Distribution Network
Content
Religious and pressure groups are continuing their attack on Shell over
its actions in Nigeria in advance of the company’s annual meeting.
The oil giant’s troubles in the volatile West African state, which are thought to have prompted other multinationals to begin reviewing the social and environmental impact of their operations, show no signs of abating. Last month one of the pioneers of shareholder activism in the UK, the Ecumenical Council for Corporate Responsibility, announced it was gathering support for a resolution on the subject at Royal Dutch Shell’s annual meeting on 16 May.
The ECCR, whose members include the Church of England and the Central Finance Board of the Methodist Church, claims Shell has failed to carry out proper environmental and social impact assessments in the Niger Delta, to respect fundamental human rights, or to consult stakeholders properly. Shell’s alleged failure to answer grievances ‘has led to conflict in Nigeria’.
Last month Shell faced further problems in the area when two of its contractors were killed in an attack on one of its facilities by a group calling itself the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta. The same group also took four expatriate oilworkers hostage, but later released them. Shell controls about half of Nigeria’s daily exports of 2.5 million barrels of oil a day.
Militants in the delta have attracted support from locals upset that oil wealth has done little to reduce poverty in the region. Shell’s activities there were highlighted in 1995 when human rights campaigner Ken Saro-Wiwa was executed after campaigning against the influence of oil companies.
ECCR claims to have been ‘actively engaged’ with Shell since 1994 on its operations in Nigeria. Its pioneering shareholder resolution on environment and human rights in the country put forward in 1997 received the support of 11 per cent of the company’s shareholders, with a further 6.5 per cent abstaining.
But ECCR says Shell is still failing to carry out ‘effective and complete’ environmental and social impact assessments of new developments or modifications to existing facilities.
Shell, which derives about ten per cent of its oil production from Nigeria, told EP that it does not comment in advance on AGM resolutions. However, it said that ‘while security problems still exist in the Niger Delta region’, Shell Nigeria ‘has developed a cordial relationship with the majority of its host communities, and engages government constantly to seek out ways of managing security challenges to its business’.
The oil giant’s troubles in the volatile West African state, which are thought to have prompted other multinationals to begin reviewing the social and environmental impact of their operations, show no signs of abating. Last month one of the pioneers of shareholder activism in the UK, the Ecumenical Council for Corporate Responsibility, announced it was gathering support for a resolution on the subject at Royal Dutch Shell’s annual meeting on 16 May.
The ECCR, whose members include the Church of England and the Central Finance Board of the Methodist Church, claims Shell has failed to carry out proper environmental and social impact assessments in the Niger Delta, to respect fundamental human rights, or to consult stakeholders properly. Shell’s alleged failure to answer grievances ‘has led to conflict in Nigeria’.
Last month Shell faced further problems in the area when two of its contractors were killed in an attack on one of its facilities by a group calling itself the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta. The same group also took four expatriate oilworkers hostage, but later released them. Shell controls about half of Nigeria’s daily exports of 2.5 million barrels of oil a day.
Militants in the delta have attracted support from locals upset that oil wealth has done little to reduce poverty in the region. Shell’s activities there were highlighted in 1995 when human rights campaigner Ken Saro-Wiwa was executed after campaigning against the influence of oil companies.
ECCR claims to have been ‘actively engaged’ with Shell since 1994 on its operations in Nigeria. Its pioneering shareholder resolution on environment and human rights in the country put forward in 1997 received the support of 11 per cent of the company’s shareholders, with a further 6.5 per cent abstaining.
But ECCR says Shell is still failing to carry out ‘effective and complete’ environmental and social impact assessments of new developments or modifications to existing facilities.
Shell, which derives about ten per cent of its oil production from Nigeria, told EP that it does not comment in advance on AGM resolutions. However, it said that ‘while security problems still exist in the Niger Delta region’, Shell Nigeria ‘has developed a cordial relationship with the majority of its host communities, and engages government constantly to seek out ways of managing security challenges to its business’.
Super Featured
No
Featured
No