By Mira Oberman | AFP – Thu, Oct 20, 2011

Re-posted from AFP

A Nigerian tribal king filed a lawsuit in a US court seeking $1 billion from Royal Dutch Shell to compensate for decades of pollution that sickened his people and damaged their lands, his lawyer said.

The suit was filed a day after the US Supreme Court said it will consider a lawsuit accusing Shell of human rights abuses in Nigeria in a landmark case that could make companies liable for torture or genocide committed overseas.

That case will assess the potential liability of corporations — including multinationals with a US presence — under the Alien Tort Statute, a US law dating back to 1789 that scholars say was meant to assure foreign governments that the United States would help prevent breaches of international law.

The latest case alleges that Shell’s Nigerian operations are “well below internationally recognized standards to prevent and control pipeline oil spills” because the Anglo-Dutch company “has not employed the best available technology and practices that they use elsewhere in the world.”

It cited a recent United Nations report that found that contamination was widespread in the Nigerian Delta after 50 years of oil extraction left groundwater badly contaminated and the soil soaked with hydrocarbons to depths of five meters.

The suit was brought on behalf of the people of Ogale in the Eleme local government area, where the UN team found the most serious groundwater contamination and people drinking water laced with cancer-causing benzene at 900 times World Health Organization guidelines.

Scientists found an eight centimeter layer of refined oil floating on the groundwater that served the wells. The oil was linked to a spill that had occurred six years earlier and was not properly cleaned up.

Full article

photo credit: © Kadir van Lohuizen/NOOR

From the website of Amnesty International: http://blog.amnestyusa.org/business/shell-accused-over-misleading-figures-on-nigeria-oil-spills/

WASHINGTON — The US Supreme Court said Monday it will consider a lawsuit accusing Royal Dutch Shell of human rights abuses, a case that could make companies liable for torture or genocide committed overseas.

The plaintiffs — relatives of seven Nigerians killed by the country’s former military regime — sued the Anglo-Dutch energy giant and other firms for apparently enlisting the government to suppress resistance to oil exploration in the Niger Delta in the 1990s.

The case will assess the potential liability of corporations — including multinationals with a US presence — under the Alien Tort Statute, a US law dating back to 1789 which scholars say was meant to assure foreign governments that the United States would help prevent breaches of international law.

The 12 Nigerian plaintiffs charge Shell with “complicity in human rights violations committed against them in the Ogoni region of the Niger Delta in Nigeria between 1992 and 1995,” according to their complaint put before the court.

“These violations included torture, extra-judicial executions and crimes against humanity.”

It said Shell “aided and abetted the Nigerian government in committing human rights abuses,” and added: “For the victims of human rights violations such cases often provide the only opportunity to obtain any remedy for their suffering.”

Full article

image credit: Sweet Crude

Read the Reuters piece on the same subject

A United States Appeal Court on Friday refused to entertain a lawsuit that accused Royal Dutch Shell Plc of helping Nigerian authorities violently to suppress protests against oil exploration in the 1990s.

Specifically, the plaintiffs, families of seven Ogoni indigenes who were executed by the regime of the late General Sani Abacha, had accused the oil giant of violations related to the 1995 hangings of Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other protesters by Nigeria’s then-military government.

The Ogoni Nine

In the case – Kiobel et al v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co et al, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Nos. 06-4800 and 06-4876, the plaintiffs had sought their claims from the oil giant under a 1789 U.S. law known as the Alien Tort Statute.

The Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) was adopted in 1789 as part of the original Judiciary Act. It gave the federal courts jurisdiction to hear tort claims brought by foreigners who allege a violation of international law or a treaty to which the United States is a party. For almost two centuries, the statute was relatively dormant, supporting jurisdiction in only a handful of cases. However, it was later invoked in several cases involving torture, disappearances, or killings committed by non-Americans in foreign countries.

In a divided vote that prompted a bitter debate among some of its judges, the US appellate court affirmed a September ruling, which held that companies cannot be liable in U.S. courts for violations of international human rights law.

Reuters reported that the full 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York declined to hear the case by a 5-5 vote and instead left intact the original 2-1 panel ruling from September. Separately, the judges in that panel voted 2-1 not to rehear the case, the report said, added that the Friday ruling may not be the end of the lawsuit.

