affidavit

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

CONSTITUTION PETITION No. 1986/2000

SHEHRI - CBE AND OTHERS ... PETITIONERS

VERSUS

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN
AND OTHERS ... RESPONDENTS

FRIENDS OF THE EARTH INTERNATIONAL Ö INTERVENORS
PRINS HENDRIKKADE-48
1012 AC AMSTERDAM,
NETHERLANDS.

AFFIDAVIT OF FRIENDS OF
THE EARTH INTERNATIONAL - INTERVENORS

I, S. SHAKIL AHMED, son of ABDUL ALEEM (LATE), muslim, adult, resident of Karachi make oath and state as under:

1. I am a duly constituted Attorney of Friends of the Earth International (hereinafter referred to as FOEI) as instructed by them.

2. FOEI begs to intervene in this Petition with a view to :

a) assist this Hon'ble Court in respect of the international status and importance of national parks, such as the Kirthar National Park, on the United Nations (UN) List of Protected Areas; and

(b) bring certain facts on record with regard to certain statements made in the affidavit of Peter Cockcroft, General Manager of Respondent No.3 so as to assist this Hon'ble Court's understanding of the possible effects of oil and gas activities.

3. FOEI respectfully submits that its intervention in this case furthers, is consistent with, and is objectively justified by:

(i) the nature, objectives and activities of FOEI.
(ii) the Principles applied by the UN EcoSoc in the establishment of consultative relations and FOEI's consultative status; and

(iii) FOEI's IUCN membership.

(iv) FOEI being an international organisation and the world environment being a common concern of the humankind as a whole

Friends of the Earth International

4. FOEI was founded in 1971 as a federation of environmental organisations from around the world. It is an association registered under the laws of the Netherlands (Chamber of Commerce, Amsterdam, no. 40535338). Its constitution contains, inter alia, the following objective:

without any purpose of gain...the cultivation of understanding and sympathy for the necessity of the conservation, restoration and sensible use of the natural resources of the earth.

(Copy of English translation of Dutch Original of Constitution of FOEI is filed as Annexure "A")

5. FOEI currently has member groups in 66 countries and areas all over the world, comprised as follows:

(1) Africa: 10 members
(2) America (Central & South): 14 members
(3) America (North): 2 members
(4) Asia: 6 members
(5) Australasia: 2 members
(6) Europe (Central & East): 14 members
(7) Europe (West): 18 members

(Further details in this regard are filed as Annexure "B").

6. FOEI and its member groups campaign internationally, nationally and locally to protect the environment and create sustainable societies. They are united by the common conviction that environmentally sustainable development requires both strong grassroots activism and effective national and international campaigning. In 1998, the combined number of members and supporters of Friends of the Earth groups was close to one million, and the FOEI umbrella united almost 5,000 local activists groups. The combined annual budget of FOE groups was close to US$200 million, and together they employed close to 700 full time staff members. In pursuing its objectives, FOEI currently has four major programmes and twelve campaigns.

7. FOEI and its member groups have considerable experience of campaigning on nature conservation issues and on the environmental and social effects of oil operations. The following paragraphs give examples, primarily, of the more recent activities.

(i) In 2000, the FOEI International Financial Institutions Programs (IFI) launched its Oil, Mining and Gas Position paper that calls for the phasing out of public financing for fossil fuel and mining projects and demanding recognition for local communities' self?determination. The phase?out paper was presented to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund in September 2000. It covers all phases of fossil?fuel and mining cycles: prospecting, exploration, test drilling, exploitation, as well as construction of related infrastructure such as pipelines and roads, and any financial regulatory advice or programs by IFIs that enable such projects.

(ii) FOEI presented a 5?year period phase, an immediate moratorium on any fossil fuel and mining support and develop a ban on any support for fossil fuel and mining prospecting and exploration in intact tropical forests frontier zones, ecologically sensitive or biologically rich areas, biodiversity hotspots, or sensitive areas for local communities and indigenous peoples' lands ? areas of "high conservation value" as identified and defined by organizations such as the United Nations, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund International and Conservation International.

(iii) In this context, FOEI regularly attends meetings, for example of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the African Development Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and presents case studies and proposals for environmental guidelines.

