BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:  May 5, 2015


                           ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY


                                  Mark Stone, Chair


          AB 15  
          (Holden) - As Amended March 26, 2015


                             As Proposed to be Amended 


          SUBJECT:  STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS: HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND HUMAN  
          RIGHTS VIOLATIONS


          KEY ISSUES:  


           1) SHOULD THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS BE EXTENDED FOR CIVIL  
             CLAIMS OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING?


           2) SHOULD A STAUTE BE ENACTED THAT WOULD ALLOW CIVIL ACTIONS  
             FOR TORT CLAIMS ARISING FROM EGREGIOUS HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES TO  
             BE FILED WITHIN TEN YEARS OF THOSE ACTIONS AND ALSO ALLOW THE  
             STATUTE TO APPLY RETROACTIVELY BY REVIVING ALL TORT CLAIMS  
             BASED UPON HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES THAT HAVE OCCURED WITHIN THE  
             PAST 115 YEARS IF THEY ARE COMMENCED BY JANUARY 1, 2018?


                                      SYNOPSIS


          This bill creates a ten-year statute of limitations for torts  








                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  2





          that constitute egregious human rights abuses and extends the  
          existing statute of limitations for human trafficking cases.   
          This bill seeks to address the problem that many human rights  
          abuse victims face after suffering egregious harms from the  
          actions of human rights abusers: bringing their claims to an  
          appropriate court in a timely manner.  Due to the nature of  
          human rights abuses, many of these egregious acts occur in  
          foreign countries and in jurisdictions with unfair or unstable  
          legal systems, where victims cannot attain any recourse for the  
          harms they have suffered.  In addition, the types of harms that  
          victims suffer as a result of torture, war crimes, genocide,  
          extrajudicial killing, and crimes against humanity generally  
          include physical and psychological harms that cannot be brought  
          to a court within a two-year statute of limitations period.   
          According to the author, it often takes many years for victims  
          to find their way out of perilous circumstances.  They typically  
          have very little money or resources and their cases can be  
          especially challenging and time consuming.  The result is that  
          most human rights claims go unheard, allowing even the most  
          reprehensible human rights abusers to escape justice simply  
          because time is on their side.  The same is true of human  
          trafficking victims.  This bill, as it is proposed to be  
          amended, seeks to extend the statute of limitations for human  
          rights abuses to allow victims of those crimes the time needed  
          to bring their claims to state court if they can establish that  
          their claims result from an egregious abuse of their fundamental  
          rights.  The bill also extends the statute of limitations for  
          cases of human trafficking from five years and eight years to  
          seven years and ten years.  The bill is supported by numerous  
          human rights organizations and advocates, including the  
          co-sponsors, EarthRights International and the International  
          Corporate Accountability Roundtable.  There is no known  
          opposition to this bill.


          SUMMARY:  Creates a ten-year statute of limitations for civil  
          action tort claims where a victim can establish that the conduct  
          constitutes a human rights violation and extends the statute of  
          limitations for civil actions for human trafficking violations.   








                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  3





          Specifically, this bill:


          1)Allows a victim up to ten years to bring a civil tort claim  
            for assault, battery or wrongful death, when a victim can  
            establish that the abuse also constitutes an act of torture,  
            genocide, a war crime, an attempted extrajudicial killing, or  
            a crime against humanity.


          2)Allows an award of reasonable attorney's fees and litigation  
            costs to a prevailing plaintiff. 


          3)Requires that a civil action be commenced within ten years for  
            the taking of property in violation of international law, or a  
            civil action seeking benefits under an insurance policy, where  
            the insurance claim arises out of any conduct that constitutes  
            a human rights violation. 


          4)Provides that the provisions be construed to apply  
            retroactively, so long as the conduct or action on which the  
            claim is based occurred within 115 years before January 1,  
            2016.


          5)Allows that all provisions of this section will apply to all  
            pending and statutorily barred actions commenced on or before  
            January 1, 2018, including any actions dismissed based on the  
            expiration of statues of limitations in effect before January  
            1, 2016, with limited exceptions.  


          6)Extends the applicable statutes of limitations for claims by  
            adults and minors: from within five years to within seven  
            years of the date on which the trafficking victim was freed  
            for an adult; and eight years to ten years after attaining  
            majority age for a minor.