“The 2nd Circuit is alone among federal circuit courts in concluding that corporations cannot be responsible under U.S. law for human rights violations, ” the newswire quoted an international law professor at George Washington University, Ralph Steinhardt as saying. “This clears the way for the plaintiffs to seek review at the Supreme Court,” he added. The report added that a lawyer who has represented the families, Paul Hoffman, and Shell, did not immediately return requests for comment.

Shell had since denied allegations it is involved in human rights abuses.The 2nd Circuit ruling, the report said, applies in New York, Connecticut and Vermont. The Alien Tort Statute had underpinned other human rights cases. Reuters reported that in one, mining company Rio Tinto Plc was accused of forcing workers in Papua New Guinea to live in “slave like” conditions, and pushing the government to exact retribution after a mine was sabotaged.

The report cited another case where plaintiffs sought to hold Ford Motor Co. General Motors Co. and International Business Machines Corp liable for helping South African authorities when apartheid was in force more than two decades ago.

Friday’s split ruling showed major differences in the judges’ thinking. Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs, part of the September panel that ruled for Shell, wrote that the original ruling “has no great practical effect except for the considerable benefit of avoiding abuse of the courts to extort settlements.”

He chided what he called fears by dissenting Judge Pierre Leval that “slavers and pirates will now rush into corporate transactions,” resulting in “absolution to moral monsters. For the record: even moral monsters are humans, and I would happily see them hanged.” Leval countered that Jacobs’ opinion evinces an “intense, multi-faceted policy agenda” underlying an effort “to exempt corporations from the law of nations.”

The report noted that other judges who favored a rehearing by the entire court said the case presented “a significant issue,” and that September’s ruling conflicted with a 2008 ruling from the 11th Circuit appeals court, which sits in Atlanta.

See another article on this story:  Shell not liable for rights violations, UPI, published: Feb. 8, 2011 at 9:44 AM

NEW YORK (AFP) — A pre-trial conference scheduled in the potentially landmark lawsuit brought by Nigerian plaintiffs against oil giant Royal Dutch Shell has been delayed until Wednesday, court papers show. Read Full Article

Ogoni Activist Suanu Bere speaks at San Francisco Shell protest. credit: Jan Sturmann

However, protests and rallies that began on May 19 for Shell’s shareholder meeting in the Hague and in London continued last week to call on Shell to end gas flaring in the Niger Delta – a demand that Wiwa and the Ogoni’s were asking for over 15 years ago and people of the Delta are still asking today.

JINN led the Bay Area protest with a large banner that read:  “Shell:  Stop Gas Flaring in Nigeria” and signs that read:  “Remember Ken Saro-Wiwa  and Shell:  Stop  Toxic Flares in Nigeria”

San Francisco activists hold Shell protest on May 19 - the day of Shell's shareholder meeting. credit: Jan Sturmann

Bere Suanu, an Ogoni from Nigeria spoke about how the Nigerian military tortured him at a time when Shell was paying the Nigerian military to quell protests in Ogoniland.

Then, on May 26 – the day the trail was set to begin – activists in South Africa led by groundWork held a solidarity rally to bring attention to the trial in New York and Shell’s dirty operations in Durban, South Africa

Activists protesting in South Africa - Shell's Hell

According to the Shell Guilty campaign other protests took place around the globe including:

In Nigeria, a rally, a candlelit vigil at the graveside of Ken Saro-Wiwa, and a mock trial were held at Bane, in Saro-Wiwa’s community. The events ran into controversy after Rivers State Police arrested a number of women activists in an attempt to prevent them from attending demonstrations. Protestors demanded their release, and eventually forced the police to release the detainees and respect their right to protest.

A noon rally took place in New York at Foley Square in Manhattan, near the federal courthouse where the trial had been scheduled to open today. A hundred supporters came out ahead of the trial, unfurling a banner that read, ‘JUSTICE FOR THE OGONI’. Inspiring speakers stressed that Shell cannot escape justice for their role in human rights abuses in the 1990s, and put pressure on Shell to end the ongoing environmental and social devastation in Nigeria’s Niger Delta region. A group of Ogoni activists closed the event by singing the Ogoni solidarity anthem.  Go to ShellGuilty.com for more information.

The trial is expected to commence no earlier than June 2nd.

Lead Plaintiff Larry Bowoto with Attorney Bert Voorhees

“The economic disparity between plaintiffs, who are Nigerian villagers, and defendants, international oil companies, cannot be more stark,” Illston stated in her brief.

