iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Michael Marx

GET UPDATES FROM Michael Marx
 

Big Oil Pleads Immunity From Prosecution for Human Rights Crimes

Posted: 10/03/2012 11:45 am

This fall the U.S. Supreme Court will decide a case that throws a spotlight on the oil industry's toxic influence on our democracy -- and why we need to move America beyond oil as quickly as possible.

In the 1990s, Shell Oil allegedly enlisted the Nigerian military dictatorship to suppress opposition to Shell's oil operations. A 2002 lawsuit, Kiobel v. Shell, alleges that Shell "aided and abetted" the Nigerian military dictatorship in committing severe human rights abuses against members of the Ogoni people who were involved in a nonviolent movement to stop it from drilling for oil in their rich Niger River Delta homeland. But, in a challenge to a 200-year-old law, Shell is arguing that as a corporation it cannot be held responsible for human rights violations abroad.

The company isn't denying the charges; it's claiming that as a corporation it should be able to get away with murder.

Katie Redford, a human rights lawyer and cofounder and director of EarthRights International, explains the case this way:

Shell is asking the Court for a "Vegas" rule: that what happens in Nigeria stays in Nigeria. In the 1990s Shell funded and armed a violent military dictatorship. They used the Nigerian army and sham courts to torture and eliminate people standing in the corporation's way. And now Shell, and the entire oil industry, wants a world in which human rights law does not apply to them.

Shell -- and six oil companies who filed briefs in support of Shell -- claim that as corporations, they enjoy immunity from prosecution under international human rights law because they are not a person, but a corporation. Forget that the Supreme Court ruled in the 2010 Citizens United case that corporations are people under the law. But somehow their "personhood" stops short of taking responsibility for their actions. And, in this case, we're talking about some really despicable actions.

The Ogoni people are ethnic minority that farms and fishes the rich Niger River Delta. Since the 1950s the Ogoni and their land has been poisoned and exploited by oil development. Nigeria is Shell's largest source of oil outside the U.S. In the 1990s, Shell collaborated with the military dictatorship to target Ogoni leaders who opposed Shell's oil operations in their homeland. After a widely condemned sham trail in 1995 the Nigerian military government executed a prominent Ogoni leader, Dr. Kiobel, along with other leaders of the peaceful resistance to oil development known as the "Ogoni Nine," which included Goldman Environmental Prize winner Ken Saro Wiwa. In 2009, Shell paid $15.5 million to settle a separate lawsuit for its role in the Ogoni Nine executions and Saro Wiwa's death.

Dr. Kiobel's wife brought the Kiobel v. Shell lawsuit in 2002 under the Alien Tort Statute, a 220-year-old federal law that allows victims of crimes that break international law -- including serious human rights abuses -- to file suit in the U.S. The law was passed in 1792 and signed by President George Washington because the founding fathers wanted to affirm that our new nation was ready to uphold the rule of law.

Looking back at some of the most heinous examples of corporate behavior in history, the question of corporate responsibility under the law has come up before. At post-World War II Nuremberg trials corporations that contributed to Nazi atrocities were dissolved and their executives were stripped of their assets.

But Shell says the Alien Tort Statute doesn't apply to it, simply because it is a corporation. Only two years after the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, Shell is asking the same judges to accept that corporations are immune from prosecution for human rights violations because they are not people under the law.

In an exchange at an earlier Supreme Court hearing on the case in February (highlighted in a great short video by EarthRights International,) Justice Breyer asked:

Do you think, in the 18th century, if they brought Pirates Incorporated, and we got all their gold, and Blackbeard gets up and he says, 'Oh, it isn't me, it's the corporation." Do you think they would have said, 'Oh yes, I see, it's the corporation, goodbye, go home?

To which Shell's lawyer answered:

"Justice Breyer, yes, the corporation would not be liable."

The Supreme Court will now decide if Shell Oil is legally responsible for its part in murder. This shouldn't be a difficult decision. I'm hoping that common sense and decency prevails in the halls of the Supreme Court, where even the ideologues must understand that as Americans, we must hold a zero tolerance policy for human rights abuses, wherever committed. George Washington and the other founding fathers passed a law to ensure that the arm of the law reaches pirates and murderers wherever they break the law, and that those pirates and murderers would have no safe haven in the U.S. And in 1792 they had a pretty good idea of the intent of the framers of the Constitution on the subject, since they wrote it.

 
FOLLOW GREEN
This fall the U.S. Supreme Court will decide a case that throws a spotlight on the oil industry's toxic influence on our democracy -- and why we need to move America beyond oil as quickly as possible.
This fall the U.S. Supreme Court will decide a case that throws a spotlight on the oil industry's toxic influence on our democracy -- and why we need to move America beyond oil as quickly as possible.
 
 
  • Comments
  • 52
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
06:46 PM on 10/10/2012
The 1886 Supreme Court opinion, Santa Clara Cty. v. Southern Pacific Railroad, which is usually cited as establishing that corporations are people under the Constitution (even though that proposition does not appear in the opinion, but only in the reporter's summary) was obtained by the railroad by bribing Justice Stephen Field. It would not be surprising if Scalia, Thomas, Alito, Roberts, and Kennedy have named their prices for an opinion in favor of Shell OIl.
photo
Talab
I tot i taw a putty tat
12:07 PM on 10/08/2012
" The company isn't denying the charges; it's claiming that as a corporation it should be able to get away with murder. "

With the current makeup of SCOTUS what do you want to bet that it finds that Corporations are a "Special class of person " not liable for criminal violations but entitled to unlimited "free speech" and "Paid Speech" as well with no accountability for the truth of that speech
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
eilish
Life ain't like a box of chocolates
12:21 PM on 10/10/2012
I can't bet against you. I'm too poor to lose.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:00 PM on 10/07/2012
Corporations are considered as an "Entity" and someone should be held responsible for ALL illness, death, money scams, and cleanup for past & future spills / accidents! Right now it seems if they pay
enough on the "Hill" thru Lobby Efforts, they are getting off the hook for many bad things......
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TedEjr
How can they be Right when they are wrong so much
11:10 AM on 10/07/2012
From the article---Forget that the Supreme Court ruled in the 2010 Citizens United case that corporations are people under the law (END)

NO THEY DIDN'T!!!!

I have read the ruling from front to back. They did not say that. What they said was that money was speech. And that corporations had a right to free speech.

However, that is NOT the same as ruling that corporations are people.

That has been an urban legend distortion by BOTH sides.

Now that I have my rant finished, I would say that the PEOPLE of Shell should not get a pass on what happened in Nigeria.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Casey Hewlett
08:03 AM on 10/06/2012
I think this is going to be very telling of the composition of the Supreme Court. If a corporation is considered a 'person' for the purpose of legal protections, then it must also be considered a person for the purpose of legal responsibilities. Additionally, the fact that there was a specific law passed in 1792 to prevent safe haven for those who broke international law ought to make it clear that any person or organization cannot violate human rights and get away with it. Even Scalia, famous for his 'originalism' doctrine, ought to decide Shell should be held accountable.
If the Court decides for Shell, then it'll be pretty clear that the Court has an agenda and is not fulfilling its responsibility.
08:47 PM on 10/05/2012
This is the US subsidiary- the owner is the US. The company does not deny they conspired to commit murder.But maybe MOST importantly, are we going to allow them to be human when it's advantageous, and be a corporation when that's preferable?
02:17 PM on 10/05/2012
A complete mischaracterization of the issue. Why in the world should US courts hear cases that don't involve the US? The plaintiffs are Nigerian. The defendant is Anglo-Dutch. The events took place in Nigeria.

Where would the nonsense you are advocating end? Should US courts hear cases involving workplace violations in China, EPA violations in Bangladesh?

It's not bad enough we are the policeman to the world and some want us to be the social worker to the world. Now you want us to be the world's judiciary too?! NO.
08:05 PM on 10/05/2012
Because U.S. Citizens should respect the basic human rights of everyone everywhere. Not just our own fellow Americans. Its not okay for our companies to assist dictatorships oppress their peole. That's the opposite of supporting democracy and quite frankly such behavior really doesn't support our claim of being the leader of the free world.
photo
carledgar
I thought I heard Buddy Bolden say
07:32 PM on 10/04/2012
When I studied law decades ago (not as a would-be lawyer, but as a journalist) a corporation was described as 'a moral person', meaning that it and its officers could be sued.

Carl
06:13 PM on 10/04/2012
This subject needs to have a lot more publicity. It needs to be everywhere. I think too many in our country have no idea exactly how much blood is on the hands of some of our corporations.
cwaged1002
There is hope but not for us
12:57 AM on 10/07/2012
Corporate owned newspapers and other publication will never inform the public of the blood
on their hands. If you want to be informed on this issue check out on-line publications or print
versions of Z Magazine, Mother Jones, and The Nation.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spriddler
02:24 PM on 10/04/2012
This is a foreign corporation being charged for crimes in a foreign country. The US has no jurisdiction. This a naked ploy by US trial lawyers to open up a bonanza of cases regardless of the damage it causes to our national interest or our corporations and citizens abroad. Shell needs to be held accountable if the allegations are true but it needs to happen in a relevant court with a sound basis for jurisdiction. I have a very difficult time believing the author is oblivious to the actual reasons Shell is likely to win this. As a reader I would like to know why he deliberately left out the most vital legal arguments in the case. Without a sound answer this malarkey needs to be written off as baseless agitprop.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lulex
Made in Canada
12:54 PM on 10/04/2012
You do the crime, you do the time. Immunity is not acceptable.
photo
Djay0252
America needs to Bless God
10:51 AM on 10/04/2012
Sounds like a Mitt Romney etch a sketch moment...........interesting!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Josh Steinhauer
Ex-Patriot, Europe
10:41 AM on 10/04/2012
People may not like it but a corporation is not the same as being a person. You can't simply say they are commiting human rights violations like you can to the Syrian President. It just doesn't work that way.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jie Jones
"Eat me!" -- Jesus, at the Last Supper
09:33 AM on 10/05/2012
Why not?
01:20 PM on 10/05/2012
If you're a person, you're held responsible, and would never have been allowed to leave the country you committed the crime in. Meanwhile international corporations have had a few unsolved issues with the commitments that entail 'personhood'. This type of questionable practice -legal or not in different countries could ultimately destroy both sides business capabilities. Not too fair if you're a small country, a person, or a world power forking over the money.
I thought this article simply questioned the ethics not so much laws, as to who IS culpable here since there's little mention of the laws regarding Human rights and international trade laws.So if the company is not responsible in your opinion- who is?
08:49 AM on 10/04/2012
Kiobel v. Shell is just another symptom of the abuse of governmental systems by those with the greatest economic clout.
It happens over and over again, and we have been warned by some of the greatest minds in all humanity.

“An imbalance between rich and poor is the oldest and most fatal ailment of all Republics.” Plutarch

“When economic power became concentrated in a few hands, then political power flowed to those possessors and away from the citizens, ultimately resulting in an oligarchy or tyranny.” John Adams

“The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism – ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.” Franklin D. Roosevelt
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sugarpops
10:19 AM on 10/04/2012
Well said/ F&F
HansB
The only good certainty is a dead certainty
04:52 AM on 10/04/2012
My guess is, the question of corporate personhood won't be addressed. Scotus directed parties to file briefs on the question of whether the Alien Tort Statute can be invoked. They'll rule narrowly on that, and probably deny relief to plaintiff. I very much doubt Scotus wants to create a precedent whereby US courts - or those of any other country with extraterritorial statutes - can and must judge any action by any person or corporation affecting any other person or corporation in any part of the world.

I think Shell will get away with this, but I haven't tanked at any of their stations for a decade, and I think I'm not alone in that. Hit them where their heart is - in their wallet.