Did Vince Cable recuse himself from Kiobel v Shell controversy?
By John Donovan
Vince Cable, the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills was formerly a senior Royal Dutch Shell executive.
It has recently come to light that Shell successfully lobbied his department to intervene on Shell’s behalf in a case being heard by the US Supreme Court: Kiobel-v-Shell.
The UK Information Commissioners Office (ICO) has just released its decision in regard to a complaint:
Extract
- This complaint relates to a request which sought information on the UK government’s decision to submit two “amicus” briefs in the case Kiobel v Shell (‘Kiobel’). (An amicus brief is a document filed in a court by a party who is not directly related to the case under consideration). Kiobel was a case before the Supreme Court of the United States brought under the US Alien Torts Statute 1789 (‘ATS’). The ATS allows foreign victims of human rights abuses to seek civil remedies in US courts.
- The Kiobel case was brought against Shell by Nigerian citizens who alleged that the company had aided and abetted the Nigerian authorities in the torture and extrajudicial killing of unarmed protesters in the 1990s.
In view of the claims made by Shell over its influence with the minister, the question arises of whether Mr Cable recused himself from any involvement in these matters, including the lobbying and the release of information as investigated by the ICO?
ARTICLE ENDS
Documents show UK Government caved in to Shell lobbying
Graphics from The Guardian article Unloveable Shell, the Goddess of Oil by Andrew Rowell, published 15th Nov 1997
“Are there any principles that the UK government is willing to stand up for in the face of business lobbying? Apparently not, if documents released through a Freedom of Information request are anything to go by. These show, in detail, how the UK intervened to support Shell and Rio Tinto in high-profile US human rights court cases, following requests from the companies. The Kiobel case was brought against the oil giant by communities from the Niger Delta, who accused Shell of helping the Nigerian military to systematically torture and kill environmentalists in the 1990s.”
Extracts from an article published by Amnesty International under the headline: “The documents that show our Government caved in to corporate lobbying”
Are there any principles that the UK government is willing to stand up for in the face of business lobbying? Apparently not, if documents released through a Freedom of Information request are anything to go by.
These show, in detail, how the UK intervened to support Shell and Rio Tinto in high-profile US human rights court cases, following requests from the companies.
The documents, obtained by the Corporate Responsibility Coalition (of which we’re a part), relate to the UK government’s intervention in two cases: Kiobel-v-Shell and Sarei-v-Rio Tinto.
The Kiobel case was brought against the oil giant by communities from the Niger Delta, who accused Shell of helping the Nigerian military to systematically torture and kill environmentalists in the 1990s.
The US Supreme court halted the case against Shell a year ago, accepting the arguments from both Shell and the UK Government that cases of this kind shouldn’t be taken in the US.
The UK government has effectively supported the corporations in ducking out of scrutiny in the US courts. Why would the government want to prevent UK companies from being held accountable in the US courts for complicity in human rights violations as serious as torture and murder?
‘both BIS [Department of Business, Innovation and Skills] and CEDD [Commercial and Economic Diplomacy Department at the FCO] believe that the prosperity and potentially significant commercial considerations in this case weigh in favour of the UK submitting an amicus brief.’
FOI request page 52
The Freedom of Information request shows the Government was well aware that its intervention would be seen as inconsistent with its approach to human rights. It knew that these cases are exceptional and relate only to the most serious corporate abuses. It was aware of the reputational consequences, and that Amnesty and other human rights groups would be outraged when we found out – but still, they decided to pursue this course of action.
RELATED ARTICLES AND DOCUMENTS
- Guardian: documents reveal extent of lobbying from Shell and Rio Tinto
- Read the full Freedom of Information documents (PDF)
- Decision Notice by Information Commissioners Office 22 April 2014
- Documents reveal extent of Shell and Rio Tinto lobbying in human rights case in Guardian, 06th April 2014
- CORE & Amnesty International press release, 06th April 2014 (Word document)
- The documents that show our Government caved in to corporate lobbying on Amnesty International UK blog, 07th April 2014
- To make a successful FOI request, take a big dollop of patience and a handful of top-class law students on CORE blog, 07th April 2014
- Corporate Responsibility Coalition – Post-Kiobel research
Shell to Sea goes to UN over policing of gas dispute
Extracts from an Irish Times article by Lorna Siggins published 30 April 2014
Shell to Sea has appealed to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to raise the issue of policing the Corrib gas dispute with the Government. The Mayo-based environmental group says it has made the submission to the UNHCR’s office, following Minister for Justice Alan Shatter’s confirmation in the Dáil that he did “not see a necessity” for an independent inquiry into policing in North Mayo. UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders Margaret Sekaggya had recommended that the Government should “investigate all allegations and reports of intimidation, harassment and surveillance in the context of the Corrib gas dispute in a prompt and impartial manner”.
Shell-led proposal for Kitimat LNG plant incorporates its joint venture
Extract from an article by Derrick Penner, published by The Vancouver Sun on 30 April 2014
VANCOUVER — Partners in the Shell Canada-led proposal for a liquefied natural gas plant at Kitimat have formally incorporated their LNG Canada Joint Venture, the companies announced Wednesday, although they remain a long way from making a final investment decision on the potentially $12-billion project. The consortium, which includes PetroChina, Korea Gas (Kogas) and Mitsubishi Corp., has already optioned a possible site in Kitimat…
RELATED ARTICLE
Shell hikes stake in proposed LNG Canada project to 50%
Royal Dutch Shell is raising its stake in the proposed Canada LNG project on British Columbia’s coast at Kitimat to 50% after two of the Asian partners pared their interests.
The TRUTH will set you FREE.