(iv) An example of its work on nature conservation, FOEI's Forest Programme is committed to the conservation of all remaining forest ecosystems on the planet, and to the restoration of forest ecosystems. It incorporates a number of strategic international campaigns to conserve the world's forests as biologically and culturally diverse ecosystems. FOEI member group activities in this regard in 2000 ranged from providing legal support to indigenous peoples defending their lands against the intrusion of oil companies, to community?based forest management, and the launching of a campaign to 'Save the Sundarbans' in Bangladesh from fossil fuel activities. This built on previous work, such as the launching of Radio Amazonia in 1996, as a successful tool to lobby and impact decision?makers on stricter policies for concessionaires and logging companies. A book, entitled "Public Policies for a Sustainable Amazon" was released and widely distributed.

(v) FOEI member group activities in this programme have included, for example, campaigning against the Chad?Cameroon Oil and Pipeline Project in Nigeria involving Exxon Mobil, Shell and Elf. In Prague, September 2000, FOE Ecuador launched the Southern Peoples Ecological Debt Creditors Alliance bringing together representatives from the Third World. One key demand of the coalition is the restoration and repair of the damage caused by the exploitation of natural resources and impacts of climate change. FOE Indonesia filed a case in the Supreme Court on the Freeport McMoran oil?mine project in Irian Jaya.

(vi) FOEI and member groups have long campaigned against the environmental and social effects of the oil industry, within the contexts of nature conservation, indigenous people and climate change. Friends of the Earth Nigeria has played a significant role in informing the world of the effects of fossil fuel activities in the Niger Delta. In 2000, Friends of the Earth Colombia published Ruiria, El grito del Petroleo, a report giving information about the U'wa people and their struggle to maintain their culture and habitat in the face of fossil fuel activities. In September 2000, FOEI published 'Gathering Storm: The Human Cost of Climate Change', arguing the need for deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, as the threat of more frequent and extreme high-temperature events, droughts, floods, cyclones and storm surges with knock-on effects for ecosystems, fires, pest outbreaks, human health, our settlements and food security increased.

(vii) In its Briefing for the failed November 2000 Hague Summit on climate change, FOEI pointed out that climate scientists have suggested that atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations should be kept below 450ppm (parts per million), or about twice pre-industrial concentrations, in order to avoid catastrophic consequences. FOEI argued that to achieve this, industrialised countries will need to make deep cuts in their greenhouse gas emissions, of up to 90% by 2050; developing countries will need to switch from dependence on fossil fuels to investment in renewable energy sources and energy efficient measures; and less developed countries must be supported in achieving development through sustainable means.

(viii) FOEI also participates in a number of issue?oriented international networks, such as Oilwatch International and the Environmental Liaison Centre International.

(Copy of FOEI's Annual Report for 1999 is filed as Annexure "C".)

UN EcoSoc Consultative Status

8. One of the principles to be applied in the establishment of consultative status requires the organization concerned to be of recognized standing within its field. FOEI, being of such standing, is in consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council (EcoSoc). By a Resolution of 25th July 1996 the UN ECOSOC at its 49th plenary meeting set out the "Arrangements for Consultation with Non-Governmental Organisations. (Copies of the relevant extract from the UN EcoSoc's 'List of Non-Governmental Organizations in Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council as at July 1995', Document ref: E/1995/INF/5 of 20th September 1995, and Resolution 1996/31 are filed as Annexure "D" and "E" respectively).

9. In the case of FOEI, consultative status, inter alia requires FOEI to support the work of the UN, and to promote knowledge of its principles, in respect of the environment; and entitles FOEI to participate in UN decision-making and consultative processes in respect of the environment, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Commission for Sustainable Development, which FOEI does regularly. FOEI official representatives attend conferences and meetings of the different UN bodies in Geneva, New York, Vienna and the UN regional offices.

IUCN membership

10. FOEI is also a member of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) - The World Conservation Union. It was founded in 1948 and, inter alia, brings together States, government agencies, non-governmental organizations and scientists from around the world. The IUCN Mission is:

To influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable.

(copy of extracts from the IUCN Dutch Membership Directory, and the IUCN website, is filed as Annexure "F").

The UN List of Protected Areas

11. On 22nd April 1959, the UN Economic and Social Council (EcoSoc) requested the UN Secretary-General, with the assistance of the IUCN and others, to establish a list of national parks. This was effected at the 1063rd plenary meeting of the UN EcoSoc, within Resolution 713 of the 27th Session, (Copy of resolution 713 is filed as Annexure "G".

