New research reveals Shell paid militants who destroyed Nigerian towns
Shell fuelled human rights abuses in Nigeria by paying huge contracts to armed militants, according to a new report published by Platform and a coalition of NGOs and featured today in The Guardian. [1]
Counting the Cost implicates Shell in cases of serious violence in Nigeria’s oil-rich Niger Delta region from 2000 to 2010.[2] The report uncovers how Shell’s routine payments to armed militants exacerbated conflicts, in one case leading to the destruction of Rumuekpe town where it is estimated that at least 60 people were killed.[3]
According to Platform’s report, Shell continues to rely on Nigerian government forces who have perpetrated systematic human rights abuses against local residents, including unlawful killings, torture and cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment. The full report is available to download here. A shorter, 9-page summary of the report can be found here. The report is available to purchase in hardcopy.
Key findings include:
- Platform has heard testimony and seen contracts that implicate Shell in regularly assisting armed militants with lucrative payments. In one case in 2010, Shell is alleged to have transferred over $159,000 to a group credibly linked to militia violence. [4]
- Shell admits that from 2006 onwards, the company paid thousands of dollars every month to armed militants in the town of Rumuekpe, in the full knowledge that the money was used to sustain three years of conflict. [5]
- A company manager exposes structural problems with Shell’s ‘community development’ programme, claiming that “the money is not going into the rightful hands,” and that poor community engagement caused Shell to shut down a third of its oil production in August 2011 after 12 oil spills in the Adibawa area. [6]
NGOs from the UK, Netherlands and Nigeria are demanding that Shell put an end to over five decades of social and environmental devastation and break its close ties with government forces and other armed groups responsible for abuses. Platform’s report also condemns the Nigerian government for failing to protect the rights of its citizens and urges President Goodluck Jonathan to find political solutions to the Delta crisis instead of military responses.
Ben Amunwa from Platform said: “This research sheds new light on Shell’s active role in human rights abuses during a decade of terrible violence in the Niger Delta. Shell claims it has nothing to do with the crisis, but the company is involved in widespread abuses and militarisation. While Shell cites ‘security issues’ as a convenient excuse for its appalling environmental record, it has also failed to take the necessary steps to resolve conflicts. In many cases, Shell’s activities have created insecurity."
Nnimmo Bassey of Friends of the Earth International said: “Shell’s obligations are clear: it must clean up after decades of devastating oil spills, end the illegal practice of gas flaring and compensate the victims of human rights abuses in Nigeria. It is unacceptable that Shell continues to deny responsibility, while pushing communities deeper into poverty and fuelling destructive conflicts.”
“Shell’s divisive practices have led to daily human rights violations in the Niger Delta," said Geert Ritsema from Friends of the Earth Netherlands. "Many of the victims have no access to justice and cannot afford to take the oil giant to court. Lawsuits in Nigeria can take decades to resolve and the remedies are often inadequate. Yet Shell must be held accountable for its environmental destruction and complicity in human rights abuses in Nigeria, and home governments like the UK and the Netherlands must ensure that remedies are available and accessible to the victims.”
Platform’s report follows months of controversy for Shell, in which:
• The UN issued a damning report on the ecological impact of oil spills in Ogoni, many of which are from Shell’s facilities. The UN Environment Programme found that Shell had operated in Nigeria below international standards and the company had certified heavily contaminated sites as “clean”.[7]
• Shell admitted liability for two massive oil spills in the Ogoni community of Bodo in 2008 to 2009 after a lawsuit filed in London. The company now faces a compensation payout estimated at $410 million and could be forced to clean up the damage.
• Court hearings in The Hague where a lawsuit by Friends of Earth and four Nigerian victims of Shell oil spills is ongoing.
CONTACT:
UK – Ben Amunwa, (Platform): [email protected], +44(0)207 403 3738.
Nigeria – Nnimmo Bassey (Chair Friends of the Earth International): [email protected], +2348037274395.
