kan dalilan da suka shafi kariya)[12] an yarda da zagaye na tara, don dalilai na yin watsi da, hujjar masu gabatar da kara cewa birnin Vatican da bankin Vatican cibiyoyi ne daban[13] Sauran wadanda ake tuhumar sun hada da Order of Friars Minor ("Franciscans"), Ƙungiyoyin 'Yanci na Croatian, da kuma "wasu kungiyoyin addinin Katolika da ba a san su ba da sanannun kuma cibiyoyin banki da ba a san su ba daga kasashe daban-daban"[14] Vatican da Order of Friars Minor sun gabatar da karaki daban-daban na yin watsi da shi.[15]

Lauyoyin Vatican ba su yi adawa da zargin cewa wani babban jigilar zinari ya zo da babbar mota a Roma a shekara ta 1946 ba, ko da yake sun tabbatar da cewa masu shigar da kara sun “saka da ‘gaskiya” na karshe.[16] duk da haka, masu tsaron sun yi jayayya da cewa "babu wata alaka ta shaida tsakanin asarar masu gabatar da kara da zinariyar da aka ajiye a bankin Vatican"[17]

Wadanda ake tuhumar sun kuma yi jayayya cewa, a ƙarƙashin Dokar Kariya na Ƙasashen Waje (tare da ikon mallakar Vatican da Amurka ta amince da shi a 1984), ba su da alhakin mayar da zinariyar Ustaše da aka sace zuwa Yugoslavia a 1946, tun lokacin da mulkin gurguzu mai adawa ya yi mulkin kasar. Sun yi jayayya:

Shawarar da wata hukuma mai zaman kanta ta bayar na ba da kuɗi ga ƙungiyoyin siyasa na ketare na adawa da gurguzu maimakon ga gwamnatin gurguzu, a lokacin da aka fara yaƙin cacar baka a Turai, ba aikin "kasuwa" ba ne; jure imperii ne, aiki ne mai zurfi mai zurfi[18]

A ƙarshe, waɗanda ake tuhuma sun yi jayayya da cewa masu gabatar da kara ba su da matsayi saboda fadar Vatican ta kasance bangare na uku ne kawai ga raunin masu gabatar da kara.[19]

Hali

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Hukuncin Kotun Lardi na Farko (2003) An shigar da karar ta asali a Kotun Gundumar Arewacin California a San Francisco a cikin 1999.[20] [21] bangarorin sun amince a kotun gunduma su takaita hujjarsu ta farko ga tambayar ko shari’ar ta kasance tambaya ce ta siyasa.[22]Alkalin gundumar ya yi watsi da karar a shekara ta 2003 bisa hujjar cewa ta kasance tambaya ce ta siyasa.[23][24] A cikin wani ra'ayi na daban, kotun gundumar ta yi watsi da da'awar da ake yi wa Ƙungiyar 'Yanci ta Croatia don rashin ikon kai.[25]

Kiran Da'irar Tara ta Farko (2005)

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Kotun daukaka kara na zagaye na tara ta dawo da wasu daga cikin da'awar masu kara a cikin 2005, [26] kuma Kotun Koli ta ki yarda a cikin Janairu 2006 don ba da certiorari don sake duba wannan hukuncin.[27] [28] ][29] da irar Tara ta ɗauka cewa da'awar kadarorin ba tambayoyin siyasa ba ne, yayin da ta yarda cewa "da'awar yaƙi" (ciki har da take haƙƙin ɗan adam, keta dokokin ƙasa da ƙasa, da aikin bawa) tambayoyi ne na siyasa.[30] ]

Da'irar Tara ta rubuta cewa saboda shari'ar "ya shafi dangantakar kasashen waje da kuma batutuwan siyasa masu rikitarwa, [ya kasance] jaraba don tsalle zuwa ga ƙarshe cewa irin wannan ikirarin an hana shi ta hanyar koyaswar tambaya ta siyasa," amma ya kamata kotu ta "bincika kowane da'awar a kai-a kai" maimakon "watse alhakin kotu na Mataki na III" [31] kotun ta tara ta kuma tabbatar da cewa har yanzu gwamnatin Amurka ba ta dau matsaya kan batun ba kuma ba batun yarjejeniya ko yarjejeniya ba ne.[32]

Roko na Kira na Biyu na Tara (2009)

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

An saurari karar da'ira ta tara ta biyu kan batun kare hakkin mallaka na bankin Vatican a ranar 10 ga Disamba, 2009, a San Francisco.,[33] An yi watsi da karar a ranar 28 ga Disamba, 2009.[34] Masu gabatar da kara sun nuna cewa za su iya kara daukaka kara[35]

