

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

The investigation process into oil spills in the Niger Delta has been challenged today by Amnesty International and the Centre for Environment, Human Rights and Development (CEHRD), as inconsistencies in Shell's claims about sabotage were revealed.
The investigation process into oil spills in the Niger Delta has been challenged today by Amnesty International and the Centre for Environment, Human Rights and Development (CEHRD), as inconsistencies in Shell's claims about sabotage were revealed.
Experts have examined evidence from the latest oil spill from Shell's poorly maintained pipelines in the Bodo creek area and confirmed that it strongly indicates that the leak is due to corrosion of the pipeline. The oil spill was discovered on or close to 21 June 2012 in the Bodo creek area of the Niger Delta. The leak was stopped on 30 June. However, Shell appears to be ignoring the evidence of corrosion.
"The investigation process into oil spills in the Niger Delta is a fiasco. There is more investment in public relations messaging than in facing up to the fact that much of the oil infrastructure is old, poorly maintained and prone to leaks - some of them devastating in terms of their human rights impact," said Audrey Gaughran, Director of Global Issues at Amnesty International.
"No matter what evidence is presented to Shell about oil spills, they constantly hide behind the 'sabotage' excuse and dodge their responsibility for massive pollution that is due to their failure to properly maintain their infrastructure and make it safe, and to properly clean up oil spills."
Amnesty International and CEHRD asked US company, Accufacts, which has many years experience in examining oil infrastructure, to examine photographs of the pipe at the leak point. They stated: "This is apparently due to external corrosion. Notice the layered loss of metal on the outside of the pipe around the "stick" from pipe wall loss (thinning) due to external corrosion. It is a very familiar pattern that we have seen many times on other pipelines."
"Shell have said locally that the spill looks like sabotage, and they completely ignore the evidence of corrosion. This has generated a lot of confusion and some anger in the community," said Stevyn Obodoekwe, Director of Programmes at CEHRD. "We have seen the pipe and brought an expert to look at it, and it seems pretty clear it is corroded."
When Amnesty International contacted Shell's headquarters to ask for evidence to support the claim of sabotage in Bodo, Shell said the company has not claimed that the cause of the spill was sabotage and the joint investigation has not been completed. However Shell could not explain the statements made locally to the community.
Shell has claimed that the joint investigation team, which includes community members, the regulators, Shell staff and representatives of the police and Joint Task Force, was not able to complete the oil spill investigation because local youths threw stones at them. Witnesses on site say that they did not see any such incident and that the security services were present during investigation.
Shell will now remove the affected length of pipe to a Shell facility where, according to the company, tests will be done. The community and local environment and human rights activists are afraid that this process - totally under the control of Shell - lacks transparency and the outcome will not be credible.
Shell's pipelines are old and many have not been properly maintained or replaced, with local people and NGOs reporting that the pipes in the Bodo area have not been replaced since 1958. When Amnesty International asked Shell to confirm the age and status of the pipes the company did not respond.
One year ago, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) issued a major report on the effects of oil pollution in the Ogoniland region of the Niger Delta. Little has changed, as this latest oil spill at Bodo demonstrates. Among its findings, UNEP confirmed that Nigerian regulatory agencies "are at the mercy of oil companies when it comes to conducting site inspections". UNEP also found that Shell had failed to adhere to its own standards in relation to maintaining its infrastructure.
"Years of bad practice with regard to oil spill investigations have left communities highly distrustful of the process and outcomes," said Stevyn Obodoekwe. "Shell has never addressed evidence of bad practice in the oil spill investigation process, of which the situation at Bodo is one more example. Spills can be attributed to sabotage when they are in fact due to corrosion and Shell knows this has occurred in the past."
Background
Thousands of oil spills have occurred in the Niger Delta since the oil industry began operations in the late 1950s. Corrosion of the pipes and equipment failure were responsible for the majority of spills. In recent years sabotage, vandalism and theft of oil have also contributed to pollution. However, corrosion and equipment failure remain very serious problems which have never been addressed.