12. The preamble to that Resolution states the rationale for the list as follows:

Noting that national parks and equivalent reserves have been established in most countries which are members of the United Nations...and that they contribute to the inspiration, culture and welfare of mankind, Believing that these national parks are valuable for economic and scientific reasons and also as areas for the future preservation of fauna and flora and geologic structures in their natural state[.]

13. The Official Record of the 1063rd plenary meeting records the rationale for a UN list, in the record of the statement made on behalf of one of the co-sponsors of the Resolution:

the United Nations was the proper authority to establish the list if it was to have the international standing which it deserved[.]

(Copy of the first sentence of paragraph 6 of the Official Record of that meeting, under Agenda Item 7, is filed as Annexure "H").
14. In response to that Resolution, the Secretary-General prepared a report, dated 15th February 1961 and entitled 'List of national parks and equivalent reserves', indicating that over fifty Governments had responded to the request to furnish information for the purposes of compiling the list (Copy of the Introduction to that report (ref. E/3436), comprising four pages, is filed as Annexure "I").

15. The IUCN "played a major role in the preparation of the report" (Copy of Resolution 810 of the 31st Session of the UN EcoSoc, passed at the 1141st plenary meeting on 24th April 1961, is filed as Annexure "J").

16. On 18th December 1962, the General Assembly of the United Nations noted the steps taken by the EcoSoc in Resolution 810, "particularly as they affect national parks and equivalent reserves" and noted "with satisfaction" the opinion expressed by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization at its 1962 General Conference:

that, to be effective, measures to preserve natural resources, flora and fauna should be taken at the earliest possible moment simultaneously with economic development.

(Copy of Resolution 1831 of the 17th Session of the UN General Assembly, passed at the 1197th plenary meeting on that date, is filed as Annexure "K").

17. To date, 12 editions of the UN List have been printed, of which the latest is the 1997 list. It is now compiled jointly by the IUCN-World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) and by the World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC), (Copy of relevant contents of its website on the 1997 UN List are filed as Annexure "L").

18. From 1982 until 1994, the list was referred to as the UN List of National Parks and Protected Areas. The list is now referred to as the 'UN List of Protected Areas', in order:

to underscore the broad range of functions served by protected areas and to avoid unjustified emphasis of the term 'national park'.

(Copy of the fourth paragraph of the Introduction to the 1997 UN List of Protected Areas, from the UNEP-WCMC website, is filed in Annexure "L").

19. FOEI therefore respectfully submits that the UN List can objectively be described as one of the most significant and seminal attempts at the international official level to recognise the importance of national parks to human society.

20. In the words of Adrian Phillips, the Chair of the WCPA:

The United Nations List of Protected Areas is...a record of extraordinary human achievement over 125 years - a commitment by nations, peoples, groups and individuals to safeguard areas of land and sea from destruction. Protected areas represent human ideals at their best - they express a long term vision and a broad sense of responsibility towards people and nature.
(Copy of the first two sentences of the Foreword to the 1997 UN List of Protected Areas is filed in Annexure "L").

21. The Kirthar National Park (KNP) was added to the UN List in 1974. It falls into Category II of the IUCN Protected Area Management Categories, as a 'protected area managed mainly for ecosystem protection and recreation'. The definition of Category II is as follows:

Natural area of land and/or sea, designated to (a) protect the ecological integrity of one or more ecosystems for present or future generations, (b) exclude exploitation or occupation inimical to the purposes of designation of the area and (c) provide a foundation for spiritual, scientific educational, recreational and visitor opportunities, all of which must be environmentally and culturally compatible.

(Copies of UNEP-WCMC list for Pakistan is filed as Annexure "M").

22. FOEI respectfully submits that activities designed to explore for fossil fuel would generally, and the activities proposed in respect of the KNP would specifically, be objectively regarded as inimical to the purposes of designation of a national park within this Category. This is reflected in section 15 of the Sindh Wild-Life Ordinance 1972, which is entirely consistent with, and can be objectively understood as a direct consequence of, the underlying philosophy and purposes of the UN List of Protected Areas, as evidenced in the United Nations' Resolutions and documents referred to above. Overriding that provision would offend against its international origin, importance and context, and against the equal treatment of environmental protection and economic legislation.

