Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act 2016 and international law

Abstract

The article analyses the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, adopted by the US Congress in 2016, and his compliance to the rules of international law. This Act allows US citizens to sue foreign states which have helped to commit an international terrorist act on US territory in US courts. This rule contradicts the norms of international law, according to which foreign states and their property have immunity in the courts of other states. According to the author, now with the refusal of the US to respect the immunity of other states, the US itself should not enjoy immunity in the courts of other states if it should commit an act of a terrorist character. But the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act does not touch state immunity, concerning the damage inflicted during military conflicts, and so US armed forces continue to enjoy this immunity. According to the author judgments that may be delivered according to this Act would be executed only on the US territory. It is improbable that such judgments would be executed by another states. In the author’s opinion, the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act may violate the complex balance of international relations and only time can show — will it bring more benefits than harm to the US and their citizens. Refs 8.