Goodlatte Statement at Markup of the “CAPTIVE Act”

Chairman Goodlatte: I would like to begin by thanking Representative Posey and Judiciary Committee Members, David Trott, Ted Deutch, Hank Johnson, and Randy Forbes for introducing this bipartisan legislation. The CAPTIVE Act makes two small, but important changes to section 201 of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act to make it easier for U.S. victims of terrorism to recover court-awarded damages from the perpetrators of terrorism. Under current federal law, victims of terrorism may satisfy a court-awarded judgment they have against a terrorist party out of any assets of that terrorist party that the federal government has frozen pursuant to the Trading with the Enemy Act or the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.  The CAPTIVE Act amends this provision to provide that assets frozen by the federal government pursuant to the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act are also available to satisfy judgments against terrorist parties. This is an important change to the law in cases involving narco-terrorists, like the FARC, that may be cross-designated as both terrorists and drug kingpins.  In cases involving narco-terrorists, the group may be designated as a terrorist organization, but its assets may be frozen under the Kingpin Act thus preventing terrorism victims from satisfying their judgments against those assets. This is more than a hypothetical problem.  Several weeks ago, I met with some of the victims, and family members of the victims, of a 2003 FARC terrorist attack.  On February 13, 2003, Keith Stansell, Marc Gonsalves, Thomas Howes, and Thomas Janis were flying over Colombia while performing counter-narcotics reconnaissance for the Department of Defense.  Members of FARC shot their plane down and, after the plane crash landed, FARC captured the group.  FARC immediately executed Thomas Janis—a Vietnam Veteran, Bronze Star recipient, and former member of Delta Force.  They took the other survivors hostage, holding them in captivity for over five years during which time they were tortured, starved, and suffered through repeated mock executions. After they were rescued and returned to the United States, the survivors and Janis’s family successfully brought suit against the FARC under the Anti-Terrorism Act.  However, because blocked Kingpin Act assets are not covered under section 201 of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act, this group of victims has found it nearly impossible to satisfy their judgment. It makes little sense for the law to reach terrorist organizations like the FARC, but then prevent the victims from executing on FARC assets merely because the Executive Branch blocked these terrorist assets under the Kingpin Act.  The CAPTIVE Act fixes this problem. In addition, to make section 201 consistent with the civil liability provision in the Anti-Terrorism Act and the state sponsored terrorism exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, the CAPTIVE Act defines the term “person” as limited to U.S. nationals, members of the armed forces, and U.S. government employees and contractors.  This change will prevent foreign nationals, who Congress has specifically excluded from the ATA and state-sponsored terrorism Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act cases, from depleting the limited pool of blocked assets available to U.S. terrorism victims. I urge my colleagues to support this bi-partisan legislation to provide victims of narco-terrorism some measure of financial justice against the terrorist groups that have caused them harm. For more on today’s markup, click here. ###