NL – Geert Ritsema, Milieudefensie / Friends of the Earth Netherlands, [email protected], +31 (0)20 5507 391.
Notes:
[1] Platform is a UK charity that campaigns for social and ecological justice. The coalition backing the report includes: Centre for Environment, Human Rights and Development (CEHRD), Friends of the Earth Netherlands/Milieudefensie, Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth Nigeria, Social Action, Spinwatch, Stakeholder Democracy Network and Platform.
[2] Counting the Cost focuses on eight cases of human rights abuse in the ‘eastern division’ of Shell’s operations in Nigeria. Platform believes these cases are part of a wider pattern of violence that is being fuelled by routine oil company activities.
[3] Rumuekpe in Rivers State was destroyed by inter-communal conflict between 2005 to 2008. For details on Shell’s active role in the conflict, see pages 28 to 36 and Appendix 1 in the report.
[4] See the case of Joinkrama 4, at pages 36 to 43 in the report.
[5] See pages 28 to 36 in the report.
[6] See pages 42 to 43 in the report.
[7] See UNEP, Environmental Assessment of Ogoniland, (2011): p12.
39 Comments
[...] The interview includes reference to the different ways that Shell’s ‘community development’ projects have undermined stability, and the company’s appalling record of environmental destruction and oil spills. The full report is available here. [...]
[...] While Shell cites ‘security issues’ as a convenient excuse for its appalling environmental record, it has also failed to take the necessary steps to resolve conflicts. In many cases, Shell’s activities have created insecurity. As Platform’s new report reveals, Shell continues to rely on Nigerian government forces who have perpetrated systematic human rights abuses against local residents in Ogoni and other areas, including unlawful killings, torture and cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment. Shell has also fuelled human rights abuses in Nigeria by paying huge contracts to armed militants. For more information, click here. [...]
[...] by jamiesw89 to worldnews [link] [20 [...]
Thanks for this. I bookmarked the article and will definitely research and public some more information on Shell soon
@EJ Hill – we’re happy to help if you need more info.
[...] allegations, contained in Platform’s new report, Counting the Cost, have put Shell’s human rights record in Nigeria under fresh scrutiny. Platform is calling on [...]
And of course no one is going to be help responsible for this. It probably wont even make it to the mainstream news. Sad.
Hello Big P,
The lack of accountability is one the main problems here. But there are small glimmers of hope – see here. The House of Reps in Nigeria has just ordered an investigation into the allegations that Shell has funded human rights abuse. It is a small step, but could potentially lead in the right direction.
Of course there are many ways in which we can hold corporations accountable – legal, political, protest, media – and all are necessary to counter the immense wealth and power of companies like Shell.
[...] PlatformLondon.org militants, niger delta, nigeria, shell oil, shell oil [...]
While the state of Nigeria today is abysmal, and Shell has certainly not improved the situation, this comes off more as scapegoating than anything else.
The corruption of the Nigerian government, the utter poverty plaguing the country, the lawlessness of the Niger Delta – all and more are far bigger factors at play than Shell’s involvement.
It is verifiable that the Nigerian government has time and again strong-armed Shell oil into making payments (under the table). In light of this, it seems that the Nigerian House of Representatives turning on the corporation is, more than anything, political treachery – the hallmarks of one of the most corrupt and deplorable nations in the world today.
@VoiceofReason
I think you’re missing the point. The problems dealt with in the report arise from a partnership between the oil companies and the Nigerian government. Both are culpable and both bear responsibility for the tragedy in the Niger Delta. We do not seek to ‘scapegoat’ one or the other.
Platform’s report clearly condemns the Nigerian government for its failure to protect the rights of its citizens, and emphasises that primary responsibility for the abuses falls on the government. It also calls on the Nigerian government to address corruption, amongst other serious problems. Focusing on corporate complicity is not the same as saying that other actors and issues are not important.
Re: ‘bigger factors’, Platform’s report places the incidents of human rights abuse in the wider social, economic and political context.
