“The material to which I have referred in this judgment leaves it open for a jury to conclude that Mr Zardad was a de facto public official in an area which was totally controlled by HezbI-Islami and controlled by them with a degree of permanence. There is no evidence to show that at any material time the central government exercised any governmental function over the area controlled by Hezb-I-Islami. Such evidence as there is tends to show that Hezb-I-Islami had total control of the area in question. There is evidence that the Hezb-I-Islami faction exercised functions which could be functions of a state authority.” (at para 35) US authorities 66. The appellant relies on a number of US authorities concerning the Alien Tort Claims Act (“ATCA”). First, reliance is placed on certain passages in the judgment of Chief Judge Newman in Kadic v Karadzic (above). The plaintiffs sought remedies against Karadzic, the president of a three-man presidency of the self-proclaimed Bosnian-Serb Republic of Srpska in respect of alleged atrocities including torture committed in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The complaints alleged that Karadzic acted in an official capacity, either as titular head of Srpska or in collaboration with the government of the recognised nation of the former Yugoslavia. Subject matter jurisdiction was grounded, inter alia, in ATCA and the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991 (“TVPA”). A motion for dismissal succeeded in the District Court, inter alia, on the ground of lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court of Appeals considered that the requirement of ATCA that the tort be “committed in violation of the law of nations” was satisfied. With regard to torture, the Court of Appeals observed, at p 243: “However, torture and summary execution - when not perpetrated in the course of genocide or war crimes - are proscribed by international law only when committed by state officials or under color of law.” and then recited the definition in article 1, UNCAT. In a passage cited earlier in this judgment at para 56 the Court of Appeals held that the proscription of official torture applied without distinction to both recognised and non-recognised States and continued, at p 245: “Appellants’ allegations entitle them to prove that Karadzic’s regime satisfies the criteria for a state, for purposes of those international law violations requiring state action. Srpska is Page 32