June, 30 2009, 12:16pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7413 5566,After hours: +44 7778 472 126,Email:,press@amnesty.org
Nigeria: Amnesty International says pollution has created human rights tragedy in the Niger Delta
Amnesty International today called the situation in the Niger Delta
a "human rights tragedy," saying that the people of the Niger Delta
have seen their human rights abused by oil companies that their
government cannot or will not hold to account.
ABUJA, Nigeria
Amnesty International today called the situation in the Niger Delta
a "human rights tragedy," saying that the people of the Niger Delta
have seen their human rights abused by oil companies that their
government cannot or will not hold to account.
"The Niger Delta provides a stark example of the lack of
accountability of a government to its people, and of multinational
companies' almost total lack of accountability when it comes to the
impact of their operations on human rights," said Audrey Gaughran,
Amnesty International's Head of Business and Human Rights and co-author
of a major new report, Petroleum, Pollution and Poverty in the Niger
Delta, released today at a press conference in Abuja.
The report examines oil spills, gas flaring, waste dumping and other
environmental impacts of the oil industry. The majority of the evidence
on pollution and environment damage gathered by Amnesty International,
and contained in its new report, relates to the operations of Shell,
the main oil company operating on land in the Niger Delta.
"People living in the Niger Delta have to drink, cook with and wash
in polluted water. They eat fish contaminated with oil and other toxins
- if they are lucky enough to be able to still find fish. The land they
farm on is being destroyed. After oil spills the air they breathe
smells of oil, gas and other pollutants. People complain of breathing
problems and skin lesions - and yet neither the government nor the oil
companies monitor the human impacts of oil pollution," said Audrey
Gaughran.
The human rights impact of pollution in the Niger Delta is greatly
under-reported. The majority of people in the Niger Delta depend on the
natural environment for their food and livelihood, particularly through
agriculture and fisheries.
"The Nigerian government is aware of the risks that oil-related
pollution poses for human rights, but has failed to take measures to
ensure those rights are not harmed. Despite the widespread pollution of
the Niger Delta's land, rivers and creeks - and the many complaints
from people living in the region - we could find almost no government
data on the impact on humans of any aspect of oil pollution in the
Niger Delta."
Amnesty International said that government regulation of the oil industry has been wholly inadequate.
"The Nigerian government is failing in its obligation to respect and
protect the rights of people in the Niger Delta to food, water, health
and livelihood," said Audrey Gaughran. "Some oil companies, for their
part, have taken advantage of this government failure, and have shown a
shocking disregard for the human impact of their activities."
There have been some recent signs of improvement, however. The
recently-established National Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency
(NOSDRA) appears to have a more robust approach.
"We welcome the more pro-active approach NOSDRA appears to want to take - but it needs more resources," said Audrey Gaughran.
"The government must address the human impact of oil industry
pollution. They have a duty to protect their citizens from human rights
abuse or harm by businesses - and they are failing in that duty."
The organization also accused the Nigerian government of effectively
placing substantial responsibility for remedying human rights abuses in
the hands of the very actors responsible for the abuse - the oil
companies. As a result, remedies are often ineffective.
However, in its report, Amnesty International does not lay the blame solely on the Nigerian government.
"A government's failure to protect the human rights of its people
does not absolve companies from responsibility for their actions," said
Audrey Gaughran. "Oil companies such as Shell are not free to ignore
the consequences of their actions just because the government has
failed to hold them to account. The international standard is not
'whatever a company can get away with' - there are international
standards for oil industry operations, and in relation to environmental
and social impacts, that oil companies in the Niger Delta are very well
aware of."
"Despite its public claims to be a socially and environmentally
responsible corporation, Shell continues to directly harm human rights
through its failure to adequately prevent and mitigate pollution and
environmental damage in the Niger Delta," said Audrey Gaughran.
Shell and other companies also do no adequate monitoring of - or
disclosure of information on - the human impacts of oil operations.