Re: corruption, it works both ways. The corruption at all levels of the Nigerian government is deeply entrenched. But companys are corrupt too. Shell, Chevron and others have authorised corrupt payments and bribes. See here. Oil companies have also short-changed the government – see Human Rights Watch (2007), Chop Fine, p105). More broadly, research on corruption in Nigeria points towards the multinational oil companies as the “epicentre” of corruption (see Jordan Smith, (2007) p46), which is hardly surprising given the massive influx of foreign capital and the record these companies have when it comes to unethical and corrupt conduct.
I actually sort of feel for Shell here.
Hear me out:
You pay for drilling rights to the Nigerian Government. You also have to pay bribes along side that because that is how Nigeria works. You wade through the bureaucracy paying some brides and just waiting other officials out. That is how Nigeria works. Then finally you break ground, drill in and get the oil. Now some c**k shows up with an AK47 talking about the land being his by birth and to pay up or a Voodoo curse might shoot your workers or burn down your plant. You take the hint and pay him to f**k off, pretty much your only option since the Nigerian government offer no security despite that being the first, basic purpose of actual government. Somehow you are still able to make a profit. Now the p**k with the AK47 has shot someone else you never met for something un-related to oil and it is your fault?
In an ideal world Shell would never pay protection money and neither would BP or ExxonMobil or any of their other competitors and the Nigerian government would actually work and the militants would get honest jobs instead of buying old USSR weapons and extorting whatever they could. In an ideal world none of this would happen. But this is not an ideal world and pretending the blame stops with Shell rather than the militants or the Nigerian government seems unfair to me.
@Byrn
I’ve removed the swear words from your comment, but that doesn’t increase the value of your contribution by much.
Leaving aside your reliance on cheap racist stereotypes, your argument re: Shell is simply wrong, and your selective view of the Niger Delta conflict is misleading. You also make some inaccurate assumptions about the ownership of oil and land, and the profitability of oil companies in Nigeria.
There is a long history to the Niger Delta conflict, which escalated over the past two decades. It included widespread peaceful protest and direct action in the 1990s, by the minority Ogoni people. When the Nigerian military regime responded with brutal repression – which Shell actively encouraged through requesting and supporting troops who committed crimes against humanity – many people lost hope in the ability of peaceful means to achieve change in Nigeria.
The late 1990s and early 2000s saw the emergence of another direct action-base movement, with the demands in the Kaiama declaration at its core. Once again, and this time under “democracy”, assertive youth activism was met with military repression, and the destruction of entire villages, such as Odi.
The “armed miltant” emerged from this context of brutal state violence and failure to protect basic human rights and democratic values.
Rather than being an innocent bystander to these events, Shell has made substantial contributions to the violence perpetrated by both the Nigerian state and other armed groups. Its appalling legacy of oil spills, gas flaring and other forms of pollution is a major grievance for local residents.
It’s cheap of you to call the comments racist to avoid the truth of what this person is saying. Shell et al are forced to work in one of the most corrupt (if not most corrupt) countries in the world with minimal respect for human life. No number of reports will help any. The people must rise up and fight for their rights.
@Adewale Maja-Pearce
Thanks for your contribution.
Firstly, Platform condemns the unjust actions of the Nigerian government. The Nigerian state has primary responsibility for respecting and protecting human rights and has failed appallingly to do so. We also condemn the corruption that runs throughout Nigerian government institutions and officials, up to the highest levels.
Secondly, Shell are not “forced” to work in Nigeria, as you say. They chose to operate in Nigeria and (as they themselves have admitted) use practices which contribute to routine and systematic human rights abuses by state and non-state actors. Shell has previously withdrawn from areas of conflict, including from onshore oil fields in Nigeria and in Syria for example.