Illston compared Chevron’s 2008 earnings of $23.93 billion to the income of the villagers who were plaintiffs in the case citing their respective jobs at a gas station – (earning as much as $100 per month), operating a kerosene business ($867 per month), and odd jobs that involve cutting or selling firewood, fishing, and construction ($60 per month), among other low paying jobs, and stated that ten of the plaintiffs were minors who have no income.

The judge also cautioned against Chevron’s efforts to use the threat of a cost order such as the one requested by Chevron to deter future human rights litigation.

“At root, this case was an attempt by impoverished citizens of Nigeria to increase accountability for the activities of American companies in their country. Plaintiffs’ ultimate failure at trial does not detract from the fact that this was a civil rights case. The threat of deterring future litigants from prosecuting human rights claims in the future is especially present in a case such as this, where plaintiffs have paltry resources and defendants are large and powerful economic actors,” she continued in the brief.

The lawsuit was filed 10 years ago by Nigerian villagers who were peacefully protesting Chevron for the lack of jobs and environmental damage caused by the company in their communities. To quell the protest, Chevron paid for and transported the notoriously ruthless Nigerian military to remove the protesters from an oil platform where the villagers had staged a sit-in. As a result, two villagers were killed and several others were injured and tortured.

On December 1, 2008 a San Francisco jury found Chevron not liable. The plaintiffs have since appealed the decision in the 9^th circuit court of appeals.

Read the press release issued from the Plaintiffs counsel

This piece is reprinted from George Monbiot’s blog which appeared in the UK Guardian on April 10, 2009:

Multinationals accused of human rights abuses can no longer feel safe now that the oil giant is facing allegations of complicity in the execution of Nigerian activist Ken Saro-Wiwa

Could this be the beginning of the end of the age of impunity? Fourteen years after the judicial murder of the Nigerian novelist, environmentalist and human rights activist, Ken Saro-Wiwa, Shell is about to go on trial in New York, accused of complicity in his execution. This represents a remarkable moment in the struggle between people and multinational corporations. Regardless of the outcome of the trial, the fact that one of the planet’s most powerful companies finds itself in the dock changes everything. From now on, no transnational corporation involved in possible human rights abuses will feel completely safe.

Ken Saro-Wiwa, with eight other Ogoni rights activists, was executed by Nigeria’s military dictatorship in 1995. The men were a constant irritant to the generals, reminding the world that their lands in the Niger Delta were being wrecked and their health and livelihoods destroyed by gas flaring, oil spills and military attacks. Imprisonment and beatings failed to shut them up. So the government constructed false charges against these men, paid people to pose as witnesses and hanged them.

The plaintiffs claim that Shell, which still has major operations in the Niger Delta, paid Nigerian troops to terrorise the Ogoni and bribed two of the witnesses at the trial of the activists. Shell denies these charges and claims it intervened to try to stop the executions, but there is no doubt that it worked alongside one of Africa’s most brutal regimes. It also continues to pollute the Ogoni’s land today by burning off the gas from its oil wells and this was one of the subjects over which I clashed with Shell’s chief executive Jeroen van der Veer during our fierce exchange a little while ago.

Aside from the damage to the health of the Ogoni and their environment, gas flaring in Nigeria produces more carbon dioxide than all other activities in the whole of sub-Saharan Africa. One day, perhaps, that might be the subject of a lawsuit too.

What this trial shows is that people like the Ogoni, though they may be poor and though they may possess little power, can no longer be treated as disposable. For two centuries corporations and governments from the rich world have treated the people they encounter overseas as nothing but obstacles to the extraction of resources, who – when they could not be enslaved to assist that work – had to be disposed of as expeditiously as possible: by bribery, deception, terror or massacre. The richer the resources a land possesses, the more viciously its inhabitants are treated. Now these inconvenient people might begin to be seen as human beings.

On May 26, 2009 the Ogoni people of Nigeria will finally have their chance at justice when the families of famed activist Ken Saro-Wiwa and his colleagues, who were sentenced to death in a sham trial in Nigeria and hanged in 1995, will show that Royal Dutch Shell was at the very least complicit in their deaths and likely colluded with the Nigerian military to quell peaceful protests through murder, torture and destruction of villages. The plaintiffs’ attorneys will use a U.S. law on the books since 1789 called the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) that allows violations of international law to be tried in U.S. courts. Violations include extrajudicial execution; torture; crimes against humanity; cruel inhuman and degrading treatment; arbitrary arrest and detention; and violations of the rights to life, liberty, security of person, and freedom of expression and association.

