-
Settlement reached, provides $15.5m to compensate the plaintiffs, establish a trust for the benefit of the Ogoni people, and cover some of the legal costs and fees associated with the case.
Royal Dutch Shell, plc (Shell) began oil production in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria in 1958 and has a long history of working closely with the Nigerian government to quell popular opposition to its presence in the region. At the request of Shell, and with Shell’s assistance and financing, Nigerian soldiers used deadly force and massive, brutal raids against the Ogoni people throughout the early 1990s to repress a growing movement against the oil company. The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), EarthRights International (ERI) and other human rights attorneys sued Shell for human rights violations against the Ogoni. The case will go to trial on May 26, 2009 in New York City.
Who are the Ogoni and why were they protesting?
Ogoni is the name of a region in the Niger Delta of southern Nigeria as well as the name of the ethnic group that lives in that region.
For the Ogoni and the people of Nigeria, oil and oil companies have brought poverty, environmental devastation and widespread, severe human rights abuses. Currently, almost 85 percent of oil revenues accrue to 1% of the population while, according to the African Development Bank, more than 70 percent of Nigerians live on less than US$1 per day. Ogoni is home to several environmental treasures, including the third-largest mangrove forest in the world and one of the largest surviving rainforests in Nigeria. Oil drilling by Shell and other oil companies has had a devastating impact on the region’s environment. Oil spills, gas flaring and deforestation have stripped the land of its environmental resources, destroying the subsistence farming- and fishing-based economy of the Ogoni.
What is MOSOP?
The Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP) is a human rights group founded in 1990 that is committed to using nonviolence to stop the repression and exploitation of the Ogoni and their resources by Shell and the Nigerian government. Upon its founding, MOSOP quickly garnered wide support and in 1993, at least half the total Ogoni population publicly supported the group. Ken Saro-Wiwa, founding member and president of MOSOP brought worldwide attention to the human rights violations committed against the Ogoni through international campaigning and his poignant writing. He was nominated for a Nobel Prize and awarded the Right Livelihood Award and the Goldman Prize for his environmental and human rights activism.
What happened to the plaintiffs in this case?
As the peaceful movement of the Ogoni grew, so did the Nigerian government’s and Shell’s brutal campaign against the Ogoni and MOSOP. In early 1993, Shell requested military support to build a pipeline through Ogoni. When plaintiff Karalolo Kogbara was crying over the resulting bulldozing of her crops, she was shot by Nigerian troops and lost an arm as a result. In a separate incident later that year, plaintiff Uebari N-nah was shot and killed by soldiers near a Shell flow station; the soldiers were requested by and later compensated by Shell. Plaintiff Owens Wiwa was detained repeatedly under false charges in 1994 to prevent him from protesting; he was beaten and threatened throughout his detentions. Michael Vizor, another plaintiff, was arrested for his political activities and upon his arrest his daughter was raped. When he would not confess to a false charge, he was beaten and tortured. Mr. Vizor’s son was also beaten and detained when he attempted to bring his father food.
In 1994, Ken Saro-Wiwa and other Ogoni leaders were prevented by the military from attending a gathering; at that very gathering, four Ogoni chiefs were killed. The military governor promptly announced that Ken Saro-Wiwa caused the deaths, and he and other leaders were taken into custody. Despite the lack of any connection between MOSOP and the deaths, the military used the deaths as a pretext to conduct raids on 60 towns in Ogoni and to detain and beat several hundred men suspected of involvement with MOSOP.
A three-man tribunal was created by the Nigerian government to try the Ogoni leaders —known as the “Ogoni Nine”– for the murders of the four chiefs. The tribunal denied the Ogoni Nine access to counsel, a fair trial, and the opportunity to appeal the decision. During the course of the trial they were tortured and mistreated, as were their relatives. The Ogoni Nine were convicted and were executed by hanging on November 10, 1995. Plaintiffs in this case include family members of Ken Saro-Wiwa, John Kpuinen, Dr. Barinem Kiobel, Saturday Doobee, Daniel Gbokoo and Felix Nuate.
“The military dictatorship holds down oil-producing areas such as Ogoni by military decrees and the threat or actual use of physical violence so that Shell can wage its ecological war without hindrance… This cozy, if criminal, relationship was perceived to be rudely disrupted by the non-violent struggle of the Ogoni people under MOSOP. The allies decided to bloody the Ogoni in order to stop their example from spreading through the oil-rich Niger Delta.”
– Ken Saro-Wiwa’s closing statement at the trial of the Ogoni 9
How was Shell involved?
Shell continued its close relationship with the Nigerian military regime during the early 1990s. The oil company requested an increase in security and provided monetary and logistical support to the Nigerian police. Shell frequently called upon the Nigerian police for “security operations” that often amounted to raids and terror campaigns against the Ogoni.