Oil companies are responsible for ensuring that, as far as possible, their equipment is not vulnerable to tampering. However, Shell has not responded to request for information on any measures it has taken to prevent sabotage and vandalism.
On 3 August Amnesty International and CEHRD published a report on an oil investigation at Bodo in June/July 2012. The report focuses on the lack of transparency in the process and the failure of Shell to disclose any information on the condition or age of its pipes. The report, Another Bodo Oil Spill, Another Flawed Oil Spill Investigation In The Niger Delta (Index AFR 44/037/2012), is available at: https://amnesty.org/en/library/info/AFR44/037/2012/en
Since 2011 Shell has posted oil spill investigation data on its website. This move was welcomed by Amnesty International and CEHRD. However, as research by both organizations has made clear, the process on the ground remains highly problematic, and there is a lack of independence and transparency in the investigations themselves.
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.
"You don’t see evidence of gang association," said one legal expert. "It just feels like a dirtying up of the defendant."
After a US Border Patrol Agent shot two Venezuelan immigrants in Portland, Oregon in January, the Department of Homeland Security claimed that the two victims were "vicious Tren de Aragua gang members" who "weaponized their vehicle" against federal agents, who had no choice but to open fire in self-defense.
However, court records obtained by the Guardian reveal that a Department of Justice prosecutor subsequently told a judge the government was "not suggesting" that one of the victims, Luis Niño-Moncada, was a gang member.
The Guardian also obtained an FBI affidavit contradicting DHS claims about the second victim, Yorlenys Zambrano-Contreras, being "involved" in a shooting in Portland last year, when in reality she was a "reported victim of sexual assault and robbery."
Attorneys representing Niño-Moncada and Zambrano-Contreras, who both survived the shooting and were subsequently hospitalized, told the Guardian that neither of them have any prior criminal convictions.
Legal experts who spoke with the Guardian about the shooting said it appeared that DHS was waging a "smear campaign" against the victims.
Sergio Perez, a civil rights lawyer and former US prosecutor, noted in an interview that prosecutors filed criminal charges against Niño-Moncada and Zambrano-Contreras just two days after they were shot, even before it had obtained crucial video evidence of the incident.
"This government needs to go back to the practice of slow and thorough investigations," he told the Guardian, "rather than what we consistently see in immigration enforcement activities—which is a rush to smear individuals."
Carley Palmer, a former federal prosecutor, told the Guardian that the court records obtained by the paper don't show DOJ presenting any of the usual evidence that prosecutors use to establish defendants' alleged gang membership.
"What’s interesting about the filings is that you don’t see evidence of gang association," said Palmer. "It just feels like a dirtying up of the defendant."
DHS in recent months has made a number of claims about people who have been shot or killed by federal immigration officers that have not held up to scrutiny.
Most recently, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem claimed that slain Minneapolis intensive care nurse Alex Pretti was a "domestic terrorist" intent on inflicting "maximum damage" on federal agents, when video clearly showed that Pretti was swarmed by multiple federal agents and was disarmed before two agents opened fire and killed him.
Noem also openly lied about the circumstances and actions that resulted in the shooting death of Renee Nicole Good by a federal agent weeks earlier.
In November, federal prosecutors abruptly dropped charges against Marimar Martinez, a woman who was shot multiple times by a US Border Patrol agent in October in Chicago’s Brighton Park neighborhood.
In the indictment filed against Martinez, prosecutors said that the Border Patrol agent who shot her had been acting in self-defense, and that he had only opened fire after Martinez’s car collided with his vehicle.
However, uncovered text messages showed the Border Patrol agent apparently bragging about shooting Martinez, as he boasted that he “fired five rounds and she had seven holes” in a message sent to fellow agents.
An attorney representing Martinez also claimed that he had seen body camera footage that directly undermined DHS claims about how the shooting unfolded.
No explanation was provided for why charges against Martinez were dropped.
