News
Update
|
Shell Must Clean Up its Act in Nigeria |
|
The Guardian, UK Sun Dec
6.2009 |
As Nigerian villagers take Shell to
court over huge oil spills, it's time
for the group to take responsibility for
polluting practices
A court in The Hague is considering
whether Shell can be held liable for
alleged pollution in Nigeria, and a
ruling is expected on 30 December. This
case could set a precedent for
corporations based in Europe that
exploit lax environmental regulations
and violate the rights of communities in
the developing world.
In the village of Ikot Ada Udot,
south-eastern Nigeria, a rusty complex
of tubes pokes five feet out of the
ground. A familiar sight to locals, it
is known as the "Christmas tree". But
unlike its innocuous namesake, this
"tree" is an abandoned oil wellhead
owned by oil multinational Shell.
According to environmentalists, the
wellhead spewed toxic oil and gas into
the land and fish ponds of local
villagers for months in August 2006, and
again in 2007. As of May 2008, the area
around the Christmas tree was still
heavily polluted and villagers remain
destitute.
This is one of three oil spills in the
case against Shell that will begin its
first hearing at The Hague civil court
this week. Four Nigerian villagers, in
conjunction with Milieudefensie (Friends
of the Earth Netherlands), are charging
Royal Dutch Shell with causing massive
oil spills that have resulted in loss of
livelihoods. The case provides a
snapshot of the environmental and social
devastation caused by Shell in the Niger
Delta.
The bigger, more disturbing picture is
that oil spills have contaminated the
once fertile Delta with approximately
1.5m tonnes of crude oil, equivalent to
one Exxon Valdez disaster every year for
the last 50 years. As Amnesty
International pointed out in a report
this July, Shell "has failed to respect
the human rights of the people of the
Niger Delta … through failure to prevent
and mitigate pollution".
The parent company, Royal Dutch Shell,
denies responsibility for the pollution
of its subsidiary, Shell Nigeria, and is
challenging the jurisdiction of the
Dutch court over its actions abroad. It
also blames oil spills on sabotage to
its equipment. It seems that if Shell
had its way, no court would have
jurisdiction over any violations of
human rights and environmental law. In
2005, the federal high court of Nigeria
declared Shell's gas flaring to be a
violation of human rights and ordered
the company to stop the illegal
practice. Shell has still not complied
with this court order. With little or no
legal remedy in Nigeria, villagers from
the Niger Delta have decided to bring
their case to The Hague to hold the
company headquarters to account.
Should the case go forward, the court
would hear about Shell's systematic
pollution across the region. In Goi, a
massive oil spill from Shell's
Trans-Niger pipeline caught fire in
2005, incinerating farmland, property
and polluting fisheries. It took 33
months before Shell cleaned up the mess.
Chief Barizaa, an Ogoni elder, and one
of the four plaintiffs in the case said:
"I lost everything … the oil flowed into
my fishponds and killed all my fish. The
five canoes I had in the creeks were
consumed by the inferno. I have nothing
left to feed my family."
Another oil spill flowed from a
high-pressure pipeline in Oruma, Bayelsa
state, in 2005, polluting the land and
drinking water of several neighbouring
communities. Shell waited 12 days before
containing the spill, and four months
later it began its clean-up operation by
dumping the polluted soil into pits and
setting them on fire, causing further
damage to the environment.
The oil-rich Niger Delta is prized by
multinational corporations; chief among
them is Shell, which derives
approximately 10% of its global profits
from the region. The oil companies have
made enormous profits and enriched a
succession of Nigerian regimes, but
pollution is driving local people into
poverty. Until Shell takes
responsibility for its impact on the
environment and human rights, it can
expect legal actions like this one to
expose ugly truths about their polluting
practices. Shell must bear the cost of
its environmental devastation. The
alternative is daily injustice on a
massive scale.
As culled from UK's GUARDIAN.
|
|
|
|