Nigeria Content Online

Since oil companies gained dominance of the world economic
system, literally driving the engines of industrialisation and modern fossil
civilisation, they have taken several steps that have endangered humanity. The
massive burning of fossil fuels, such as oil and gas, have contributed
immensely to the stoking of the atmosphere with greenhouse gases responsible
for global warming.

The sector is also known to have been responsible for environmental
and human rights abuses in the world. The presentation of their commodity as
the cheapest form of available energy has been sustained over a century by cost
externalization to the voiceless, whose environments have been heavily
assaulted. The energy wars that are sometimes masked as war on terror are also
well known. The contribution of oil companies to human misery is well
documented.

Although the leopard may not change its spots, the companies
have not been blind to the woes they generate. One of the steps they have taken
to cushion the impact of their harm has unfortunately been nothing more than
hogwash. One subtle way this has been done has been to plant into public minds
that they are not oil, but energy companies. The difference may be subtle, but
it seeks to erode the stink that the former name carries. We insist on calling
them by the name that best describes them and to avoid grouping them in the
same slot as clean energy producing companies.

Apart from change of nomenclature, the fossil fuel sector has
etched some oxymoron into public minds, making people accept clearly
contradictory terms as being logical. Take the example of clean coal. What is
that? There are others, but this is not our focus in this discussion today.

Voluntary Principles on
Security and Human Rights (VPs)

Some oil companies, including Shell and Chevron, have signed up
to what is known as Voluntary Principles, by which they solemnly declare how
they would change their corporate practices in the area of security and human
rights. See the principles at http://www.voluntaryprinciples.org/.

The question this raises is whether the endorsement of these
voluntary and non-binding principles has brought about any positive change. The
VPs are not even known to be in existence by many. We will touch briefly on
some key areas of the principles. You are urged to ask how those principles are
applied in Nigeria oil fields.

The companies say they will report payments made to security
forces or, in our case, to the Nigerian government for supply of security cover
for company operations. If such records were properly kept, it would be
possible for such companies to be held accountable where funds are tied to
incidents that resulted in human rights abuses. If a company pays money to the
military, for example, and the funds support an assault on a community, the
link should be transparently traceable for this clause to make sense.

A look at the Voluntary Principles appears to start from the
premise that oil company security depends on the actions of the country’s
security forces. This thinking has maintained the relationship with the
Nigerian military and police and continues to encourage abuse. It also often
precipitates clear acts of mayhem. Oil companies sometimes review their
security arrangements to determine if the relationship they have built with the
security forces has been a credit or a liability.

A review conducted by Chevron in 1999 found that Nigerian
security forces were actually more of a liability than a benefit, and that they
were prone to cause great harm both to Delta residents and company employees.
Shell, on its part admitted in a 2003 security review, that it had contributed
to the rise of conflict and corruption in the Delta region through its
relationship with security forces. The question is, what changes have they
made?

We submit here that if the official security forces provide a
safe atmosphere for ordinary citizens, corporate citizens would also enjoy the
same. Moreover, if oil companies maintain their equipment, operate with the
same standards they apply in their home countries, and respect community
rights, there would be no need for special security arrangements that must be
eating into their resources.

The voluntary principles also require that oil companies
communicate effectively on Human Rights Principles to security forces and
ensure proper training, and screening of known human rights abusers.

Security officers of corporations and public security forces are
often tied together in mutually dependent arrangements, whereby governments
take primary responsibility for security and the private entity provides
resources and logistical support. To what extent have the guidelines provided
in the Principles been used to ensure that the conduct of the forces abides by
human rights law?

Holding Individuals
Accountable

It is known that oil companies do keep security logs showing
records of security incidents as they occur at their facilities. They should
also be required to keep full records of incidents in which local residents are
injured or killed in confrontations with government security forces, acting to
secure the interest of the companies. Such incidents should also be reported
promptly and publicly. Individuals indicted should be held accountable.

The Voluntary Principles provide an opportunity for the Nigerian
legislative houses at the state and federal levels to take their provisions,
review, and enact them into law. The oil companies may have endorsed the
principles as a way of beefing up their public image and presenting the face of
companies that care about human rights.

Enacting same into law will encourage the companies to implement
them by making them mandatory principles. It will also help the companies to
bridge a part of the huge deficits they have accumulated in terms of
transparency in their activities.