US embassy cable - 04BOGOTA3628

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BOGOTA 003628 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/06/2015 
TAGS: ECON, KJUS, EPET, CO, PROL 
SUBJECT: GOC AIRS CONCERNS OVER CALIFORNIA LAWSUIT AGAINST 
OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM AND AIRSCAN FOR 1998 SANTO DOMINGO 
BOMBING 
 
REF: A. 2000 BOGOTA 09890 
     B. 2001 BOGOTA 00504 
     C. 02164 
     D. 05864 
     E. 11158 
     F. 2002 BOGOTA 01587 
     G. 02351 
 
Classified By: Ambassador William B. Wood, reason 1.4 (b). 
 
1.  (U)SUMMARY: The MFA has notified the Embassy of its 
concern over a pending lawsuit in Federal District Court in 
California concerning the controversial bombing of the 
Colombian village of Santo Domingo in 1998 (see reftels), 
which it fears may have negative repercussions on bilateral 
relations.  END SUMMARY. 
 
2.  (U) A Colombian filed the lawsuit on April 24, 2003 under 
the Alien Tort Claims Act.  It argues that two U.S. 
companies, Occidental Petroleum and Airscan Inc., share 
responsibility for the Colombian Air Force's bombing of the 
village of Santo Domingo, Arauca department, in December 
1998, in which 17 people were killed.  An Airscan crew in a 
small surveillance aircraft, operating on a contract with the 
Colombian Air Force funded with Occidental contributions, 
made targeting suggestions to Colombian Air Force helicopter 
crews during a military confrontation with the FARC near 
Santo Domingo.  At the time, the Airscan aircraft was 
conducting anti-guerrilla surveillance of the pipeline that 
carries oil from Occidental's wells in Arauca. 
 
3.  (SBU) MFA contacts told EconOff that such a legal process 
would likely require a weighing of fault.  The MFA 
specifically cited the specter of Colombian air force 
officers testifying under a U.S. subpoena as a concern.  A 
finding by a U.S. court that the GOC or military acted in bad 
faith in Colombian territory was also a concern. The Ministry 
learned that the presiding judge in the case had contacted 
the Department to inquire about the case's potential impact 
on bilateral relations, and the MFA transmitted its concerns 
to post via verbal and diplomatic note. 
 
4. (U) Post received verbal note VER-CEC No. 1278 of March 
12, 2004, which referred to the case and stated that "the 
responsibility of Colombian government for the events... 
remains under investigation by the Colombian judicial system 
under the principle of territoriality."  Post received 
Diplomatic Note VRE-CEC No. 12785 of March 12, 2004, in 
reference to the suit. Informal Embassy translation follows: 
 
The Ministry of Foreign Relations sends its sincere greetings 
to the Embassy of the United States of America and makes 
reference to verbal note VER-CEC No. 3866 of February 25, 
2004, which mentions a lawsuit filed before the District 
Court of California on April 24, 2003, against Occidental 
Petroleum Corporation and Airscan, Inc. for events which took 
place in the municipality of Santo Domingo, Arauca, Colombia, 
in December of 1998 (Case No. 03-CV-2860-WJR (JWJX)). 
 
The Ministry of Foreign Relations wishes to add that the 
Government of Colombia believes an eventual decision in the 
aforementioned case could have repercussions on its 
relationship with the United States. The Ministry of Foreign 
Relations takes this opportunity to assure the Honorable 
Embassy of the United States of America of its highest 
consideration. 
 
5. (C) Comment: The Santo Domingo case was not expeditiously 
investigated by military authorities and has been a thorn in 
bilateral relations for the past five years.  In October 
2002, Colombia's Office of the Inspector General 
("Procuraduria") ruled that two members of an Air Force 
helicopter crew acted negligently in dropping a cluster bomb 
on the town, and suspended them without pay for 90 days.  The 
entire three-member crew was recently indicted by the Office 
of the Prosecutor General ("Fiscalia") on charges of 
manslaughter. 
 
6. (C) There is little question that a finding for or against 
the GOC in this case would be seen by many in Colombia as 
interference in Colombia's internal affairs and would 
negatively impact our bilateral relations. As noted in 
paragraph 4, the GOC is prosecuting this case, albeit 
tardily.  The ruling of a U.S. court on guilt or innocence 
could become an issue in the Colombian legal proceeding 
and/or the public's view of the case. 
 
7.  (C)  The Embassy relies on the Department for the 
ultimate determination of the foreign policy implications of 
the case.  We can see adverse effects relating to legal 
issues, reciprocity, extraterritoriality, as well as 
bilateral relations.  Regarding the bilateral aspects, the 
Embassy works closely with Oxy and the GOC to preserve the 
pipeline, the safety of which is an explicit Administration 
and Congressional goal.  Contractors play a large role in 
Embassy programs, Oxy's protection, other U.S. companies' 
protection, and in some GOC security programs.  A ruling 
against Oxy and/or Airscan could complicate contracting, 
recruitment, and/or mission objectives.  We already have had 
several contractors killed in the context of our drug 
eradication programs, and three U.S. contractors remain 
hostages of the FARC terrorist group.  The eradication 
program never involves  contractors or U.S. personnel in a 
combat role.  But contractors are frequently part of mission 
planning, which involves coordination of Colombian military 
forces deployed to clear and temporarily hold regions 
targeted for anti-drug spraying.  An adverse ruling could 
complicate that relationship. End Comment. 
WOOD