Terrorism is a global threat that has caused immense suffering and loss of life. The United States’ Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) is an important piece of legislation that allows victims of terrorism to hold foreign entities accountable for their actions. However, there is a need to evaluate the act from the perspective of Civil Procedure to determine its effectiveness in providing remedies for victims and addressing the challenges of holding foreign entities accountable. This paper’s analysis is based on the JASTA, for the evaluation of its position and application from a pre-litigation of Civil Procedure perspective. The two most significant parts of Civil Procedure in the segments of preliminary issues including Parties to the Suit and Cause of Action are examined to determine their susceptibility to being exploited in the process of executing the intention and purpose of the act concerning foreign entities, as highlighted in JASTA. Preliminary aspects must be considered before initiating a civil suit based on JASTA. This analysis is important in understanding the strength and weaknesses of JASTA in the civil suit and it involves a qualitative method of research. For the most part, the research methodology adopted will be pure legal research. Since the research will focus on JASTA, the regular method of analysis adopted is by referring to the sources and data discussing JASTA and procedural law. The findings of this work could be used to establish better laws from JASTA and provide the opportunity for the citizens who are victims to bring legal action against foreign states that are also responsible for their loss and suffering. Moreover, other countries faced with litigation initiated under JASTA could also benefit from the findings as they could be used in establishing better laws for countries that had also suffered greatly due to actions resulting from terrorism or the war against terrorism. Future research related to this topic is also recommended in this analysis.