23. The importance to human society of protected areas, as evidenced by the UN List, has been supplemented in international law by the adoption on 5th June 1992 of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity. To date, there are 180 Parties to this Convention. Pakistan signed the Convention on 5th June 1992 and ratified it on 26th July 1994.

24. The Convention's first three pre-ambular paragraphs express this importance:

Conscious of the intrinsic value of biological diversity and of the ecological, genetic, social, economic, scientific, educational, cultural, recreational and aesthetic values of biological diversity and its components Conscious also of the importance of biological diversity for evolution and for maintaining life sustaining systems of the biosphere,
Affirming that the conservation of biological diversity is a common concern of humankind

25. The Convention's ninth and tenth pre-ambular paragraphs recognise the importance of the precautionary principle:

Noting that it is vital to anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of significant reduction or loss of biological diversity at source, Noting also that where there is a threat of significant reduction or loss of biological diversity, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to avoid or minimise such a threat

26. Article 8 of the Convention establishes a public international law obligation on Parties in respect of protected areas:

Each Contracting Party shall, as far as possible and as appropriate:

(a) Establish a system of protected areas or areas where special measures need to be taken to conserve biological diversity;

(b) Develop, where necessary, guidelines for the selection, establishment and management of protected areas or areas where special measures need to be taken to conserve biological diversity;

(c) Regulate or manage biological resources important for the conservation of biological diversity whether within or outside protected areas, with a view to ensuring their conservation and sustainable use;

(d) Promote the protection of ecosystems, natural habitats and the maintenance of viable populations of species in natural surroundings;

(e) Promote environmentally sound and sustainable development in areas adjacent to protected areas with a view to furthering protection of these areas;.....

The oil industry and the environment

27. Respondent No. 3 has suggested to the court, in a number of different formulations, that the oil industry operates in environmentally sensitive areas in ways that are of little or of no environmental significance.

28. In particular, in the Affidavit of Peter Cockcroft, General Manager of Respondent No.3 (in paragraphs 9 and 27) he states as follows:

In [two specified] letters [in August 1997] PEPL informed the Respondent No.2 that there are various examples in the world where seismic and exploration activities have been undertaken in sensitive natural environments. Specifically, PEPL quoted the examples of:

a) BHP Petroleum has undertaken seismic operations in a highly sensitive natural reserve in Western Australia.

b) Mobil Corporation has undertaken seismic operations in Zambezi valley in Zimbabwe and successfully completed the operations without leaving a trace.

c) TOTAL has drilled exploratory wells in virgin rain forests in Bolivia with minimal effects.

d) The ESSO production facility in Fawley, Southern England is an example of the harmonious coexistence between industrial and ecological operations.

e) British Petroleum for the past twenty-two years been operating (sic) in perfect harmony within an area of outstanding natural beauty in Wytch Farm, Dorset, Southern England.

.....As noted above, the oil industry is already operating in environmentally sensitive areas without significant impact on the environment.

29. FOEI wishes to refute the claim that the oil industry operates without significant impact on the environment, in environmentally sensitive areas or otherwise, in three ways:

a. by informing this Hon'ble Court of the environmental liabilities as admitted by two of the world's largest oil and gas companies;

b. by responding to the particular examples cited by Mr Cockcroft; and

c. by informing this Hon'ble Court of an example of the possible environmental and social effects such operations.

30. As to 29(a):
Exxon Mobil Corporation

At the end of 2000, accumulated site restoration and environmental provisions, after reduction for amounts paid, amounted to US $3.7 billion. Charges made against income for site restoration and environmental liabilities were US $311 million in 2000, US $219 million in 1999 and US $240 million in 1998. This information was provided by the company to the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), filed on 28th March 2001 (in Form 10-K, Financial Section, page 23; (Copy of relevant extracts from the electronic version of that Form, as downloaded from the SEC website, are filed as Annexure "N").

Royal Dutch Shell Group of companies

At the end of 2000 the total liabilities being carried for environmental clean up, decommissioning and site restoration were US $2.989 billion. In addition, Shell companies paid a total of $3.1 million in 2000, the third consecutive year that the levels of fines paid increased. These are the Shell Group's own figures, appearing on their website (Copy of these figures are filed Annexure "O").

31. As to 29(b), specifically with respect to Mr Cockcroft's examples, he does not offer any information upon which an objective assessment may be made by the court on the environmental impact of such activities. Nor, in respect of his first and third examples, does he identify the "highly sensitive natural reserve" and "virgin rain forests" referred to.