"For Haitian TPS holders and their families, this decision provides immediate relief from the fear of family separation, job loss, and forced return to life-threatening conditions in Haiti."
Haitian refugees living in the United States with temporary protected status were given a reprieve Monday night when a federal judge blocked an order by the Trump administration to strip them of their TPS—an effort that many feared would lead to an immediate intensification of efforts to target such communities with the same heavy-handed tactics seen by federal agents in Minnesota, Maine, and elsewhere.
US District Judge Ana Reyes in Washington granted a request to pause the TPS termination for Haitians while a lawsuit challenging the order issued by Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem in November proceeds.
The termination of TPS for Haitian nationals was set for Tuesday, but Reyes's 83-page order stated that it "shall be null, void, and of no legal effect."
Rose-Thamar Joseph, the operations director of the Haitian Support Center in Springfield, Ohio—which has a large Haitian community that has been the target of racist and xenophobic attacks from President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and their allies—said the judge's ruling means "we can breathe for a little bit."
The residents of Springfield and surrounding areas have been anxious that their community would be the next target for Trump's aggressive deportation tactics. The legal challenge to the termination of TPS for Haitians alleges that the secretary acted with "animus," as evidenced by repeated public remarks from Noem and other administration officials.
Reyes, in her ruling, determined that the suit stands a good chance of winning on the merits, writing: “The mismatch between what the secretary said in the termination and what the evidence shows confirms that the termination of Haiti’s TPS designation was not the product of reasoned decision-making, but of a preordained outcome justified by pretextual reasons."
Jerome Bazard, a member of the First Haitian Evangelical Church of Springfield, told NPR that life in Haiti remains too dangerous for many in his community to return.
"They can't go to Haiti because it's not safe," Bazard said. "Without the TPS, they can't work. And if they can't work, they can't eat, they can't pay bills. You're killing the people."
The sense of relief was felt beyond Ohio, as people from Haiti living with TPS status live in communities across the US.
Tessa Petit, executive director of the Florida Immigrant Coalition and a native of Haiti, said the ruling is a welcome development for the approximately 330,000-350,000 people living in the country with TPS, which allows them to work and pay taxes. In her ruling, Reyes noted that Haitians with TPS generate $5.2 billion annually in tax revenue.
"For Haitian TPS holders and their families, this decision provides immediate relief from the fear of family separation, job loss, and forced return to life-threatening conditions in Haiti," said Petit, "where political instability, gang violence, and humanitarian collapse remain acute. No one should be deported into crisis, and today’s ruling affirms that the law cannot be twisted to justify cruelty.”
“Today’s ruling is a victory for the roughly 350,000 Haitian TPS holders whose status was set to expire tomorrow,” said Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass). “By providing a safe haven to those who cannot return home safely, TPS embodies the American promise as a land of freedom and refuge. Haitian TPS holders are deeply rooted in our Massachusetts communities—from Mattapan to Brockton. They are our friends, our family members, our neighbors, our colleagues. I will keep fighting to protect the Haitian community.”
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, said that even though Monday's ruling is sure to be appealed by the Trump administration, it arrives as a "huge" win.
With the order, he said, "350,000 people can breathe a sigh of relief and go to work or school tomorrow without suddenly having been rendered 'illegal' and forced to either go back into danger or risk being rounded up by ICE agents on the street."
“We know that patients have died basically waiting for evacuation," a WHO spokesperson said, "and that’s something which is horrible when you know just a few miles or kilometers outside that border help is available."
With only five Palestinians in need of medical evacuation from Gaza permitted to leave through the Rafah crossing after it reopened on Monday, health authorities in the exclave warned that the restrictions Israel is continuing to impose at the crossing could ultimately kill thousands of Palestinians who have been waiting for years for treatment as Israeli attacks have decimated Gaza's health system.
Zaher al-Wahidi, a spokesperson for the Gaza Health Ministry, told Al Jazeera Tuesday that although the crossing has reopened—a step that has been hailed as progress under the "ceasefire" agreement reached in October—the intense screening process Palestinians are subjected to by Israeli authorities at the entry point is "too complex."