                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  4







          7)Requires that its provisions are severable and if any  
            provisions or applications are held to be invalid, that  
            invalidity will affect no other provisions or applications  
            that are valid. 


          EXISTING LAW:  


          1)Requires that an action for assault, battery, or injury to, or  
            for the wrongful death of, an individual be commenced within  
            two years.  (Code of Civil Procedure Section 335.1.  All  
            further statutory references are to this code, unless  
            otherwise indicated.)
          2)Provides that any person who deprives or violates the personal  
            liberty of another intending to obtain forced labor or  
            services, is guilty of human trafficking and will be punished  
            by imprisonment in the state prison for 5, 8, or 12 years and  
            a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars  
            ($500,000).  (Penal Code Section 236.1.)


          3)Provides that a victim of human trafficking may bring a civil  
            action for actual damages, compensatory damages, punitive  
            damages, injunctive relief, or any other appropriate relief.   
            A prevailing plaintiff may also be awarded attorney's fees and  
            costs, and up to three times his or her actual damages or ten  
            thousand dollars ($10,000), whichever is greater.  Punitive  
            damages may also be awarded upon proof of the defendant's  
            malice, oppression, fraud, or duress in committing the act of  
            human trafficking.  An action will be commenced within five  
            years of the date on which the trafficking victim was freed or  
            if a minor, when the act of human trafficking occurred, within  
            eight years after attaining majority age.  (Civil Code Section  
            52.5(a) & (b).) 










                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  5





          4)Provides that every person who intends to cause cruel or  
            extreme pain and suffering for the purpose of revenge,  
            extortion, persuasion, or for any sadistic purpose, inflicts  
            great bodily injury upon the person of another is guilty of  
            torture.  The crime of torture requires no proof that the  
            victim suffered pain.  (Penal Code Section 206.)


          5)Provides that whoever, whether in time of peace or in time of  
            war and with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in  
            substantial part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious  
            group as such:


             a)   kills members of that group;
             b)   causes serious bodily injury to members of that group;
             c)   causes the permanent impairment of the mental faculties  
               of members of the group through drugs, torture, or similar  
               techniques;
             d)   subjects the group to conditions of life intended to  
               cause the physical destruction of the group in whole or in  
               part;
             e)   imposes measures intended to prevent births within the  
               group; or
             f)   transfers by force children of the group to another  
               group;

            is guilty of Genocide and will be punished as provided by law.  
             (18 U.S.C. Section 1091(a).)


          6)Provides that whoever, whether inside or outside the United  
            States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances  
            described in subdivision (b), will be fined under this title  
            or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if  
            death results to the victim, will also be subject to the  
            penalty of death.  The circumstances referred to in  
            subdivision (a) are that the person committing such war crime  
            or the victim of such war crime is a member of the Armed  








                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  6





            Forces of the United States or a national of the United  
            States.  (18 U.S.C. Section 2441(a) & (b).)
          7)Provides that an individual who, under authority of any  
            foreign nation subjects an individual to torture or to  
            extrajudicial killing will be liable for damages to that  
            individual or that individual's legal representative or to any  
            person who may be a claimant in a wrongful death action.   
            (Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991, Pub. L. No.102- 256,  
            Section 3(a), (106 Stat. 103 (1992).)



          8)Provides that the district courts of the federal courts of the  
            United States will have original jurisdiction of any civil  
            action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of  
            the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.  (Alien  
            Tort Claims Act/Alien Tort Statute, (1789) 28 U.S.C. Section  
            1350.)

          FISCAL EFFECT:  As currently in print this bill is keyed  
          non-fiscal.  


          COMMENTS:  This bill creates a new statute of limitations (SOL)  
          of ten years in Section 354.8, relating to tort claims by  
          victims of human rights violations.  It also extends the statute  
          of limitations in Civil Code Section 52.5, relating to civil  
          claims for human trafficking.  Specifically, this bill will  
          primarily do four things: (1) allow future victims of assault,  
          battery, and wrongful death who can establish that the conduct  
          also constitutes torture, genocide, a war crime, an attempted  
          extrajudicial killing, or a crime against humanity, ten years to  
          commence an action; (2) extend the statute of limitation to ten  
          years for a civil action seeking benefits under an insurance  
          policy where the insurance claim arises out of an action  
          involving a human rights abuse; (3) allow its provisions to be  
          applied retroactively to revive claims by victims of human  
          rights abuses that occurred up to 115 years prior to January 1,  
          2016, under specified circumstances, as long as the action is  








                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  7





          commenced prior to January 1, 2018; and (4) allow victims of  
          human trafficking to bring civil lawsuits within seven years of  
          the date on which the trafficking victim is freed, or if the  
          victim was a minor when the act of human trafficking occurred,  
          within ten years after the date when the plaintiff attains the  
          age of majority.


