Documents seen by The IoS support claims energy giant enlisted help of country’s military government

By Andy Rowell, The Independent on Sunday
Sunday, 14 June 2009

Serious questions over Shell Oil’s alleged involvement in human rights abuses in Nigeria emerged last night after confidential internal documents and court statements revealed how the energy giant enlisted the help of the country’s brutal former military government to deal with protesters.

The documents, seen by the IoS, support allegations that Shell helped to provide Nigerian police and military with logistical support, and aided security sweeps of the oil-rich Niger Delta. Earlier this month Shell agreed to pay $15.5m (£9.6m) in a “humanitarian settlement” on the eve of a highly embarrassing US lawsuit.

One of the allegations was that Shell was complicit in the regime’s execution of civilians. The Anglo-Dutch firm denies any wrongdoing and said it settled to help “reconciliation”. But the documents contain detailed allegations of the extent to which Shell is said to have co-opted the Nigerian military to protect its interests.

The legal settlement came 14 years after the Abacha government hanged nine protesters, including Ken Saro-Wiwa, the environmentalist and writer, after a charade of a trial in 1995. Saro-Wiwa led a successful campaign against Shell in his Niger Delta homeland, even forcing the company to quit Ogoniland in 1993. The campaign focused on environmental devastation and demanded a greater share of oil revenues for his community. As the campaign grew, the Ogoni suffered a brutal backlash that left an estimated 2,000 dead and 30,000 homeless. The documents claim there was systematic collusion with the military and Mobile Police Force (MPF), known as the “Kill and Go”. Shell has always denied this but is believed to have settled in court as a result of the embarrassing contents.

In one document written in May 1993, the oil company wrote to the local governor asking for the “usual assistance” as the Ogoni expanded their campaign. There was a stand-off between the Ogoni and the US contractor Willbros, which was laying a pipeline. Nigerian military were called in, resulting in at least one death.

Days later, Shell met the director general of the state security services to “reiterate our request for support from the army and police”. In a confidential note Shell suggested: “We will have to encourage follow-through into real action preferably on an industry rather than just Shell basis”. The Nigerian regime responded by sending in the Internal Security Task Force, a military unit led by Colonel Paul Okuntimo, a brutal soldier, widely condemned by human rights groups, whose men allegedly raped pregnant women and girls and who tortured at will. Okuntimo boasted of knowing more than 200 ways to kill a person.

In October 1993, Okuntimo was sent into Ogoni with Shell personnel to inspect equipment. The stand-off that followed left at least one Ogoni protester dead. A hand-written Shell note talked of “entertaining 26 armed forces personnel for lunch” and preparing “normal special duty allowances” for the soldiers. Shell is also accused of involvement with the MPF, which worked with Okuntimo. One witness, Eebu Jackson Nwiyon, claimed they were paid and fed by Shell. Nwiyon also recalls being told by Okuntimo to “leave nobody untouched”. When asked what was meant by this, Nwiyon replied: “He meant shoot, kill.”

One former Shell employee, Kloppenburg Ruud, head of group security in the mid-1990s told lawyers that the deployment of Nigerian security forces at two Shell jetties in the delta was at the company’s request.

Since the settlement, Malcolm Brinded, Shell’s executive director, said: “We wanted to prove our innocence and we were ready to go to court. We knew the charges against us were not true.” He added: “I am aware that the settlement may – to some – suggest Shell is guilty and trying to escape justice,” but said this was not the case.

Shell ‘lobbied’ Guardian to soften its Nigeria stance

Confidential internal documents reveal how the oil giant lobbied The Guardian newspaper to reduce its support for Saro-Wiwa.

In an assessment of the political and security situation, a Shell executive noted: “The Guardian newspaper ran a much more balanced article on the Ogoni issue, with their position moving from apparent support for Saro-Wiwa to the middle ground. There is a slight possibility that this may have been influenced by the meeting we had with The Guardian’s editor the week before.”

Peter Preston, The Guardian’s editor from 1975 to 1995, said yesterday that he could not remember a meeting with Shell. “I have absolutely no memory of one. And Nigerian politics was never one of my interests.”