Daga baya Hukunce-hukuncen Kotunan Lardi (2006–2009)

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

A ranar 15 ga Yuni, 2006, mai shari'a Elizabeth Laporte na Gundumar Arewacin California ta musanta ba tare da nuna son kai ba, motsin masu gabatar da kara don gano hukunce-hukuncen shari'a kuma an ba da wani bangare na motsin masu gabatar da kara don samar da kayan bisa ga Dokokin Tarayya na Tsarin Farar Hula.[36] ranar 27 ga Disamba, 2007, alkali Maxine M. Chesney, ya amince da bukatar bankin Vatican na yin watsi da korafi na hudu da aka yi wa kwaskwarima, inda ya kawo karshen shari’ar da ake yi wa bankin na Vatican bisa tushen kariyar da ta dace.[37] ranar 14 ga Afrilu, 2009, mai shari’a Chesney ya amince da bukatar masu shigar da kara na neman izinin shigar da kara na shida da aka gyara kafin ranar 1 ga Mayu, 2009.[38] shigar da kara na shida da aka yi wa kwaskwarima, inda aka sanya sunan odar Franciscan a matsayin wanda ake tuhuma da kuma cire bankin Vatican.[39] A ranar 11 ga Satumba, 2009, kotun gundumomi ta yi watsi da karar da ake yi wa Franciscans ba tare da nuna bambanci ba bisa dalilan rashin hurumin tarayya kuma ta ki amincewa da bukatar da masu gabatar da kara suka yi na yin gyara a ranar 13 ga Nuwamba, 2009. Masu gabatar da kara sun daukaka kara zuwa Sashe na Tara a kan dalilin da ya sa bankin Vatican ya shiga harkokin kasuwanci amma ya yi kasa a gwiwa a harkokin kasuwanci a [40] Amurka.

Binciken shari'a

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Korar farko na shari'ar akan koyaswar tambaya ta siyasa shine tsawaita abin da aka kafa a Baker v. Carr.[41] A cewar Farfesa Gwynne Skinner, "An yi watsi da yawancin da'awar da ta taso daga Holocaust bisa ga wannan koyarwar, ko dai saboda an riga an yanke shawara game da ramuwar gayya ko kuma saboda sojojin kawance sun riga sun yanke shawara game da wadanda za a gurfanar da su a kan laifuka daban-daban da aka aikata a lokacin Holocaust" [42] A cewar Farfesa Hannibal Travis: "Da farko, kotunan Amurka sun yi watsi da ikirarin da wadanda suka tsira daga Holocaust suka yi a kan dalilin cewa dokokin kasa da kasa ne kawai suka haifar da da'awar tsakanin jihohi kuma ba su aiwatar da kansu ba tare da aiwatar da dokar da Majalisa ta yi ba. An gyara wannan kuskuren fassarar §1350 a cikin 'yan shekaru, kuma tun lokacin da U.S. kusan layukan da ba a warware su ba da suka shafi laifuffuka da suka dace da ake zargin an aikata su a wani wuri wanda ya saba wa dokokin kasa da kasa.[43]

An kwatanta shari'ar da wasu kararraki da yawa na 2003 akan 'yan wasan kwaikwayo masu zaman kansu don kuskuren da aka yi a lokacin yakin duniya na biyu, irin su Anderman v. Tarayyar Ostiriya (kuma an ƙaddara ta zama tambaya ta siyasa).[44] An buga shi a matsayin misali na shari'ar Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) inda kotuna ba su buƙatar ƙarewar maganin shari'a na ƙasashen waje.[45] soki hukuncin zagaye na tara ta hanyar Binciken Dokokin Jami'ar Golden Gate bisa dalilan cewa: "yayin da kotun ta yanke tsakanin ikirarin dukiya da ikirarin yakin na iya zama hanyar nazari mai kyau don magance batutuwan rukunan siyasa, da'awar aikin bawa bai kamata a cire shi daga iyakokin da'awar dukiya ba"[46]

Masu gabatar da kara sun yi ƙoƙari su daidaita tare da shari'o'in cin zarafin jima'i na Katolika don "kaucewa bincike daban-daban game da batun samar da damar Vatican don dacewa da ita a Amurka."