32. In the case of seismic activities, it is known that they can disturb wildlife and that longer term problems may be suffered by particularly sensitive creatures, such as, in the marine environment, cetaceans (for example, whales and dolphins).

33. In the case of exploratory well drilling in a virgin rain forest, it is known that the particularly vulnerable ecology of such declining environments can be susceptible to minor breaches of their integrity, and the drilling of exploration wells can rarely, if ever, be considered a minor breach. Additionally, the activities of oil companies in these areas often conflict with the indigenous communities. For example, Shell and Enron are constructing the Cuiaba gas pipeline from Bolivia to Brazil, through the middle of the largest intact area of Chiquitano Tropical Forest and Pantanal wetlands. In July 2000, Friends of the Earth US and Amazon Watch presented video evidence to the US Overseas Private Investment Corporation showing the pipeline's significant and irreversible impacts. They expressed concern over, for example, pollution and damage to local water supplies, a failed conservation programme and a mismanaged indigenous titling programme. (Copy of the Friends of the Earth US Press Release, dated 25th July 2000, is filed as Annexure "P")

34. In the case of the Esso production facility in Fawley, near Southampton in Southern England, this is neither a seismic nor an exploration activity. Again, no evidence is offered to support the statement that it is "an example of the harmonious coexistence between industrial and ecological operations".

35. This production facility is an oil refinery. It released into the air the second highest tonnage of benzene (174 tonnes) of all sites regulated by the Environment Agency as a part of the United Kingdom's regulatory regime for the most polluting industrial processes in 1999. According to the World Health Organisation's International Agency for Research on Cancer, benzene is recognised as a definite (as opposed to probable or possible) human carcinogen. In 1999, the refinery discharged into the environment over 40 substances regulated under that regime, including 2.9 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, the single most important greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change; fossil fuel production and use represent about 75% of human-derived emissions of carbon dioxide (Copy of extracts from the websites of the Environment Agency and Friends of the Earth, England, Wales and Northern Ireland, is filed as Annexure "Q"; and of the IARC, for scientific information on the nature of benzene, is filed as Annexure "R").

36. Since its commissioning in 1951, this refinery has discharged many thousands of tonnes of substances harmful, probably harmful and possibly harmful to human health and the environment. In addition, a number of human deaths and unauthorised discharges into the environment have also occurred at this refinery. For example:

(1) two people were killed in 1991 in an explosion when an Esso ship's cargo was being discharged at this refinery. A report by the official UK Government's inquiry team found that the engineering standards practised "were below an acceptable level" and criticised Esso's management onshore and on board;

(2) on 13th June 1995, the relevant UK regulatory body issued a third enforcement notice in respect of the refinery after an unauthorised discharge of hydrogen sulphide and mercaptans;

(3) nine days later, Esso was fined £5,000 after an oil spill at the refinery. An oil slick developed across Southampton Water after the spill and the clean-up bill cost Esso £175,000

(Copy of extracts from The ENDS Reports, a respected UK journal, is filed as Annexure "S").

37. FOEI respectfully submits that this refinery cannot objectively be said to be "an example of the harmonious coexistence between industrial and ecological operations".

38. As to British Petroleum operating "in perfect harmony within an area of outstanding natural beauty in Wytch Farm, Dorset", England, again, no evidence is produced to establish this statement. One of the parent companies of Respondent No. 3 (Premier Oil) is also interested in this oil production accumulation, the largest onshore accumulation in Western Europe. If Respondent No. 3 seeks to produce such evidence, it should, in particular, make full disclosure of:

(1) the soil and groundwater investigations conducted at Wytch Farm;

(2) the causes and effects of the two pipeline failures, costing over £3 million to repair, which occurred in July 1997;

(3) the cause of the circumstances leading to the serving of an enforcement notice by the Environment Agency in December 1998 after a leak from the Wytch Farm Gathering Station

(Copies the documents are filed as Annexure "T")

39. Aside from these specific examples cited by Respondent No. 3, FOEI respectfully submits that the court may wish to be made aware more broadly of the possible environmental and social effects of the operations of oil companies.