          Purpose.  This bill seeks to extend the statute of limitations  
          for filing a claim when human trafficking is involved, which  
          currently favors abusers over victims.  As importantly, it seeks  
          to address a vexing problem faced by victims of human rights  
          abuses who seek to recover for harms they may have suffered many  
          years ago but were physically, emotionally, psychologically, or  
          legally unable to bring their claims before an unbiased, safe or  
          reasonable court of law.  Because the very nature of human  
          rights abuses is the cause of these roadblocks, often victims  
          are traumatized and for long periods of time are unaware of  
          their legal options.  


          Federal law and courts have recognized the need for a longer  
          statute of limitations period in human rights cases.  The  
          statute of limitations period for human rights abuse claims in  
          federal court (torture, genocide, war crimes, and crimes against  
          humanity) has been ten years or more for many years.  The Alien  
          Tort Statute (ATS), also known as the Alien Tort Claims Act  
          (ATCA), contains no express statute of limitations period (See  
          28 U.S.C. Section 1350), but since 1980, courts have generally  
          applied the ten year statute of limitations period found in the  
          Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA), to claims brought under  
          the ATS/ATCA.  (Torture Victim Protection Act, § 2(a), note  
          following 28 U.S.C. § 1350.)  In Papa v. United States (2002)  
          281 F.3d 1004, 1013, the court rejected the lower court's  
          holding that California's shorter personal injury statute of  
          limitations should apply to claims brought under the ATS and  
          adopted the ten-year period provided by the TVPA instead.  










                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  8





          This bill would adopt the reasoning of the court in Papa that a  
          shorter statute of limitations is not sufficient for claims of  
          egregious human rights violations, like those to which the TVPA  
          ten-year statute of limitations applies.  This bill addresses  
          many of the same harms as those contained in the ATS/ATCA and  
          the TVPA and therefore extends the state statute of limitations  
          to ten years for victims who can establish that they have  
          suffered torts that constitute egregious human rights abuses.  


          In addition, the bill would extend the statute of limitations  
          for victims of human trafficking from five to seven years from  
          the time the victim is freed from the trafficking situation, or  
          if the victim is trafficked as a minor, from eight to ten years  
          from the date the minor attains the age of majority. 


          According to the author:



               When victims of human rights violations file in state  
               court, they must assert tort claims, such as wrongful  
               death, assault, or battery. In California, victims only  
               have two years before their claims expire. While there are  
               good reasons for statutes of limitation in the normal  
               context, victims of human rights abuses face unique  
               obstacles to bringing their suit. It often takes many years  
               for victims to find their way out of perilous  
               circumstances, they typically have very little money or  
               resources, and their cases can be especially challenging  
               and time-consuming. The result is that most human rights  
               claims go unheard - allowing even the most reprehensible  
               human rights abusers to escape justice simply because time  
               is on their side. 

               AB 15 seeks to re-balance the scales of human rights cases  
               and allow survivors ten years to bring their claims to  
               state court, if they can show their claims results from an  








                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  9





               egregious abuse of their fundamental rights.  


          The Legislature has the power to create, extend and change  
          statutes of limitations as it deems appropriate.  While the  
          Legislature is authorized to revive actions, the policy behind  
          the statutes of limitation provides that they "are designed to  
          promote justice by preventing surprises through the revival of  
          claims that have been allowed to slumber until evidence has been  
          lost, memories have faded, and witnesses have disappeared.  The  
          theory is that even if one has a just claim it is unjust not to  
          put the adversary on notice to defend within the period of  
          limitation and the right to be free of stale claims in time  
          comes to prevail over the right to prosecute them."  (3 Witkin,  
          California Procedure § 433, 4th Ed.) 