Communities in the Niger Delta frequently do not have access to even
basic information about the impact the oil industry has on their lives
- even when they are the "host" community. This lack of information
feeds fears and insecurity within communities, contributes to conflict
and fundamentally undermines human rights.
Amnesty International said that clean-up processes in the Niger
Delta frequently fail to meet any expert understanding of good
practice, with some companies negligently allowing unqualified staff to
clean up oil spills, resulting in ongoing contamination of land and
water.
Almost every community visited by Amnesty International recounted
that creeks, ponds or rivers had been damaged by oil spills or other
oil-related pollution - often more than once, leading to community
anger.
Communities and armed groups in the Niger Delta have also
contributed to the problem of pollution, by vandalizing oil
infrastructure and the theft of oil. But the scale of this problem is
not clear.
"The Nigerian government desperately wants to see an end to the
conflict in the Niger Delta," said Audrey Gaughran. "But the poverty
and conflict that continues to scar the Niger Delta will not be
resolved until underlying causes - including decades of environmental
damage - and impunity for abuses of the environment and human rights
ends, and until the Nigerian government garners sufficient political
will and the means to deal with the oil company activities that cause
widespread damage to human rights."
Note to editors:
On 1 July 2009 Mr Peter Voser will take over as the new Chief
Executive of Royal Dutch Shell. As the new Chief Executive he inherits
the legacy Shell's failures and poor practice in the Niger Delta. This
legacy is - in significant part - the result of Shell's failure to
effectively prevent and address environmental damage and pollution
caused by its operations. Amnesty International has sent Mr. Voser a
copy of its report, and called on him to make cleaning up Shell's
operations in the Niger Delta a top priority. As a first step - Amnesty
International has joined colleagues from the Niger Delta to ask Mr
Voser to 'come clean' on Shell's impact on human rights by disclosing
critical information and making a public commitment to assessing the
social and human rights impact of Shell's operations.
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
LATEST NEWS
Privacy Defenders Decry 'Spy Draft' in Section 702 Renewal Advanced by Senate
"It's not about who RISAA allows the government to spy on, it's about who RISAA allows the government to force to spy," explained one critic.
Apr 18, 2024
Civil liberties defenders on Thursday decried the U.S. Senate's advancement of the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, which critics say lawmakers are trying to ram through without protection against warrantless surveillance and with a provision that would effectively make every American a spy whether they like it or not.
Senators voted 67-32 in favor of a cloture motion to begin voting on RISAA, a bill to reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which expires on Friday. FISA—a highly controversial law that has been abused hundreds of thousands of times—allows warrantless surveillance of non-U.S. citizens but also often sweeps up Americans' communication data in the process.
In a 273-147 vote last week, House lawmakers passed RISAA, including an amendment critics say dramatically expands the government's unchecked surveillance authority by compelling a wide range of individuals and organizations—including businesses and the media—to cooperate in government spying operations.
This so-called "Make Everyone a Spy" clause would allow the attorney general or director of national intelligence to force electronic communication service providers to "immediately provide... all information, facilities, or assistance" the government deems necessary.
"This bill would basically allow the government to institute a spy draft," Seth Stern, director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, warned Thursday. "It will lead to significant distrust between journalists and sources, not to mention everyone else."
"It's not about who RISAA allows the government to spy on, it's about who RISAA allows the government to force to spy," he added. "Regardless of whether the end target of the surveillance is a foreigner, it's indisputable that the people the government can enlist to conduct the surveillance are Americans. And what's more, these civilians ordered to spy would be gagged and sworn to secrecy under the law."
In addition to the "Make Everyone a Spy" provision, civil libertarians have sounded the alarm over the House lawmakers' rejection of an amendment that would have added a warrant requirement to the legislation.
Critics accuse Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and colleagues including Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Mark Warner (D-Va.) of trying to rush a vote on RISAA while disingenuously claiming Section 702's powers will expire with the law on Friday. That's a misleading claim, as a national security court earlier this month approved the government's request to continue a disputed surveillance program even if Section 702 lapses.
