By Jonathan Ugbal
The plan by Shell to exit the Nigerian oil and gas industry has sparked concerns over the rights of Niger Deltans whom Amnesty International, AI on Thursday in PortHarcourt, the Rivers State capital say have suffered a lot from the exploitation of their resources.
Shell first drilled oil near the village of Oloibiri in 1956, and, after six decades of operation, the Anglo-dutch company is seeking to sell its onshore assets which AI Country’s Director in Nigeria, Sanusi Isa says the issues from the divestment are a cause for worry.
“In the course of extracting this resource, the well-being of the people; their rights, their environment, their agricultural resources, their health has being taken for granted and this has been going on for many years,” Isa said, during the presentation of a report titled, “Tainted Sale? Why Shell’s Divestment From The Niger Delta Must Not Harm Human Rights.”
Isa who averred that AI has done a lot of work in this region, and will continue to shine the light on human rights violations as a result of oil exploration, sued for the support of all present, adding that; “Shell’s divestment from this region should not be a way of shying away from their liabilities to this region. It should not be a way for running away or shifting that liability without accountability.”
Explaining AI’s interest in the matter, he averred that; “we want to make sure you will have a good standard of living, we want to make sure that your environment is not used to enrich the nation while your own standard of living is falling apart. We want to make sure that your rights are protected, we want to make sure that what you deserve, comes to you without being shortchanged. We want to make sure that all your rights are protected.”
Reports suggests that the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission, NUPRC recently halted the divestment process of Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited, SPDC, citing “technicalities,” while approving the continuation of others.
And, while previewing the report, the Head of Business, Security, and Human Rights at AI’s international secretariat in London, Mark Dummett says while everyone present “already know about this appalling environmental and human rights catastrophe caused by the oil industry in the Niger Delta,” points out that; “this is a very critical moment for the Niger Delta, and the campaign for justice for the Niger Delta because as we know, Shell is trying to sell up and the other oil majors.”
He continues; “This week, we heard the news from the NUPRC. They confirmed that four of those divestments are going ahead but with Shell, SPDC, that is not going ahead. Amnesty International along with other Civil Society Organizations globally and in Nigeria welcomes that decisions. It is cautious welcoming of this decision because we haven’t yet seen the reasoning behind this decision.”
Dummett, who said AI is hoping the NUPRC applied the criteria in its divestment framework, called on the regulator to, “in the interest of transparency and accountability to publish in detail, its decision as well as publish its decision on other divestments.”
“Of course just because it is given the greenlight on those other divestments, that is not the end of the matter, it needs to continue to hold those companies to account because the pollution and the issues we see around the area that the SPDC operates, is similar to those in the other parts of the Niger Delta where other companies operate,” he added.
Furthermore, Dummett gave two reasons why the matter should not be kept closed. “Firstly, Shell is not going to give up in trying to divest. Secondly, whatever the NUPRC has decided doesn’t make a material difference to the conditions on the ground. And those conditions on the ground that all of you know so well, remain, devastating.”
Critics and activists have also claimed Shell is basically escaping responsibility for the ecocide it’s actions caused while questioning the millions of dollars awarded for clean up exercises especially in Ogoni land.
Ken Henshaw, the Executive Director of We The People, told this reporter that what Shell is doing is basically changing it’s shell to avoid further litigation in advanced countries where ecocide is a major issue. According to him, Shell’s plans to basically fund it’s own divestment leaves a lot to be desired.
Meanwhile, AI says the 24-page report, which outlines why Shell has a responsibility, under international human rights standards, to conduct responsible divestment, draws on over 20 years of research by the organization and partner organizations.
The report is available for download on Amnesty.org. You can click on the link below to download it.
Nigeria: Tainted Sale? – Amnesty International
The Report
In the report, AI says, “Shell disputes the allegations that it has acted irresponsibly in the Niger Delta and has previously pointed to improvements that it says it has made in recent years in its response to preventing and cleaning oil spills, investments in infrastructure, anti-theft measures, and increased transparency on reporting of oil spills,” the report quotes Dummet as saying, “Shell must take its own steps to ensure that its divestment plan does not worsen the plight of the inhabitant of the Niger Delta” by abiding with the UN guiding principles.”
Also, AI did note that it is, “indisputable that Shell is not uniquely responsible for the devastating oil pollution that blights the region,” and pointed out that, “the government (at all levels) needs to ensure that communities are informed and consulted as part of the divestment process. It must clarify the law around post-divestment liability.”
Furthermore, AI says there are lessons for the global oil and gas industry as multinational companies such as Shell need to divest themselves of assets and operations that deal with fossil fuels by no later than 2050, and “must do so in a way that respects human rights and the environment.”
Recommendations
AI recommended that the Nigerian government must protect and respect the human rights of its citizens, including their right to an adequate standard of living, water, health, and the right to access to effective remedy for people whose human rights have been infringed; ensure that this divestment does not limit Shell’s liabilities without a full investigation into and remediation of all existing pollution, the maintenance and repair of existing pipelines, and the protection of pipelines from sabotage, as well as clarify rules on post-divestment liability.
Also, AI recommended that the Government ensures that all relevant stakeholders, most importantly the affected communities, be engaged in the process and that their concerns are solicited and incorporated into the final decision and require that any purchaser be adequately capitalized to meet these requirements and, given the uncertainty of the cost, consider requiring Shell to remain as guarantor, should funding be insufficient.
For Shell, AI recommended that it should conduct a thorough human rights due diligence process in order to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how it addresses potential human impacts linked to the sale.
Other recommendations include;
- As part of this due diligence, Shell should conduct meaningful consultations with affected communities about its plans, and provide up-to-date information, including measures to mitigate potential risks, and lessons from previous divestments in the Niger Delta;
- Shell should provide a full remediation plan, with details of all completed and ongoing clean-ups across its area of operation before divestment, and ensure that this is completed before the transfer. Shell should also allow independent testing to be conducted to assess whether its purported clean up of previous oil spills has been done properly;
- Before selling its assets, Shell should publish details of the condition of pipelines and other assets and disclose the age of infrastructure and all repairs and replacements;
- Shell should provide details about measures to increase the safety and security of its infrastructure;
- Shell should assess whether companies bidding for its assets have weaker policies and public commitments than its own, and use its influence to ensure they publish all relevant information on their operations, including on spills, including JIV reports, photographs, video and remediation reports;
- Shell must assess the capacity of companies to maintain its infrastructure to international standards. If it has not already done so, Shell should assess the record of companies that have previously taken on its assets and publish the findings. If necessary, it should assess steps it can take to improve the capacity acquiring companies, and then carry these out;
- Shell must assess whether its transfer of assets risks increasing emissions and take steps to mitigate this risk.