          Nonetheless, courts have acknowledged that "the need for repose  
          is not so overarching that the Legislature cannot by express  
          legislative provision allow certain actions to be brought at any  
          time, and it has occasionally done so."  (Duty v. Abex Corp.  
          (1989) 214 Cal.App.3rd 742, 749.)  The United States Supreme  
          Court has long held that:


          Statutes of limitation find their justification in necessity  
          and convenience rather than in logic.  They represent  
          expedients, rather than principles.  . . . They are by  
          definition arbitrary, and their operation does not  
          discriminate against the just and the unjust claim, or the  
          avoidable or unavoidable delay . . . .  Their shelter has  
          never been regarded as what now is called a "fundamental  
          right" . . . .  [T]he history of pleas of limitation shows  
          them to be good only by legislative grace and to be subject to  
          a relatively large degree of legislative control.  (Chase  
          Securities Corp. v. Donaldson (1945) 325 U.S. 304, 314.)


          Subsequently, in Liebig v. Superior Court (1989) 209 Cal.App.3d  








                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  10





          828 and Lent v. Doe (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 1177, the courts cited  
          Chase Securities and clearly affirmed the Legislature's power to  
          revive civil common-law causes of action, even if the actions  
          were otherwise barred by the running of the statute of  
          limitations.  In both cases, the court upheld against  
          constitutional attack the retroactive application of prior  
          legislation amending Section 340.1 to revive childhood abuse  
          actions that had lapsed or technically expired under prior law. 
          Similarly, in Hellinger v. Farmers Group, Inc. (2001) 91  
          Cal.App.4th 1049, the court upheld the Legislature's revival of  
          certain insurance claims arising out of the Northridge  
          Earthquake that were not brought previously and that otherwise  
          were time-barred, and allowed these claimants a one-year window  
          to file the revived action.  (SB 1899 (Burton) Chap. 1090,  
          Stats. 2000, enacting Section 340.9.)


          The impetus for this bill is that egregious human rights abuses  
          are instances, as mentioned by the court in Chase Securities,  
          when the "grace of the Legislature" should be extended due to  
          the seriousness of the acts and the severity of the harms that  
          these victims suffer.  The statute of limitations should be  
          extended long enough to allow for recourse for victims in these  
          types of cases.  


          For other civil causes of action, there is no statute of  
          limitations for an action to recover money or property deposited  
          with a bank (Section 348) or for an action for any bonds or  
          coupons issued by the State of California (Section 348.5).


          Extending the Statute of Limitations for Human Trafficking  
          Cases.  According to one co-sponsor, the International Corporate  
          Accountability Roundtable, the seriousness of human rights  
          violations and the remaining victims, should be held to the same  
          standard, and avenues for recourse and punishment should remain  
          available to the victims who have suffered.  California has  
          recognized the seriousness of the crime of human trafficking and  








                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  11





          has provided an extended statute for civil claims based upon the  
          nature of the crime involved.  Sometimes victims are held in  
          captivity for long periods of time and many victims suffer  
          physical, emotional and psychological damage that may last for  
          years.  Taking these factors into consideration, the Legislature  
          provided statutes of limitations of five and eight years for  
          victims of human trafficking.  To demonstrate the severity of  
          harms caused by human trafficking crimes, the Legislature allows  
          victims to recover numerous types of damages, i.e. actual,  
          constructive, punitive and up to three times the amount of  
          actual damages or ten thousand dollars ($10,000), whichever is  
          greater.  


          According the author, at its annual meeting in August 2013, the  
          America Bar Association urged all countries to eliminate  
          statutes of limitations on claims of genocide, war crimes, and  
          crimes against humanity.  While the ABA's resolution was focused  
          at the international level, California should heed the  
          recommendation to ensure that victims who must proceed with  
          their claims in state court are not barred from recovery because  
          the statute of limitations has run.  