"There is simply no defense of Majority Leader Schumer and Sen. Warner's duplicity," Sean Vitka, policy director at the progressive advocacy group Demand Progress, said in a statement. "House Intelligence Committee leaders poisoned this bill with one of the most repugnant surveillance expansions in history, and apparently the administration was too busy attacking commonsense privacy protections to notice. They know it, we know it, and now the American people know it."
"There can be no mistake: Sens. Schumer and Warner just helped hand the next president an unspeakably dangerous weapon that will be used against their own constituents," Vitka added. "And there is only one vote left to stop it."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)—who
said earlier this week that the bill would dragoon the American people into becoming "an agent for Big Brother"—on Thursday argued that "this issue demands a debate about meaningful reforms, not a rushed vote to rubber-stamp more warrantless government surveillance powers."
In an attempt to tackle the warrantless surveillance issue, Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) on Thursday proposed a RISAA amendment that would require the government to obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court before accessing Americans' private communications.
However, the amendment contains exceptions to the warrant requirement in the event of unspecified emergencies and cyberattacks.
"If the government wants to spy on the private communications of Americans, they should be required to get approval from a judge—just as our Founders intended," Durbin said in a statement. "Congress has a responsibility to the American people to get this right."
The Biden administration and U.S. intelligence agencies vehemently oppose the Durbin-Cramer amendment. The White House called the measure "a reckless policy choice contrary to the key lessons of 9/11 and not grounded in any constitutional requirement or statute."
"The amendment outright bars the government from gaining access to lawfully collected information using terms associated with U.S. persons," the administration added. "Exceptions to that prohibition are narrow and unworkable. They are insufficient to protect our national security."
On Wednesday, the House also passed the Fourth Amendment Is Not for Sale Act, which would prohibit the government from buying Americans' information from data brokers if it would otherwise need a warrant to obtain the data, which includes location and internet records. The Senate will now take up FANFSA.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Opposite of Leadership': US Vetoes Palestine's UN Membership
Palestine's permanent observer at the United Nations said the resolution's failure "will not break our will, and it will not defeat our determination."
Apr 18, 2024
U.S. President Joe Biden's administration on Thursday used the country's veto power at the United Nations Security Council to block Palestine's bid to become a full member of the U.N.
While 12 nations voted in favor of Palestinian membership and two abstained, the United States is one of five countries—along with China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom—who have veto authority at the Security Council.
Since Israel launched what the International Court of Justice has said is a "plausibly" genocidal assault of the Gaza Strip in response to a Hamas-led October attack, the Biden administration has blocked three cease-fire resolutions at the Security Council. Under mounting global pressure, the U.S. finally abstained last month, allowing a cease-fire measure to pass.
In the lead-up to Thursday's vote, the Biden administration was pressuring other countries to oppose the Palestinian Authority's renewed membership effort so it could possibly avoid a veto, according to leaked cables obtained by The Intercept.
"Take a moment to ponder how isolated Biden has made the U.S.," said Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, after the veto. "Biden lobbied Japan, South Korea, and Ecuador HARD to oppose the Palestine resolution so that the U.S. wouldn't have to veto. They refused. So Biden cast his fourth veto in seven months (!!) This is the opposite of leadership."
In addition to the nations Parsi highlighted, Algeria, China, France, Guyana, Malta, Mozambique, Russia, Sierra Leone, and Slovenia voted for giving Palestine full U.N. membership while Switzerland and the United Kingdom abstained.
After the vote, U.N. Newsreported on remarks from Riyad Mansour, a U.N. permanent observer for the state of Palestine:
"We came to the Security Council today as an important historic moment, regionally and internationally, so that we could salvage what can be saved. We place you before a historic responsibility to establish the foundations of a just and comprehensive peace in our region."