In response to growing Ogoni opposition, Shell and the Nigerian government coordinated a public relations campaign to discredit the movement, falsely attributing airplane hijackings, kidnapping and other acts of violence to Ken Saro-Wiwa and MOSOP.
Shell was involved in the development of the strategy that resulted in the unlawful execution of the Ogoni Nine. Shell told the Nigerian regime they needed to deal with Ken Saro-Wiwa and MOSOP. Shell monitored Ken Saro-Wiwa, and closely followed the tribunal and his detention. Prior to the trial, Shell Nigeria told its parent companies that Saro-Wiwa would be convicted and told witnesses that Saro-Wiwa was never going free. Shell held meetings with the Nigerian regime to discuss the tribunal, including with the military president Sani Abacha himself. Shell’s lawyer attended the trial, which, in Nigeria, is a privilege afforded only to interested parties. Brian Anderson, the Managing Director of Shell’s Nigerian subsidiary, met with Owens Wiwa, Saro-Wiwa’s brother and offered to trade Saro-Wiwa’s freedom for an end to the protests against the company. At least two witnesses who testified that Saro-Wiwa was involved in the murders of the Ogoni elders later recanted, stating that they had been bribed with money and offers of jobs with Shell to give false testimony – in the presence of Shell’s lawyer.
One month after the executions of the Ogoni Nine, Shell signed an agreement to invest $4 billion in a liquefied natural gas project in Nigeria.
What’s the status of the case against Shell?
Beginning in 1996, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), EarthRights International (ERI), Paul Hoffman of Schonbrun, DeSimone, Seplow, Harris & Hoffman and other human rights attorneys have brought a series of cases to hold Shell accountable for human rights violations in Nigeria, including summary execution, crimes against humanity, torture, inhuman treatment and arbitrary arrest and detention. The lawsuits are brought against Royal Dutch Shell and Brian Anderson, the head of its Nigerian operation.
The cases were brought under the Alien Tort Statute, a 1789 statute giving non-U.S. citizens the right to file suits in U.S. courts for international human rights violations, and the Torture Victim Protection Act, which allows individuals to seek damages in the U.S. for torture or extrajudicial killing, regardless of where the violations take place.
Shell has made many attempts to have these cases thrown out of court, which the plaintiffs have defeated. The trial has been postponed until further notice. The plaintiffs eagerly await their day in court to hold the defendants accountable for their injuries and the deaths of their loved ones.
What can you do?
The Center for Constitutional Rights and EarthRights International are mobilizing support for this landmark lawsuit against Shell. Specifically, you can:
1. Educate yourself and others about the case against Shell on this site.
2. Join CCR and ERI’s online action lists for updates (join at www.ccrjustice.org and www.earthrights.org).
3. Plan an educational event in your school, church, home or elsewhere in your community.
4. Write an Op-ed or Letter to the Editor regarding this landmark trial.
5. If you are in or near New York City, come out to the trial or volunteer.
Royal Dutch Shell, plc (Shell) began oil production in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria in 1958 and has a long history of working closely with the Nigerian government to quell popular opposition to its presence in the region. From 1990-1995, Nigerian soldiers, at Shell’s request and with Shell’s assistance and financing, used deadly force and conducted massive, brutal raids against the Ogoni people living in the Niger Delta to repress a growing movement in protest of Shell.
On November 10, 1995, nine Ogoni leaders (the “Ogoni Nine”) were executed by the Nigerian government after being falsely accused of murder and tried by a specially-created military tribunal. Those executed were internationally acclaimed environmental and human rights activist Ken Saro-Wiwa, prominent youth leader John Kpuinen, Dr. Barinem Kiobel, Saturday Doobee, Nordu Eawo, Daniel Gbokoo, Paul Levera, Felix Nuate and Baribor Bera. The detention, trial, and executions of the Ogoni Nine were the result of collusion between Shell and the military government to suppress opposition to Shell’s oil operations in Nigeria. The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), EarthRights International (ERI) and other human rights attorneys sued Shell for human rights violations against the Ogoni. The case will go to trial on May 26, 2009 in federal court in New York City.
Environmental devastation
The environmental devastation the oil company has caused to Ogoni lands in the Niger Delta was a primary reason for the Ogoni movement against Shell. In 2006, the Niger Delta Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Project (an independent team of scientists from Nigeria, the U.K. and the U.S.) characterized the Niger Delta as “one of the world’s most severely petroleum-impacted ecosystems.” Their report noted that the Delta is “one of the 10 most important wetlands and marine ecosystems in the world.
Millions of people depend upon the Delta’s natural resources for survival, including the poor in many other West African countries who rely on the migratory fish from the Delta.” Of the nearly 27 million people living in the Niger Delta, an estimated 75 percent rely on the environment for their livelihood, often farming and fishing for market or subsistence living. Shell’s operations in the Delta have led to the deep impoverishment of the Ogoni people and surrounding communities in the Delta.