Oil giant Shell agrees a £10m “humanitarian” settlement, 14 years after protesters including author Ken Saro-Wiwa were executed by Nigeria’s former military regime. Sue Turton reports.

The oil giant Shell has always denied claims of being complicit in grave human rights abuses in Nigeria.

But Channel 4 News has obtained copies of court documents showing how the Anglo-Dutch company enlisted the help of Nigeria’s former military regime to deal with protesters.

By JAD MOUAWAD, The New York Times
June 9, 2009

Royal Dutch Shell, the big oil company, agreed to pay $15.5 million to settle a case accusing it of taking part in human rights abuses in the Niger Delta in the early 1990s, a striking sum given that the company has denied any wrongdoing.

The settlement, announced late Monday, came days before the start of a trial in New York that was expected to reveal extensive details of Shell’s activities in the Niger Delta.

The announcement caps a protracted legal battle that began shortly after the death of the Nigerian activist Ken Saro-Wiwa in 1995. Mr. Saro-Wiwa, Shell’s most prominent critic at the time in Nigeria, was hanged by that country’s military regime after protesting the company’s environmental practices in the oil-rich delta, especially in his native Ogoni region.

Shell continued Monday to deny any role in the death. It called the settlement a “humanitarian gesture” meant to compensate the plaintiffs, including Mr. Saro-Wiwa’s family, for their loss and to cover a portion of their legal fees and costs. Some of the money will go into an educational and social trust fund intended to benefit the Ogoni people.

In a statement, the company said the agreement “will provide funding for the trust and a compassionate payment to the plaintiffs and the estates they represent in recognition of the tragic turn of events in Ogoni land, even though Shell had no part in the violence that took place.”

“Shell has always maintained the allegations were false,” Malcolm Brinded, the company’s executive director for exploration and production, said in the statement.

Shell said that the trust being set up is in addition to the contribution to community development made by Shell-run companies in the Niger Delta. According to Shell, these payments totaled more than $240 million in 2008.

Ten plaintiffs, including the son of Mr. Saro-Wiwa and his brother, accused Shell of seeking the aid of the former Nigerian regime to silence the critic, as well as paying soldiers who had carried out human rights abuses in the impoverished region where it operated.

Mr. Saro-Wiwa, who founded the Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni Peoples in 1990, was one of Shell’s most forceful critics because of the damage done to the delta communities, including gas flaring and the destruction of mangroves to make way for pipelines.

The Niger Delta continues to be marred by violence and ethnic strife. Much of Shell’s production in the delta is still the target of militants seeking a larger share of the country’s oil wealth.

The prominent case involving Shell was the latest to challenge the behavior of some of the world’s biggest oil companies in developing countries. Companies are increasingly being called to account for their environmental record as well as any collusion with repressive governments.

The suit was brought under the Alien Tort Claims Act, an arcane United States law that has been increasingly used for lawsuits asserting human rights violations occurring overseas. The Supreme Court ruled 6 to 3 in 2004 that foreigners could bring cases before American courts in some limited circumstances, like crimes against humanity or torture, and the courts have decided that a wide variety of defendants, including multinational corporations, can be called to account. Royal Dutch Shell is headquartered in the Netherlands.

So far, no corporation has been found guilty under the alien tort law. Last year, a jury cleared Chevron of wrongdoing after it was accused of complicity in the shooting of Nigerian villagers who occupied an offshore oil barge in 1998 to protest its environmental record and hiring practices.

In 2004, Unocal, a California oil company that was accused of using slave labor in the construction of a pipeline in Burma during the 1990s, agreed to compensate villagers there. The terms of that settlement were not made public.

For the Nigerian plaintiffs and their lawyers, Shell’s settlement, including publication of the sum involved, is a significant victory. Companies commonly demand that details of such settlements be kept secret, for fear of setting precedents.

“It has been a really long struggle,” said Jennie Greene, a lawyer with the Center for Constitutional Rights, which brought the case on behalf of the plaintiffs. “But this shows that corporations cannot act without accountability.”

Ken Saro-Wiwa Jr., the son of the slain rights advocate, was also satisfied with the outcome.