Thirdly, Shell and other companies contribute towards the culture of corruption in Nigeria, and benefit from the situation. A January 2012 audit by NEITI found that oil companies had underpaid petroleum tax by $1 billion. Another example of this is the recent US SEC decision in 2010 to fine Shell $48 million for approving an agent which bribed officials over the Bonga deepwater oil field. In reality, the companies and the Nigerian government are inter-linked. They operate as partners in a joint-venture and protect each other’s interests. They both have responsibility for the tragedy of the Delta and as such, should be held accountable. And yes, I agree with you, the people must rise up and fight for their rights, and that is exactly what many of the partners involved in Counting the Cost have been doing for many years, through activism and environmental and human rights monitoring, often at great personal risk.
Finally, @Byrn’s comment featured offensive language and sentiment, but in the interests of open debate I published and have responded to the points raised in it. If I had wanted to avoid the issue raised, I would not have published it in the first place. I believe that @Bryn relied upon a racist stereotype by referring to “Voodoo curse”.
Why not publish the expletives, which you do anyway by default. As for voodoo curse, the vast majority of Nigerians will tell you point blank that the black man is cursed. This might offend your (and miy) sensibility in a racist world but nothing was ever gained by denying the facts. It was Nigerian governments, not Shell, which sent Nigerian soldiers to kill Nigerian citizens, however many guns Shell gave them to achieve their ends. Personally, I wouldn’t want to be a Shell employee, but then the moral high ground is always a safe place to be if you can afford it. Anyway…
[...] had come to the Niger Delta to investigate Shell’s role in recent human rights abuses perpetrated by government forces and other armed groups. I found that Shell not only relied on [...]
[...] Counting the Cost: corporations and human rights abuses in the Niger Delta (Platform) [...]
SHELL PAYS FOR VIOLENCE TO MAINTAIN HIGH OIL PRICES
Thank you for an interesting & timely report. However, you may be missing the true intent of Shell Oil’s insidiously divisive protection payments & other practices.
In the 1950s & 1960s, multinational oil corporations calculated that the best method to maximize shareholder profits (and to increase scarcity-based political power) was to limit oil exploration & development and to limit refining capacity. See “The Poverty of Power” by Barry Commoner.
In Nigeria, under cover of short-term security interests, Shell still employs such practices. Are you surprised? The well-known, medium- to long-term result of Shell’s protection-payment practices is to perpetuate violence against both Nigerians AND against oil company workers – thus, maintaining high oil prices. Do you now see Shell’s ‘madness in their method’ or ‘method in their madness’ to increase chaos-based political power and to maximize Big Oil’s profits?
Did you ever notice that much if not most chaos & conflict around our world involve oil-related nations (e.g., Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Iran, Vietnam, Sudan, Nigeria, etc.)? Did you ever notice that the West almost never wins such conflicts (if “winning” is defined as an increase in oil development & exports for the West from nations in chaos & war)? Despite all possible protestations to the contrary by Shell & the Big-Oil Boys & Girls, this may be the covert actual intent of Big Oil.
Such chaos may achieve Big Oil’s true purposes: 1) To limit oil exploration (despite oil abundance); 2) To limit oil production; 3) To limit oil exports; 4) To maximize scarcity-based demand & political power; and 5) To maximize profits.
Despite motivation by bribery, extortion & blackmail, most OPEC national leaders would not allow and/or order the killing of their own people to maximize Big-Oil profits. Nigerian leaders are no exception. However, when such leaders ‘cannot see the forest due to the trees,’ results are precisely what Nigerian leaders have unwittingly or only semi-wittingly aided & abetted for a long, long time.
What can WE do to stop Big Oil from continuing chaos & conflict in oil-related nations? The first step is to recognize that Shell & Big-Oily others are in fact doing what they are doing: Maximizing chaos & conflict in oil-related nations to limit oil availability and to maximize scarcity-based power & profits.
The second step may be to limit direct oil-corp. involvement in their own security (especially since oil-corp. operatives are sometimes if not often covert national intel-agency operatives who foment chaos & conflict).
The third step is to fund hydrocarbon-energy-replacement technologies and R&D – not only in low-efficiency solar-&-wind-based technologies but also in cheaper & higher-efficiency ‘New-Energy’ & ‘New-Physics’ electromagnetic technologies (e.g., the 100-year-old technology of Nikola Tesla).