Gas flaring
Natural gas is a byproduct of oil drilling. In much of the world, this gas is either used for energy or re-injected into the well. In Nigeria, Shell and other oil companies burn it in a process known as gas flaring. Nigeria flares more gas than any other country but Russia; at least 20 billion cubic meters of gas are burned per year, enough to meet the energy needs of Nigeria and neighboring countries. The gas burned in flares is not the clean natural gas used for heating or cooking; the gas is contaminated with toxic compounds and the flares send huge toxic plumes into the air. The chemicals, which end up in local waterways and fields through soot and precipitation, include carcinogens such as benzene, a deadly chemical that can cause convulsions, chromosomal damage and birth defects. Many of the flares are located adjacent to Niger Delta communities. According to the World Bank, gas flaring in Nigeria, which generates no useful energy, has contributed more greenhouse gases emissions than all other sources in sub-Saharan Africa combined.
The Nigerian government first moved to end gas flaring in 1969 when it ordered corporations to set up infrastructure to utilize associated gas. Shell and other oil companies ignored this order. The Nigerian government passed the Associated Gas Reinjection Act in 1979 that required oil companies to submit a detailed plan for utilizing all gas with an ultimate goal of ending flaring by 1984. Since then, Shell and other companies have continued flaring, choosing to pay a fine rather than clean up their operations. Shell was again ordered to stop flaring in 2005 when Nigeria’s Federal High Court declared gas flaring as a gross violation of the neighboring communities’ human rights. Shell and other oil companies continue to make excuses. As of December 2008, there were over 100 flare sites still operating in Nigeria.
“I and my colleagues are not the only ones on trial… Shell is here on trial and… there is no doubt in my mind that the ecological war that the company has waged in the Delta will be called to question…”
- Ken Saro-Wiwa’s closing statement at the trial of the Ogoni 9
Oil spills
An estimated 1.5 million tons of oil has spilled in the Niger Delta ecosystem over the past 50 years. This amount is equivalent to about one “Exxon Valdez” spill in the Niger Delta each year. Many of the spills have taken place in sensitive habitats for birds, fish and other wildlife, leading to further loss of biodiversity and, in turn, further impoverishment of local communities. The spills pollute local water sources that people depend on for drinking, cooking, bathing, laundering and fishing. They also release dangerous fumes into the air, sometimes rendering villages uninhabitable and causing serious illness for those who are unable to relocate. Many of the oil spills can be attributable to poorly maintained infrastructure such as aging pipelines.
Environmental groups in Nigeria and Europe have filed a lawsuit against Shell in the Netherlands for its history of oil spills and lack of cleanup in Nigeria. According to the Nigerian environmental group involved in the suit, cleanup of oil spills is often very superficial, sometimes involving little more than turning the land so that the oil remains just beneath the surface of the soil.
An estimated 1.5 million tons of oil has spilled in the Niger Delta ecosystem over the past 50 years. This amount is equivalent to about one “Exxon Valdez” spill in the Niger Delta each year.
A pattern of Greenwashing
Despite Shell’s dirty record in Nigeria and elsewhere, the company continues to try to falsely portray itself as “green” in its advertising, a practice known as “greenwashing.” The U.K.’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has found that Shell’s environmental claims violated advertising rules. In 2007, Friends of the Earth filed complaints about a Shell ad featuring an oil refinery emitting flowers that was accompanied by a claim that its carbon dioxide waste was used to grow flowers. The chairman of ASA called it “a ridiculous claim” and Shell was forced to pull the ad. In 2008, the ASA banned Shell’s ad that claimed it was building a “profitable and sustainable future” through its development of the largest oil refinery in the U.S. and its petroleum mining in a Canadian oil sands deposit.
The case against Shell
Beginning in 1996, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), EarthRights International (ERI), Paul Hoffman of Schonbrun, DeSimone, Seplow, Harris & Hoffman and other human rights attorneys have brought a series of cases to hold Shell accountable for human rights violations in Nigeria, including summary execution, crimes against humanity, torture, inhuman treatment and arbitrary arrest and detention. The lawsuits are brought against the Royal Dutch/Shell group and Brian Anderson, the head of its Nigerian operation.
The cases were brought under the Alien Tort Statute, a 1789 statute giving non-U.S. citizens the right to file suits in U.S. courts for international human rights violations, and the Torture Victim Protection Act, which allows individuals to seek damages in the U.S. for torture or extrajudicial killing, regardless of where the violations take place. Shell has made many attempts to have these cases thrown out of court, which the plaintiffs have defeated. The trial has been postponed until further notice. The plaintiffs eagerly await their day in court to hold the defendants accountable for their injuries and the deaths of loved ones.