40. A prominent example of such effects is those that have arisen in the Niger Delta in Nigeria. In the following paragraphs, the facts are taken, unless otherwise stated, from Chapters 5 and 6 of 'The Price of Oil: Corporate responsibility and Human Rights Violations in Nigeria's Oil Producing Communities' (Human Rights Watch, 1999). Human Rights Watch describes itself, at the beginning of the book, as follows:

Human Rights Watch conducts regular, systematic investigations of human rights abuses in some seventy countries around the world. Our reputation for timely, reliable disclosures has made us an essential source of information for those concerned with human rights. we address the human rights practices of governments of all political stripes, of all geopolitical alignments, and of all ethnic and religious persuasions. Human Rights Watch defends freedom of thought and expression, due process and equal protection of the law, and a vigorous society; we document and denounce murders, disappearances, torture, arbitrary imprisonment, discrimination, and other abuses of internationally recognized human rights. Our goal is to hold governments accountable if they transgress the rights of their people.....

Human Rights Watch is an independent, nongovernmental organization, supported by contributions from private individuals and foundations worldwide. It accepts no government funds, directly or indirectly.

(Copy of relevant extracts from the book. The Price of Oil is filed as Annexure "U").

Introduction
41. The Niger Delta is one of the world's largest wetlands, encompassing over 20,000 square kilometres; contains 6,000 square kilometres of mangrove forest and 11,700 square kilometres of freshwater swamp forests, with many unique species of plants and animals.

42. In 1997, the Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited (SPDC) accounted for over 40% of Nigeria's total oil production from more than 80 oilfields. SPDC is a joint venture between the Nigerian National Oil Corporation (NNOC), Shell, Elf and Agip and operates largely onshore on dry land or in the mangrove swamp. The other large producers carry out their activities under five further joint ventures between NNOC and (i) Chevron; (ii) Mobil; (iii)Agip and Phillips; (iv) Elf; and (v) offshore, Texaco.

Spills and discharges

43. According to the Department of Petroleum Resources, between 1976 and 1996, a total of 4,835 incidents resulted in the spillage of 2,446,322 barrels of oil, of which an estimated 1,896,930 barrels were lost to the environment. In March 1998, for example, "pipeline failure" caused a spill of 20,000 barrels from a Shell flow station.

44. The environmental impact of oil-contaminated produced water and of the disposal of waste from oil facilities are largely unevaluated or unknown. A 1993 Shell environmental impact study found high hydrocarbon content in a nearby creek indicating "poor or no treatment of effluent". According to a former employee, SPDC had no adequate facilities for treating oily or chemical waste in its eastern division in 1994.

45. SPDC has admitted in 1996 that the water discharged from three of its refineries contained more hydrocarbons than prescribed by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency. The effects of effluents from refineries at Port Harcourt and Warri on fish stocks have been the subject of complaints by communities neat the Bonny terminal.

Other environmental effects

46. In addition to the direct pollution caused by oil production, the oil industry has had a profound effect on the environment of the Niger Delta through the infrastructure constructed to support exploration and production, and from internal immigration. The construction of roads has increased economic activity in the affected communities, but has also allowed cultivation and hunting in previously pristine forest and increased commercial logging activities.

47. Lines cleared for seismic surveys have become informal roads. According to Shell, "in densely populated or environmentally sensitive areas, where explosions are not practical, vibrator trucks are used" rather than dynamite. However, the use of dynamite had taken place close to human habitation.

48. Roads have been built across seasonally flooded plains, whose ecology depends on the changing hydrological conditions.

Flaring

49. Nigeria flares about 75% of its total gas production, about half of it by SPDC. Due to the low efficiency of many of the flares much of the gas is released as methane, which has a higher global warming potential, rather than carbon dioxide. Fines for gas flaring of 11 US cents per 1,000 standard cubic feet of gas are paid by SPDC.

Land expropriation

50. Land is acquired by the companies from the Nigerian Government under domestic legislation, which in practice allows the Government to expropriate land for the oil industry with no effective due process protections for those whose livelihoods may be destroyed by confiscation of their lands. In practice, the decision as to the land that will be expropriated and the determination of such compensation as will be paid appears to be made by the industry itself.

Sabotage

51. SPDC and Shell have claimed that in 1996 sabotage accounted for over 60% of spills at its Nigerian facility. This claim was quoted in a Shell advertisement in the British national press, and Friends of the Earth, England, Wales and Northern Ireland complained to the British advertising industry's self-regulating, non-statutory Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). The ASA upheld the complaint, ruling that "the advertisers had not given enough information to support the claim and asked for it not to be repeated". Statistics from the Department of Petroleum resources indicate that 4% of all Nigerian spills were caused by sabotage between 1976 and 1990.