Council members were given the opportunity "to revive the hope that has been lost among our people" and to translate their commitment towards a two-state solution into firm action "that cannot be maneuvered or retracted," and the majority of council members "have risen to the level of this historic moment, and they have stood on the side of justice and freedom and hope, in line with the ethical and humanitarian and legal principles that must govern our world and in line with simple logic."
"The fact that this resolution did not pass will not break our will, and it will not defeat our determination," Mansour added. "We will not stop in our effort. The state of Palestine is inevitable. It is real. Perhaps they see it as far away, but we see it as near, and we are the faithful."
Parsi said that "a Western-friendly senior Global South diplomat" told him of Biden's veto: "Whatever agonizing claim the U.S. had to lead a self-appointed free world has died a very loud public death on the Security Council horseshoe tonight. YOU CAN'T LEAD IF YOU CAN'T LISTEN."
Biden, a Democrat seeking reelection in November, has faced fierce criticism in the United States and around the world for U.S. complicity in Israel's war on Gaza—which Hamas, not the Palestinian Authority, has controlled for nearly two decades. In under seven months, Israeli forces have killed 33,970 Palestinians, injured another 76,770, displaced most of the besieged enclave's 2.3 million population, devastated civilian infrastructure, and severely limited the flow of lifesaving humanitarian assistance.
Israel—which already got $3.8 billion in annual U.S. military aid before October 7—continues to receive weapons support from the Biden administration, even as a growing chorus of critics, including some Democrats in Congress, argues that the arms transfers violate U.S. and international law.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Shameful': Columbia Greenlights Police Crackdown on Anti-War Encampment
Even after dozens of students were arrested, hundreds "rushed to take the place of their classmates" and continued the protest.
Apr 18, 2024
The arrests of dozens of Columbia University and Barnard College students on Thursday "galvanized" other supporters of Palestinian rights on the campuses, as hundreds of students occupied the school's western lawn after New York City police filled at least two buses with protesters who had been detained for setting up an encampment.
"Disclose, divest, we will not stop, we will not rest," chanted hundreds of students as they marched around the area where organizers had set up a tent encampment early Wednesday morning.
Columbia President Minouche Shafik informed the campus community on Thursday that she had authorized the police to clear the encampment.
As it has been in the past, the school has become a center of anti-war protests—and crackdowns by school officials and the police—since Israel began its bombardment of Gaza in October.
Pro-Palestinian students and alumni have demanded that Columbia divest from companies that profit from Israel's apartheid policies in the occupied Palestinian territories and cancel its dual degree program with Tel Aviv University.
In response to pro-Palestinian demonstrations, Columbia in November suspended the campus chapters of Jewish Voice for Peace and Students for Justice in Palestine—an action that pushed the New York Civil Liberties Union and Palestine Legal to file a lawsuit on behalf of the students last month.
On Thursday, police and Columbia employees took down about 50 tents that had been up for more than a day and disposed of them in trash cans and alleyways—but The New York Times reported later that "demonstrators repitched a couple of tents, and ... recovered the main signage from the encampment as well," while hundreds of students were "still gathered and chanting on the south side of the grass."
The arrests came a day after Shafik testified before the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce about antisemitism on campus.
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), whose daughter, Isra Hirsi, was among the Barnard students who were suspended on Thursday for participating in the encampment protest, questioned Shafik about whether antisemitic protests have actually taken place at Columbia, prompting the president to say there have not.
"There has been a rise in targeting and harassment against anti-war protesters, because it's been pro-war and anti-war protesters is what it seems, like, correct?" asked Omar.
"Correct," replied Shafik.
On Thursday, Omar posted on social media two images of protesters at Columbia: one from the encampment this week, and one from 1968, when students protested the U.S. war in Vietnam.
New York City Council member Tiffany Cabán was among those who condemned the university's crackdown on the protests on Thursday.
"Suspending and arresting Columbia/Barnard student activists and disbanding student organizations—including Jewish students and organizations—doesn't combat antisemitism or increase safety," said Cabán. "All it does is punish and intimidate those who believe in human rights for Palestinians. Shameful."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular