Tag Archives: Amazon rainforest

Chevron’s Refusal to Apologize to Affected Communities in Ecuador

Posted on February 24, 2012 | 5 Comments

Here’s the hypothetical:  Mr. Jones owns a nice ranch in central Texas.  It’s big, the soil is fertile, and the animals couldn’t be happier.  Jones is down on his luck, though, so he decides to lease out half the ranch to an oil company.  Tests a couple of decades ago showed significant potential, and the oil company is eager to get to work.  The parties sign an agreement, and the next few years pass with contentment all around.  Jones is happy because he has a stable stream of income, and the oil company is turning a nice profit on its investment.

Then it happens.  One of the pumping rigs breaks, backs up, and slowly begins to flood the surrounding area with crude oil.  When the company realizes what has happened, it fails to take any meaningful action.  It’s only one pump out of many, and the contamination is hidden under a layer of top-soil and sagebrush.  After a year goes by, animals start dying.  Another year sees Jones fall ill, with the medical exams pointing to contaminated water.

Jones sues and wins big.  The jury awards compensatory damages of $2 million.  Instead of awarding punitive damages outright, the jury conditionally awards an additional $2 million to be paid by the oil company unless the company publicly apologizes to Jones for its willful behavior.

The company has now approached you, a local attorney, for advice on the wisdom of an appeal.  The CEO wants you to attack the demand that the company publicly apologize for its actions on pain of double damages.  The company also wants to fight the merits, maintaining that it is innocent of any wrongdoing.

Does the very nature of the issues on appeal prove the company’s case?  How can the company be penalized for maintaining its innocence?  Doesn’t the verdict tend to coerce the company to make a statement against its interests?  Does it tend to undermine the right to appeal?

*****

The story I just told is not the Chevron-Ecuador case.  The last bit, however, pretty much reflects the situation in which Chevron now finds itself.

In January, Chevron was ordered to pay $9.5 billion in remediation costs and damages and an additional $8.6 billion if it refused to apologize to the affected communities.  Chevron has refused to apologize, nearly doubling the tab as it seeks to overturn the ruling on appeal.   Earlier this month, a Chevron spokesman said an apology would be “a false admission of responsibility.”

What to make of this?  On the one hand, I hear Chevron’s argument loud and clear.  The apology facet of the award certainly seems to be a major departure from the norm.  At the least, it may interfere with the right to appeal and maintain one’s position.

On the other hand, is it really that crazy to demand an apology?  If a mother catches her son hitting another child, she may very well insist on an apology.  If the child apologizes — “accepts responsibility” — maybe he is only grounded a week instead of two.  If this logic flies with parenting, why not with civil justice?

-NF

P.S.  If anyone can recommend any literature on this issue, I’d be grateful.

→ 5 Comments

Posted in Ecuador, South American Environment

Tagged , , , , , , ,

On the Brink? TIPNIS Law to be Revisted by Bolivian Legislature

Posted on January 18, 2012 | 1 Comment

Though it’s probably difficult for outside observers to imagine–and even tough for many of us here in Bolivia–there is a chance that the gains of October could be reversed.  Dario Kenner of Bolivia Diary reports as follows:

The Plurinational Assembly (Congress and Senate) approved Law 180 on 24 October. A few days ago it was formally introduced for further discussion on the parliament´s agenda. The intention is to  modify the law to build the road through the TIPNIS. It is unclear how long this process will take but it could happen soon.

Modifying the law is a very real possibility because since the 2009 general election the governing Movement Towards Socialism (MAS) party has enjoyed a two thirds majority in the Plurinational Assembly (Congress and Senate) and controls the executive branch. However, it might not be quite so straightforward because several indigenous MAS represenatives in the Congress have said they will no longer vote with the MAS.

It is no coincidence the Morales government is now attempting to reverse Law 180. A march led by indigenous communities in the south of the TIPNIS represented by CONISUR (Indigenous Council of the South) is expected to arrive in La Paz very soon. Around a thousand have marched since 20 December 2011 from the edge of the national park to demand the reversal of Law 180 and for the road to be built through the TIPNIS (for more information see Bolivia Diary article on the CONISUR march and interview with expert on TIPNIS Sarela Paz).

For the full story by Dario, click here.

 

→ 1 Comment

Posted in Bolivia, South American Environment

Tagged , , , , , ,

Contradictions

Posted on June 5, 2011 | 4 Comments

We all have them.  Actions that are inconsistent with our words, changes in attitude that reveal we weren’t sincere in the first place, etc.  For some reason, though, it seems politicians are the masters of contradictions.  In the case of national leaders, I suppose it makes perfect sense — they are elected by groups of people with diverse and often inconsistent interests.  By trying to please all or most of their constituents, national leaders inevitably paint themselves into a corner.  Then, when it comes time to choose between standing by tough talk or “compromising” (i.e., acting in a contradictory way), politicians do what politicians do.

That’s a long wind-up to announce that I’m upset with Evo Morales and his government’s decision to build a highway through some of the most beautiful rainforest on earth.  I’ve heard a lot about this issue since I arrived in Cochabamba two weeks ago, but I confess that I’m still shaky on some of the details.  In a nutshell, Morales and his MAS administration have brokered a deal with Brazil to construct a highway from Villa Tunari to San Ignacio de Moxos.  The 306-kilometer highway, bankrolled by Brazil and managed by a Brazillian construction company, will cut through the heart of Isiboro Secure Indiginous Territory and National Park (TIPNIS), dividing communities, destroying habitat, and, as roads always do, paving the way for further development and destruction.

Beyond the ecological impact, two factors make this project extremely troubling: (1) the fact that the people living in TIPNIS were not properly consulted; and (2) the fact that this project comes on the heels of President Morales’s inspiring leadership at the World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth and in passing the Law of Mother Earth.

The people of TIPNIS make the case better than I can:

We report before Bolivia and before the world that our government is breaking the constitution, which they themselves put into law. Also the Environment Act, the Protected Areas Act and many other national laws and international commitments. They are trying to build this road, which would cause the greatest ecological destruction in the history of Bolivia, illegally without respect for the law or the rights of the indigenous peoples who inhabit it.

The road constitutes an attack on the life and culture of the Moxenos, Yurakaré and Chimanes peoples. It would also condemn to extinction the unique fauna and flora of the forest. The rivers, lakes and scenic beauty of the area would be irreparably affected. We ask President Morales that he is consistent with his speech and laws in defence of Mother Earth and the rights of indigenous peoples.

Some links on the issue for those interested in learning more:  here (positive coverage on the economic benefits), here (the full statement from TIPNIS), and here (an analysis from eco Amazonia).

-NF

→ 4 Comments

Posted in Bolivia, South American Economy, South American Environment

Tagged , , ,