          Reviving a Statute of Limitations Period for Civil Causes of  
          Action.  The court in Cruz v. United States (2005) 387 F. Supp.  
          1057, 1079-80, analyzed the ability of a foreign court to revive  
          a claim after the statute of limitations has tolled in the  
          country where the action occurred, the court held "It is not  
          exceptional . . . for civil statutes of limitations to be  
          revived, extended, or originally created that claims may be  
          brought long after they accrued."  California has recognized the  
          need to eliminate, extend, and/or revive the period for filing  
          civil causes of action in cases where the abuses suffered were  
          less than those suffered from human rights violations.   
          California recently extended the statute of limitations for  
          actions to recover art work from galleries or museums where the  
          art was unlawfully taken or stolen, and revived all such claims  
          over the past 100 years.  (Section 338(c)(3).)  The law survived  








                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  12





          a constitutional challenge on the basis of due process and  
          federal foreign affairs preemption.  The court upheld the  
          statute because it was not directed toward a specific event in  
          history, only for certain events that took place within a  
          certain period of time.  Thus, as long as the statute is written  
          to include all similarly situated individuals of similar crimes,  
          a statute should fend off claims of preemption and state court  
          jurisdiction.  Other instances where California courts have  
          allowed claims to be brought long after the offense occurred,  
          whether through tolling, revival, and/or extending the statute  
          of limitations include:


          1)Allowing a plaintiff to bring a civil action for damages  
            against a defendant, arising from a felony offense, within one  
            year after the felony conviction judgment, even though the  
            statute of limitations may have passed.  (Section 340.3(a).)


          2)Allowing the statute of limitations period to be tolled when a  
            person cannot commence an action, due to a state of war.   
            (Section 354.)


          3)Removing the statute of limitations for claims arising from  
            the Bracero labor importation program between January 1, 1942  
                                                                              and January 1, 1950.  (Section 354.7.)


          4)Extending the statute of limitations for victims of terrorists  
            acts, related to the events of September 11, 2001, including  
            for death or injury claims caused by the wrongful act or  
            neglect of another, regardless of whether the action lapsed or  
            was barred by time under another state law that predated the  
            statute being enacted.  (Section 340.10.)  


          There have been numerous attempts by the Legislature to extend,  
          eliminate or revive statute of limitations for civil actions to  








                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  13





          address other human rights abuses which have been overruled by  
          the courts.  In each of these efforts, the specific name of an  
          international event or a specified limited group was included,  
          so these efforts were determined to have been preempted by  
          federal law because federal courts have sole jurisdiction to  
          rule on claims related to international events because of the  
          federal government's foreign affairs powers.  These preempted  
          attempts include:


          1)Waiver of statute of limitations for insurance policy claims  
            for Armenian Genocide victims. (Section 354.4.)
          2)Waiver of statute of limitations for deposited and looted  
            assets of Armenian Genocide Victims.  (Section 354.45.)


          3)Waiver of stature of limitations for actions to recover on  
            claims by Holocaust victims for insurance policies that were  
            purchased in Europe.  (Section 354.5.)


          4)Waiver of statute of limitations for actions to recover  
            compensation for Second World War slave or forced labor  
            victims.  (Section 354.6.)


          Whether successful or overruled, these legislative attempts to  
          assist victims of human rights abuses obtain redress for the  
          damages inflicted by those acts demonstrate the Legislature's  
          commitment to seeing that statutes of limitations do not  
          unjustly bar the claims of victims of egregious human right  
          abuses.


          Preemption Issues for Human Rights Abuse claims.  The foregoing  
          examples clarify that federal preemption issues generally arise  
          where a state law is attempting to address an issue for which  
          the federal government's foreign affairs powers have already  
          been exercised to provide a remedy.  However, the litigation of  








                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  14





          claims arising from human rights violations may be addressed in  
          both state and federal courts.  While there are federal remedies  
          for some claims, victims may use both federal and state courts  
          to address their claims.  According to the bill's sponsors,  
          federal cases with ATS claims have routinely included parallel  
          state law claims.  For example, a complaint alleging summary  
          execution will generally include a state law claim for wrongful  
          death and a complaint alleging torture will generally include a  
          state law claim for assault and battery.  Claims brought under  
          the ATS must be filed in federal court, but those same claims  
          may be brought in state court as tort claims.  


          Access to California Courts Can Be Critical For Victims.   
          Bringing a lawsuit against perpetrators of human rights  
          violations can deliver justice, offer closure for victims, and  
          act as a powerful deterrent to future abuses.  When the  
          perpetrators of these egregious acts are located in California,  
          they should not be able to avoid claims by hiding behind the  
          fact that the acts took place outside of the state or the  
          country.  Many of the foreign locations where human rights  
          violations occur do not have adequate mechanisms in place to  
          allow victims the opportunity to have their abuses addressed.   
          Some of these foreign locations have weaker or corrupt legal  
          systems where victims do not stand a chance to attain redress  
          for their injuries.  There have even been instances where the  
          foreign government condones the behavior or violations, so  
          protection for victims are nonexistent.  This is why the need  
          for an extended statute of limitations for human rights abuses  
          is so great because an extended statute of limitations allows  
          victims time to escape oppressive environments, heal from their  
          wounds, find legal services and then bring their claims before a  
          fair and just court system.  Some of the most atrocious human  
          rights violations have occurred in situations where the statute  
          of limitations was too short to allow victims to recover.  Many  
          survivors suffer physical and psychological consequences,  
          post-traumatic stress disorders, depression, anxiety, grief and  
          other trauma and are not able to immediately bring their claims.  
           There is also the challenge of finding the right legal services  








                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  15





          organization to handle the claim.  According to those  
          organizations that fight for human rights victims and support  
          this measure, due to the sensitivity and often international  
          nature of human rights abuses, human rights claims require  
          extraordinary time and preparation and pose additional obstacles  
          for victims who need their wrongs to be heard the most.


          ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:  The co-sponsors of this bill, EarthRights  
          International and International Corporate Accountability  
          Roundtable write in support:


               There is unlikely to be a significant increase in the  
               number of claims brought under this provision.  [This bill]  
               does not create a new cause of action; it merely provides  
               for more time to bring an action that could already have  
               been heard.  But it does so in only limited  
               circumstances-where the harms arise to such egregious  
               levels as to constitute torture, war crimes, genocide, and  
               extra judicial killing.  While it is important to provide  
               remedies in the few cases where these egregious abuses  
               occur, they are not numerous.


               They myth that allowing human rights litigations "opens the  
               floodgates" to frivolous lawsuits is particularly misplaced  
               when considered alongside the significant barriers faced by  
               victims of human rights abuses when they try to seek  
               justice in court-whether or state.


          Author's Clarifying Amendments.  As the bill is currently in  
          print, a portion of the statute that describes civil actions for  
          human trafficking has been moved from Civil Code Section 52.5 to  
          the new Code of Civil Procedure that describes civil actions for  
          human rights abuses created by this bill, Section 354.8, in an  
          effort to demonstrate that human trafficking is as much a human  
          rights violation as the other acts enumerated in the new  








                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  16





          Section.  However, California has a very specific statute  
          regarding civil actions for human trafficking, which is not the  
          case in many states where the co-sponsors of the bill have  
          successfully fought to have human rights abuses addressed by  
          statute.  The author believes that the human trafficking statute  
          in Section 52.5 is optimum and only the current statutes of  
          limitations need to be extended.  The author therefore seeks to  
          amend Section 52.5 (c) to extend the applicable statutes of  
          limitations for claims by adults and minors: from within five  
          years to within seven years of the date on which the trafficking  
          victim was freed for an adult; and eight years to ten years  
          after attaining majority age for a minor.


          REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:




          Support


          International Corporate Accountability Roundtable (sponsor)


          Accountability Counsel


          American Jewish World Service


          Amnesty International USA


          Armenian National Committee of America


          Attorneys for the Rights of the Child









                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  17






          Bay Area Friends of Tibet


          Center for Justice and Accountability


          Center for Women Policy Studies


          Clergy and Laity United for Economic Justice


          Coalition to Abolish Slavery & Trafficking


          Consumer Attorneys of California


          EarthRights International


          Girls Against Porn and Human Trafficking


          Global Exchange


          GoodWeave International


          Government Accountability Project


          Hadsell, Stromer & Renick, LLP


          HealthWrights









                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  18






          Human Rights Center at UC Berkeley Law


          Institute for Global Labour and Human Rights


          Investors Against Genocide


          Jewish World Watch


          Latin America Working Group


          Los Angeles Peace Council


          National Center for Lesbian Rights


          National Council of Jewish Women-CA


          National Immigration Project of the NLG


          National Lawyers Guild-Los Angeles


          Network for Cultural Change


          Oxfam America


          Pesticide Action Network









                                                                      AB 15


                                                                    Page  19






          Runaway Girl, Inc.


          Survivors for Solutions




          Opposition


          None of file




          Analysis Prepared by:Khadijah Hargett / JUD. / (916) 319-2334