Background

Almost 20 years ago in a minority region of the Niger Delta called Ogoniland, a peaceful movement emerged called the Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP) that began to successfully challenge the environmental and economic destruction caused by oil extraction. Royal Dutch Shell, who began extracting oil from the Niger Delta in1958, has since bulldozed subsistence farms to install oil drills, erected gas flares that cause acid rain and asthma, and laid oil pipelines literally through villages that dot the marshy creek lands of the Delta. Oil spills are a regular occurrence, and natural barriers between the fresh water creeks and the Gulf of Guinea have been breached throughout the Delta causing the fresh water to become brackish and as a result fresh water fish have died in droves. Water that was once used for drinking, for cooking, for cleaning clothes not to mention the basis for a fisher economy is now filled with a mixture of salt and oil rendering it useless in many regions and in fact dangerous to the thousands of villages who depend on the creeks for their survival.

During the early 1990’s MOSOP emerged to peacefully protest and call for land restoration, and the right to protect their environment from further destruction. MOSOP bravely challenged a dictatorial government and powerful oil companies that colluded with the Nigerian military. Saro-Wiwa, a well known Nigerian author, and TV producer began inspiring and leading the Ogoni people to stand up against Shell who had decimated their land for decades. In January of 1993 MOSOP staged one of the largest protests the Delta had ever seen. Over 300,000 Ogoni people marched on what came to be known as Ogoni Day showing the power of peaceful protest. As a result, the Nigerian military clamped down on the villagers with the support of Shell. Villages were burned and people shot. In 1994 during another Ogoni protest, four Ogoni elders were killed and Saro-Wiwa along with other MOSOP leaders were framed and held in prison for several months without charges. After several months of torture and detention, they were convicted of inciting the murders in an internationally condemned military tribunal and hanged on November 10, 1995.

A year later, the families of some of those who were killed and other victims of military abuse,  filed suit in U.S. court against Shell for their collusion in the death and torture  of Saro-Wiwa and others. Last fall after many years in litigation, Judge Kimba Wood in the U.S. Southern District court of New York announced that the case would be set for trial.

Since the death of the Ogoni 9, the situation in the Delta has only worsened. Several other peaceful protests were violently suppressed by the Nigerian military that received payments from Shell, Chevron and others. Additionally, the oil companies have been accused of using divide and conquer tactics to incite ethnic violence in the Delta. Today’s Delta has descended into armed violence. Some angry, mostly young, men who have only seen their livelihood worsen have turned to militant groups who have varied agendas and have in effect declared war with the Nigerian military and the oil companies. Meanwhile, the oil companies have not changed their practices or cleaned up the environmental damage they have caused. They still utilize the services of the military to act as their personal security and continue to avoid responsibility for their actions.

Click here for more information about the case, Shell and the life of Ken Saro Wiwa

COURT DENIES NEW TRIAL IN HUMAN RIGHTS SUIT AGAINST CHEVRON:

PLAINTIFFS TO APPEAL

March 4, 2009, San Francisco, CA – A U.S. federal court today denied a request by Nigerian victims of human rights abuses for a new trial against Chevron, which was found not liable for aiding and abetting those abuses after a jury trial last December.  The plaintiffs in Bowoto v. Chevron had argued that a new trial was warranted due to insufficient evidence for the defense verdict, erroneous legal rulings, and prejudicial misconduct by Chevron’s lawyers.  Judge Susan Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California disagreed, letting the verdict stand.

Plaintiffs’ counsel Theresa Traber, of Traber & Voorhees, stated, “We are disappointed in the ruling and we will appeal.  We continue to believe that there were errors in this trial, and these victims, who waited so long to have their day in court, will continue to pursue justice against Chevron.”

The court ruled that, even though much of the plaintiffs’ evidence was undisputed by any Chevron witnesses, the jury still could have disbelieved the plaintiffs’ witness, and found that no legal errors had been made during the trial.  The court did acknowledge that defense counsel used evidence improperly in his closing argument, but found that this misconduct was not so prejudicial as to warrant a new trial.