About 20,000 patients in Gaza are awaiting medical evacuation, including about 440 people whose cases are critical and need immediate treatment.
Egyptian officials had said before the crossing reopened that 50 people were expected to cross from Gaza into Egypt per day, but al-Wahidi said that if the rate of crossing on Monday continues, "we would need years to evacuate all of these patients, by which time all of them could lose their lives while waiting for an opportunity to leave."
Al Jazeera reported that people hoping to leave Gaza must register their names with Egyptian authorities, who send the names to Israel's Shin Bet for approval. Palestinians then enter a checkpoint run by the Palestinian Authority and European Union representatives before Israeli officers use facial recognition software to identify those who are leaving.
Reporting for the outlet, Nour Odeh said the crossing process has been "humiliating" for Palestinians and exemplifies the "absolute control" Israel demands over the lives of people in Gaza.
"There were strip searches and interrogations, but now there are even more extreme elements. We’re hearing about people being blindfolded, having their hands tied, and being interrogated," said Odeh. "When we talk about security screening, and a person needing urgent medical care, that person is basically being denied medical attention."
Ambulances waited for hours on Monday on the Egyptian side of the border, ready to take patients to 150 hospitals across Egypt that have agreed to treat patients from Gaza, before five people were finally able to cross after sunset.
The process, said al-Wahidi, "will not allow us to evacuate patients and provide medical services to them to give them a chance at life."
About 30,000 Palestinians have also requested to return to Gaza, having fled the exclave after Israel began bombarding civilian infrastructure and imposing a total blockade on humanitarian aid in October 2023—retaliating against Gaza's population of more than 2 million people, about half of whom are children, for a Hamas-led attack on southern Israel.
But only about a dozen people were permitted to reenter Gaza on Monday, falling far short of the daily target of 50.
The Associated Press reported that Palestinians arrived at the border crossing with luggage that they were told they could not bring into Gaza.
“They didn’t let us cross with anything,” Rotana Al-Regeb told the AP after returning to Khan Younis. “They emptied everything before letting us through. We were only allowed to take the clothes on our backs and one bag per person.”
Another woman told Tareq Abu Azzoum of Al Jazeera that she was "blindfolded and interrogated by the Israeli military on her way back to Gaza," and other said "they were intercepted by Israeli-backed militias" who demanded information about armed groups in Gaza.
For people who have waited months or years to return to Gaza, Abu Azzoum said, "the Rafah crossing has been a humiliating process instead of a day marking a beautiful reunion with family."
Palestinian political analyst Muhammad Shehada of the European Council on Foreign Relations said the process "means in practice that Israel has made the Rafah border crossing a one-way ticket. If you decide to go to Gaza, they tell you, 'Okay, you will be caged there permanently. Forget about being able to leave ever again.' If you decide to leave you will have to settle with the concept of being banished and exiled again, permanently, because the queue is so formidably long."
Palestinian analyst @muhammadshehad2 explains the restrictions that Israel has imposed at Rafah Crossing are so harsh that it would take approximately 10 years for all 150,000 Palestinians in Egypt to return to Gaza, and similarly long for the tens of thousands of patients and… https://t.co/FBy1TCAW3L pic.twitter.com/WwBA7rs4xC
— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) February 2, 2026
On Tuesday, a World Health Organization (WHO) team arrived at a Palestinian Red Crescent hospital in Khan Younis to take about 16 patients with chronic conditions or injuries sustained in Israeli attacks to the Rafah crossing. The Red Crescent had previously been told 45 people would be able to cross on Tuesday.
Al Jazeera reported that health authorities in Gaza are being forced to choose which sick and wounded patients will be permitted to get treatment first.
“We know that patients have died basically waiting for evacuation," WHO spokesperson Christian Lindmeier said, "and that’s something which is horrible when you know just a few miles or kilometers outside that border help is available."