“We hope this sends a signal,” he said in a telephone interview from London. “It’s a relief also that we’ve been able to draw a line over the past. And from a legal perspective, this historic case means that corporations will have to be much more careful.”

Ed Pilkington in New York
The Guardian UK, Monday 8 June 2009

The oil giant Shell has agreed to pay $15.5m (£9.7m) in settlement of a legal action in which it was accused of having collaborated in the execution of the writer Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other leaders of the Ogoni tribe of southern Nigeria.

The settlement is one of the largest payouts agreed by a multinational corporation charged with human rights violations. Shell and its Nigerian subsidiary SPDC have not conceded to or admitted any of the allegations, pleading innocent to all the civil charges.

But the scale of the payment is being seen by experts in human rights law as a step towards international businesses being made accountable for their environmental and social actions.

In the past, it has been notoriously difficult to bring and sustain legal actions involving powerful corporations.

The settlement follows three weeks of intensive negotiation between the plaintiffs, who largely consisted of relatives of the executed Ogoni nine, and Shell. “We spent a lot of time trying to put together something that would be acceptable to both sides, and our people are very pleased with the result,” said Anthony DiCaprio, the lead lawyer for the Ogoni side working with the New York-based Centre for Constitutional Rights.

The deal marks the end of a 14-year personal journey for Ken Saro-Wiwa Jr, son of the executed leader. Among the other plaintiffs was Karalolo Kogbara who lost an arm after she was shot by Nigerian troops when she protested against the bulldozing of her village in 1993 to make way for a Shell oil pipeline.

Though the settlement cannot compensate for individual losses of loved ones or livelihoods, the plaintiffs will now be able to pay all legal fees and costs. A sum of $5m will be used to set up a trust called Kiisi - meaning “progress” in the Ogoni Gokana language - to support educational, community and other initiatives in the Niger delta.

Shell has consistently denied any involvement in the decision of the Nigerian regime to execute the Ogoni nine. It argues it tried to plead with the government to grant clemency to the prisoners but to its great sadness the appeal went unheard.

Supporters of the legal action said the fact that Shell had walked away from the trial suggested the company had been anxious about the evidence that would have been presented to the jury had it gone ahead.

Stephen Kretzmann, director of Oil Change International, said Shell “knew the case was overwhelming against them, so they bought their way out of a trial”.

Among the documents that were lodged with the New York court was a 1994 letter from Shell in which it agreed to pay a unit of the Nigerian army for services rendered. The unit had retrieved one of the company’s fire trucks from the village of Korokoro - an action that according to reports at the time left one Ogoni man dead and two wounded. Shell wrote that it was making the payment “as a show of gratitude and motivation for a sustained favourable disposition in future assignments”.

Shell’s involvement in the oil-rich Niger delta extends back to 1958. It remains the largest oil business in Nigeria, owning some 90 oil fields across the country.

The Ogoni people began non-violent agitation against Shell from the early 1990s, under the leadership of Ken Saro-Wiwa and his organisation Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People. Mosop has long complained that the oil giant was responsible for devastating the ecosystem of the delta upon which Ogoni farmers and fishermen depend, through a combination of oil spills, forest clearance for pipelines and the burning of gas from oil-wells known as gas flares.

Human rights experts believe the settlement will have a substantial impact on other multinational corporations. DiCaprio predicted it would “encourage companies to seriously consider the social and environmental impact their operations may have on a community or face the possibility of a suit”.

By CHRIS KAHN, The Associated Press
Monday, June 8, 2009 6:30 PM

NEW YORK — Royal Dutch Shell agreed to a $15.5 million settlement Monday to end a lawsuit alleging that the oil giant was complicit in the executions of activist Ken Saro-Wiwa and other civilians by Nigeria’s former military regime.

Shell, which continues to operate in Nigeria, said it agreed to settle the lawsuit in hopes aiding the “process of reconciliation.” But Europe’s largest oil company acknowledged no wrongdoing in the 1995 hanging deaths of six people, including poet Saro-Wiwa.

“This gesture also acknowledges that, even though Shell had no part in the violence that took place, the plaintiffs and others have suffered,” Malcolm Brinded, Shell’s Executive Director Exploration & Production, said in a statement.