Bowoto v. Chevron Corp., No. 99-2506, charged the multinational oil company with complicity in gross human rights abuses arising from its use of the notorious Nigerian military and “kill and go” mobile police against those who protested environmental and economic harms caused by oil production in the Niger Delta.  The lawsuit is based on a 1998 incident in which Nigerian soldiers shot nonviolent protesters at Chevron’s Parabe offshore platform. The soldiers were admittedly paid by Chevron, ferried to the platform in Chevron helicopters and supervised by Chevron personnel. Two demonstrators were killed, others were shot and wounded, and several others were detained and tortured after the attack.

In addition to Traber & Voorhees, the plaintiffs are represented by EarthRights International, the private law firms of Hadsell Stormer Keeny Richardson & Renick and Siegel & Yee; and Cindy Cohn and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Robert Newman, Paul Hoffman, Richard Wiebe, Anthony DiCaprio, Michael Sorgen, and Judith Chomsky and the Center for Constitutional Rights.

For more information about the case, please visit www.earthrights.org.

Bowoto Case Showed There is a Legal Foundation For Corporations to be Held Liable in US Courts for Human Rights Abuses Committed Overseas

SAN FRANCISCOO Monday, December 1, a US district court jury acquitted San Ramon-based Chevron Corporation of complicity in human rights abuses. The case of Bowoto v. Chevron, which pitted Chevron and its relationship with the notoriously violent Nigerian police and military against Nigerians who peacefully protested the destruction of their environment and livelihood by Chevron’s oil production activities. Despite the verdict, corporate accountability advocates vowed to continue the struggle to bring Chevron and other corporations to justice for human rights violations they commit overseas.

“The fact that Bowoto v. Chevron made it this far in the process is a victory in and of itself, because it means that we have demonstrated that there is a clear pathway in the US court system for holding corporations accountable to the rule of law. This is the first time a case against a company for aiding and abetting human rights violations overseas has even gone before a jury. And although we are disappointed that the plaintiffs did not prevail in this case, we are heartened by the fact that we are now entering a new era in the United States and abroad where people have seen the results of unregulated corporate excess (in the financial system and elsewhere) and want corporations to be reined in to prevent serious harms. Bringing this case to trial in the United States is a step on the path to corporate accountability. In the near future, corporations will no longer have a free ride to do operate with impunity in ways that are destructive and dehumanizing,” said Laura Livoti, founder of the group Justice in Nigeria Now.

“Regardless of the verdict, the Bowoto v. Chevron case represented a watershed in terms of corporate accountability. The details of the Nigerian case – of human rights abuses in the global operations of the oil and gas industry – can be replicated many times over in different industrial sectors in different parts of the world. Now communities around the world know that they have recourse to legal mechanisms to bring corporations that violate their human rights to justice,” said Michael Watts, a professor at UC Berkeley and author of numerous books on the Niger Delta, including Curse of the Black Gold: 50 Years of Oil in the Niger Delta.

Bowoto v. Chevron concerned a 1998 incident in which Nigerian soldiers and police shot unarmed residents of the Ilaje community in southern Nigeria who were staging a nonviolent sit-in at Chevron’s offshore Parabe Platform to demand that Chevron change its practices. Chevron’s operations have devastated local communities’ access to food and clean water. The protester also demanded that the company support the local economy by hiring local residents. In response to the peaceful protest, Chevron summoned the notoriously violent Nigerian police and military and transported them in Chevron helicopters to the oil platform. Under the supervision of Chevron personnel, the Nigerian military and police killed two protesters and permanently injured others. Several protesters were taken to Nigerian jails, where they were tortured.

The jury was charged with deciding whether Chevron aided and abetted the Nigerian military, in violation of international law. The legal basis for the case was the Alien Tort Statute, a law that enables foreign victims of human rights violations by corporations to hold a US corporation accountable in US court for violations of the law of nations overseas. The Alien Tort Statute has been used in cases charging Unocal with violating the human rights of Burmese villagers during the construction of an oil pipeline in Burma, and charging Yahoo with giving the Chinese government information that allowed it to identify and arrest a Chinese dissident. Both of those cases ended in out-of-court settlements. Bowoto v. Chevron would have been the first time a U.S. corporation has been held liable by a jury in U.S. courts for aiding and abetting human rights abuses committed overseas.

The jury will need to find liability on the part of Chevron for the killing, injury and torture of the Nigerian plaintiffs for the following violations under the Alien Tort Statute:

• Torture
• Wrongful Death
• Cruel, inhumane, degrading treatment
• Assault
• Battery
• Negligence

Be sure to read the Bowoto v Chevron Blog for a full account of the court proceedings since the trial opened on October 27.