Manazarta

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]
  1. ↑ Phayer, 2008, p
  2. ↑ Phayer, 2008, p
  3. ↑ Phayer, 2008, p
  4. ↑ Phayer, 2008, p.
  5. ↑ Phayer, 2008, p.
  6. ↑ Phayer, 2008, p.
  7. ↑ Phayer, 2008, p. 214, 217.
  8. ↑ "Property, War Objectives, and Slave Labor Claims: The Ninth Circuit's Political Question Analysis in Alperin v. Vatican Bank"
  9. ↑ Phayer, 2008, p. 208
  10. ↑ "Property, War Objectives, and Slave Labor Claims: The Ninth Circuit's Political Question Analysis in Alperin v. Vatican Bank"
  11. ↑ Phayer, 2008, p.
  12. ↑ "Property, War Objectives, and Slave Labor Claims: The Ninth Circuit's Political Question Analysis in Alperin v. Vatican Bank"
  13. ↑ "Property, War Objectives, and Slave Labor Claims: The Ninth Circuit's Political Question Analysis in Alperin v. Vatican Bank"
  14. ↑ "Property, War Objectives, and Slave Labor Claims: The Ninth Circuit's Political Question Analysis in Alperin v. Vatican Bank"
  15. ↑ "Property, War Objectives, and Slave Labor Claims: The Ninth Circuit's Political Question Analysis in Alperin v. Vatican Bank"
  16. ↑ Phayer, 2008, p.
  17. ↑ Phayer, 2008, pp. 217–218
  18. ↑ Phayer, 2008, p. 217.
  19. ↑ Phayer, 2008, p. 219.
  20. ↑ James Vicini. 2006, January 17. "Court won't review Vatican Bank Holocaust suit".
  21. ↑ 99-C-4941 (N.D. Cal. filed Nov
  22. ↑ "Property, War Objectives, and Slave Labor Claims: The Ninth Circuit's Political Question Analysis in Alperin v. Vatican Bank"
  23. ↑ James Vicini. 2006, January 17. "Court won't review Vatican Bank Holocaust suit".
  24. ↑ 21303209 (N.D. Cal.
  25. ↑ "Property, War Objectives, and Slave Labor Claims: The Ninth Circuit's Political Question Analysis in Alperin v. Vatican Bank",
  26. ↑ 410 F.3d 532, 544 (9th Cir. 2005)
  27. ↑ James Vicini. 2006, January 17. "Court won't review Vatican Bank Holocaust suit". Reuters.
  28. ↑ Order of Friars Minor v. Alperin, 126 S. Ct. 1141, 163 L. Ed. 2d 1000, 2006 U.S. LEXIS 774 (U.S., 2006)
  29. ↑ Istituto per le Opere di Religione v. Alperin, 126 S. Ct. 1160, 163 L. Ed. 2d 1000, 2006 U.S. LEXIS 775 (U.S., 2006).
  30. ↑ ["Property, War Objectives, and Slave Labor Claims: The Ninth Circuit's Political Question Analysis in Alperin v. Vatican Bank"
  31. ↑ Symeon C. Symeonides. 2005. "Choice of Law in the American Courts in 2005: Nineteenth
  32. ↑ Symeon C. Symeonides. 2005. "Choice of Law in the American Courts in 2005: Nineteenth
  33. ↑ "Court document"
  34. ↑ Sud odbio tužbu preživjelih iz holokausta u NDH protiv Vatikanske banke
  35. ↑ "Nazi-loot suit against Vatican dismissed"
  36. ↑ Alperin v. Vatican Bank, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42902 (N.D. Cal., June 15, 2006).
  37. ↑ Alperin v. Vatican Bank, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95529 (N.D. Cal., Dec. 27,
  38. ↑ Alperin v. Vatican Bank, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36270 (N.D. Cal., Apr. 14, 2009).
  39. ↑ "Vaticanbankclaims Resources and Information"
  40. ↑ "ECB 7-1-10 | European Central Bank | Lawsuit"
  41. ↑ ..S. 186, 210-11 (
  42. ↑ Gwynne Skinner. 2008. "Nuremberg's Legacy Continues: The Nuremberg Trials' Influence on Human Rights Litigation in U.S. Courts under the Alien Tort Statute". 71 Alb. L. Rev.
  43. ↑ Hannibal Travis. 2008. "Genocide in Sudan: The Role of Oil Exploration and the Entitlement of Victims to Reparations". 25 Ariz. J. Int'l & Comp. Law 1.
  44. ↑ Symeon C. Symeonides. 2004. "Choice of Law in the American Courts in 2003: Seventeenth Annual Survey". 52 Am. J. Comp. L.
  45. ↑ Elise Catera. 2008. "ATCA: Closing the Gap in Corporate Liability for Environmental War Crimes". 33 Brooklyn J. Int'l L. 629.,
  46. ↑ "Property, War Objectives, and Slave Labor Claims: The Ninth Circuit's Political Question Analysis in Alperin v. Vatican Bank"
Daga "https://ha.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bankin_Alperin_v._Vatican&oldid=678858"