If & when we recognize & develop the abundance of oil-gas-&-coal hydrocarbon energy deposits around the world (not only those counted in the “proven reserves” scam), and/or if & when we develop already-known-but-suppressed ‘cheap energy’ tech, then we might (probably would) eliminate much if not most chaos & conflict.
Energy enables and empowers global & national economies. ‘Cheap Energy’ enables & empowers an ever-increasing standard of living for all – without much if any ‘Haves-Versus-Have-Nots’ chaos & conflict.
Conspiracy theories alive and well. What a load of tripe.
[...] du gaz [1] et indemnise les victimes de violations des droits humains au Nigeria ». Autant d’exigences qui s’appliquent également aux autres compagnies pétrolières opérant dans la région. Avis [...]
[...] When Platform visited local community members in October 2010, they informed us that Shell’s oil spills had devastated the area. Between 2006 to 2009, Joinkrama 4 documented sixteen oil spills which devastated the fisheries of Taylor Creek and destroyed hectares of farmland. Shell’s role in fuelling of conflict in Joinkrama 4 is also featured in Platform’s new report,Counting the Cost. [...]
[...] The interview includes reference to the different ways that Shell’s ‘community development’ projects have undermined stability, and the company’s appalling record of environmental destruction and oil spills. The full report is available here. [...]
[...] recent report by the watchdog NGO Platform covers several cases in which Shell has actively fueled conflict and violence in the Niger Delta. [...]
[...] funds investing millions in oil companies and banks. This article mentions Platform’s work on Shell Nigeria and uses it to question the ethics of investment in oil [...]
[...] Complicity has continued to be a problem for Shell in Nigeria. Shell’s involvement in recent human rights abuses in the Niger Delta was revealed in Platform’s 2011 report, Counting the Cost. [...]
[...] 5. Counting the Cost [...]
[...] exacerbated, in part via routine payments to armed militants. The atrocities committed included the destruction of the Rumuekpe town between 2005 and 2008 and the deaths of 60 [...]
[...] the Delta during a decade of intense conflictwhich claimed an estimated 1,000 lives a year. Several independent investigations between 2003 and 2011 have confirmed that Shell has exacerbated conflict by awarding contractsand “protection [...]
[...] Delta during a decade of intense conflict which claimed an estimated 1,000 lives a year. Several independent investigations between 2003 and 2011 have confirmed that Shell has exacerbated conflict by awarding contracts and “protection [...]
[...] Delta during a decade of intense conflict which claimed an estimated 1,000 lives a year. Several independent investigations between 2003 and 2011 have confirmed that Shell has exacerbated conflict by awarding contracts and “protection [...]
[...] The timeline is based on the examination of 4,521 leaked US embassy cables from Nigeria and builds on the report: Counting the Cost….: Corporations and human rights abuses in the Niger Delta [...]
[...] to their Counting the Cost report published last year Shell’s involvement in the escalating conflict in the Niger Delta is still [...]
[...] to turn up, more characters appeared, more companies involved; a story of corporate and government complicity began to [...]
[...] to their Counting the Cost report published last year Shell’s involvement in the escalating conflict in the Niger Delta is still [...]
[...] groups during a period of intense conflict in the Delta. It follows Platform’s 2011 report, Counting the Cost, which showed how Shell’s reliance on government forces in Nigeria and its routine payments to [...]
[...] armed groups during a period of intense conflict in the Delta. It follows Platform’s 2011 report, Counting the Cost, which showed how Shell’s reliance on government forces in Nigeria and its routine payments to [...]
[...] scaricare il briefing di Platform: http://platformlondon.org/2011/10/03/counting-the-cost-corporations-and-human-rights-abuses-in-the-n… [...]
[...] citando documenti ufficiali della multinazionale di cui è entrata in possesso (si veda qui), conferma come buona parte di tali fondi sia andata a soggetti – tra cui le forze [...]