Social impacts

52. Despite the vast oil wealth of the oil producing areas, the Niger Delta region remains poor. GNP per capita is below the estimated national average of US$260. Education levels are below the national average. The poverty level is exacerbated by the high cost of living. The oil sector employs on high wages a small percentage of the workforce, and they are surrounded by a great mass of un- or under-employed.

53. There are low levels of access to safe drinking water and proper sanitation. Agricultural development has followed the construction of new roads, whilst pressure on land forces farmers to reduce their fields' fallow periods. Yields have declined. Local fishermen complain of reduced catches and attribute that to pollution from the oil industry, though there is a lack of proper research to confirm or refute this.

54. Despite the stated policies of some of the companies, they and their contractors are typically perceived as arrogant and dismissive by local communities; at remote flow stations live in virtual isolation from local communities; are fed and watered by company suppliers rather than local retailers; and are airlifted to hospitals in Port Harcourt or Lagos if they fall ill. Communities complain that they have no permanent staff working for the oil companies.

55. Large sums of money have been spent by the companies on 'development assistance, but this has largely been misspent. According to accounts, much development spending gets diverted into the pockets of company employees or local contractors or chiefs, or of those who might otherwise be troublemakers. In each community, the result has been to create an elite group which has benefited from the companies, and the great mass who have not. Inappropriate projects are another source of misspent 'development assistance', such as the unused SPDC fish processing plant, located far from potential markets, without electricity for cold storage and without qualified local staff to run it; or the SPDC hospital with no running water and no toilet.

56. According to research carried out for SPDC, in its areas of operation in the Niger delta, 84% of respondents felt that oil company activities adversely affected the economies of the host communities, and 69% felt there was a high level of deprivation and neglect.

57. The London Sunday Times quoted a European Shell executive anonymously in 1995, in the context of Nigeria, as stating "I would go so far as to say that we spent more money on bribes and corruption than on community projects".

Double standards

58. Of the many questions raised by the experience of the people and the environment of the Niger Delta, is that of the standards applied by multinational companies when operating far from home in so-called developing countries.

59. Principle 11 of the 1992 UN Rio Declaration on Environment and Development provides:

Environmental standards, management objectives and priorities should reflect the environmental context to which they apply. Standards applied by some countries may be inappropriate and of unwarranted economic social cost to other countries, in particular developing countries.

60. At the annual general meeting of Shell Transport and Trading plc (the British parent company of the Anglo-Dutch joint venture generally known as Shell) in London in May 1996, Group chairman Mr John Jennings is quoted as saying:

the charge of 'double standards' is mistaken, because it is based on the notion that there is a single 'absolute environmental standard'... As long as we continue to improve, varying standards are inevitable.

61. At the corresponding Dutch meeting, the Group Managing Director, Mr C.A.J. Herkstroter implied that higher environmental standards could harm local economies and is quoted as saying:

Should we apply the higher-cost western standards, thus making the operation uncompetitive and depriving the local work force of jobs and the chance of development? or should we adopt the prevailing legal standards at the site, while having clear plans to improve towards 'best practice' within a reasonable timeframe?

Violence and US litigation

62. Violence, involving Nigerian soldiers, police action and neighbouring communities, and against the back-drop of the oil industry, has been a feature of the Niger Delta for decades. One example of the oil industry being caught up in and contributing to a conflict is the 1997 Warri Crisis, documented on pages 111-114 of 'The Price of Oil', contained in Annexure "U".
63. A prominent opponent of the oil companies in the Niger Delta was Ken Saro-Wiwa, spokesperson for the Movement of the Survival of the Ogoni People. He was hanged in November 1995, with eight others, after being convicted and sentenced to death by a special tribunal which, according to a fact-finding team appointed by the United Nations Secretary General, "had no jurisdiction to try Mr Ken Saro-Wiwa and the others" (Annex to UN Document A/50/960). A member of Ken Saro-Wiwa's defence team was Oronto Douglas, Deputy Director of Friends of the Earth Nigeria (Environmental Rights Action), who himself has been arrested and tortured by the Nigerian authorities.

64. Members of Ken Saro-Wiwa's family and others are currently bringing a legal action in the United States alleging grave human