The lawsuit in U.S. District Court in New York claimed Shell colluded with the country’s former military government to silence environmental and human rights activists in the country’s Ogoni region. The oil-rich district sits in the southern part of Nigeria and covers about 400 square miles, roughly the size of San Antonio. Shell started operating there in 1958.

The primary complaint against Shell focused on activities by the company’s subsidiary, Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited.

The lawsuit said in the 1990s, Shell officials helped furnish Nigerian police with weapons, participated in security sweeps of the area, and hired government troops that shot at villagers protesting the construction of a pipeline.

The plaintiffs also say Shell helped the government capture and hang Saro-Wiwa, John Kpuinen, Saturday Doobee, Felix Nuate, Daniel Gbokoo and Dr. Barinem Kiobel on Nov. 10, 1995.

Saro-Wiwa, leader of the Movement for the Survival of Ogoni People, led rallies against Shell. He blamed the company for myriad oil spills and gas fires in the Ogoni region.

“I think he would be happy with this,” Saro-Wiwa’s 40-year-old son, Ken Saro-Wiwa Jr., said in a telephone interview from London. Though Shell denied any wrongdoing, “the fact that they would have to settle is a victory for us.”

Besides compensating the families, the money from Shell will pay for years of legal fees. And a large chunk of the settlement - roughly half - will create a trust that will invest in social programs in the country including educational endowments, agricultural development, support for small enterprise and adult literacy programs.

Altogether, the settlement will have a negligible affect on Shell’s shareholders, amounting to less than one-hundredth of a percent of Shell’s annual revenue. It’s comparable to the annual cost of renting one of the supertankers that Shell uses to deliver Nigerian oil to other countries.

“Is it enough to bring back the lives of our clients? Obviously not,” said Jenny Green, a lawyer for the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York who helped file the lawsuit in 1996.

But Green said it will send a message to Shell and other multinationals that operate in developing countries.

“You can’t commit human rights violations as a part of doing business,” she said. “A corporation can’t act with impunity. And we think there is accountability in this settlement.”

Ralph Steinhardt, a George Washington professor of international law, said he doesn’t think Shell got off easy with the settlement.

“It’s not the size of the company that’s the right measure here,” Steinhardt said. “At the end of the day, it’s to get some acknowledgment of the plaintiffs and their suffering and the role of the company.”

The Shell settlement ends one of several legal battles brought against energy companies by indigenous peoples where they operate.

Villagers in Indonesia are suing Exxon Mobil, claiming it employed guards who kidnapped, tortured and murdered civilians. Chevron awaits a potential $27 billion judgment in Ecuador stemming from a dispute over the role of Texaco, which Chevron bought in 2001, in environmental damages in the Amazon rain forest.

The case against Shell was based on Alien Tort Claims Act. The 18th-century law was originally meant to combat piracy and allows foreigners to pursue corporations in U.S. courts.

At least one additional lawsuit alleging human rights abuses by Shell in Nigeria is pending in U.S. District Court in New York.

Fourteen years after the Nigerian activists were hanged, Saro-Wiwa said he thinks Shell has started to acknowledge that it needs a “social license” to operate in a foreign countries. For example, the company has agreed to pay for a study of environmental damage that drilling has caused the Ogoni region.

“They have a long way to go,” he said. “But at least they realize some of their actions can come back to haunt them as we saw in New York.”

© 2009 The Associated Press

Wed Jun 3, 2009 12:38pm EDT

NEW YORK, June 3 (Reuters) - A U.S. judge canceled a hearing on Wednesday in the civil trial of Royal Dutch Shell PLC over the alleged involvement of the giant oil producer in the executions of protesters in Nigeria in the 1990s.

Presiding Judge Kimba Wood in U.S. District Court in Manhattan had already postponed the trial indefinitely. In a court order on Wednesday, she said the hearing in the case had also been postponed indefinitely. No reason was given, and no new dates were announced.

Shell is accused of human rights abuses, including violations connected with the 1995 hangings of prominent activist Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other protesters by Nigeria’s then-military government.

Shell has denied allegations of involvement.

The case was brought by relatives of Saro-Wiwa and others under a 1789 U.S. statute, the Alien Tort Claims Act, allowing noncitizens to file cases in U.S. courts for human rights abuses occurring overseas.

Earlier on Wednesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit in New York reinstated a related case against Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Ltd.

The cases are Wiwa et al v Royal Dutch Shell et al 96-08386, Wiwa et al v Anderson et al 01-01909 and Wiwa v Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Manhattan). (Reporting by Christine Kearney and Grant McCool, editing by Matthew Lewis)

An excellent report from Al Jazeera’s Kristen Saloomey, including footage from the ShellGuilty courthouse rally in New York on May 27th and an appearance by Remember Saro-Wiwa’s Ben Amunwa, one of the ShellGuilty Campaign Coordinators:

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.

The conference was announced last week following the decision by the presiding judge in the US Southern District Court in New York to delay indefinitely the actual trial. It had been planned for Monday, but now has been pushed back two days.

“The court hereby postpones the conference scheduled … until Wednesday,” Judge Kimba Wood said in an order dated Friday. She gave no explanation.

Jury selection in the trial itself had been meant to start April 27, but was put off the day before. No new date was set.

The judge then scheduled the pre-trial conference, which has now also been delayed.

A spokesman for the Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents the Nigerian plaintiffs, told AFP there was no further indication about the future of the trial. The spokesman would not comment on the reasons for the delay.

Shell is accused of complicity in the 1995 hanging of Saro-Wiwa, a renowned writer and activist, and other leaders of a movement protesting alleged environmental destruction and other abuses by Shell against the Ogoni people in the Niger Delta.

The corporation, which has a powerful presence in Nigeria, is also accused of complicity in the torture, detention and exile of Saro-Wiwa’s brother, Owens Wiwa, and other violent attacks on dissidents in the country.

Shell denies all the charges.

The civil suit was brought by victims of Nigeria’s former military government, including Saro-Wiwa’s son.

They sued under the Alien Tort Claims Act, a little-used US law that dates to 1789 and which is being increasingly dusted off as a way to target human rights violations in foreign countries.

The act requires companies with a substantial presence in the United States to obey US law everywhere in the world.

Friday, May 29, 2009

NEW YORK, May 29 (Reuters) - A civil trial has been further delayed over the alleged involvement of giant oil producer Royal Dutch Shell Plc in the executions of protesters in Nigeria in the 1990s, a U.S. judge’s order said on Friday.

A conference in the case in Manhattan federal court was postponed to Wednesday from Monday, the order said.

No reason was given for the indefinite delay of the trial in the order, signed by U.S. District Judge Kimba Wood. Jury selection had been previously scheduled for next week.

Shell is accused of human rights abuses, including violations connected with the 1995 hangings of prominent activist Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other protesters by Nigeria’s then-military government.

Shell has denied allegations of involvement.

The case was brought by relatives of Saro-Wiwa and others under a 1789 U.S. statute, the Alien Tort Claims Act, allowing noncitizens to file cases in U.S. courts for human rights abuses occurring overseas.

The case is Wiwa, et al v Anderson, et al 01-01909 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Manhattan).

(Reporting by Grant McCool; Editing by Tim Dobbyn)

Friday, May 29, 2009

NEW YORK, May 29 (Reuters) - A civil trial has been further delayed over the alleged involvement of giant oil producer Royal Dutch Shell Plc in the executions of protesters in Nigeria in the 1990s, a U.S. judge’s order said on Friday.

A conference in the case in Manhattan federal court was postponed to Wednesday from Monday, the order said.

No reason was given for the indefinite delay of the trial in the order, signed by U.S. District Judge Kimba Wood. Jury selection had been previously scheduled for next week.

Shell is accused of human rights abuses, including violations connected with the 1995 hangings of prominent activist Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other protesters by Nigeria’s then-military government.
Shell has denied allegations of involvement.

The case was brought by relatives of Saro-Wiwa and others under a 1789 U.S. statute, the Alien Tort Claims Act, allowing noncitizens to file cases in U.S. courts for human rights abuses occurring overseas.
The case is Wiwa, et al v Anderson, et al 01-01909 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Manhattan).