SUMMARY
This report documents human rights violations related to oil production in theNiger Delta, and focuses on the role of multinational oil companies in those violations.

Related Material The Price Of Oil Corporate Responsibility and Human Rights Violations in Nigeria’s Oil Producing Communities Human Rights Watch Report, February 1999 UPDATE on the situation in the Niger Delta February 23, 1999 HRW Press Releases State of Emergency Declared in the Niger Delta December 31, 1998

The Niger Delta has for some years been the site of major confrontations between the people who live there and the Nigerian government security forces, resulting in extra-judicial executions, arbitrary detentions, and draconian restrictions on the rights to freedom of expression, association, and assembly. These violations of civil and political rights have been committed principally in response to protests about the activities of the multinational companies that produce Nigeria's oil.

The June 1998 death of former head of state Gen. Sani Abacha and his succession by Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar have significantly relaxed state repression in Nigeria. But human rights abuses in the oil producing communities continue and the basic situation in the delta remains unchanged. Since the death of Abacha, in fact, there has been a surge in incidents in which protesters have occupied flow stations and closed production or taken oil workers hostage.

Of course, oil companies legitimately require security for their personnel and property. But the companies cannot shirk their responsibility to do something about human rights abuses that are being committed on their behalf and in their interest. In the most egregious examples, a company requests security protection, and the authorities commit human rights abuses in providing that protection. Certainly, the company is then complicit in those abuses and must take action to stop them. But corporate responsibility does not end with these simple cases, since the operations of big oil companies are deeply intertwined with violence and repression in the Niger Delta.

Human Rights Watch traveled to the Niger Delta in 1997 to investigate human rights violations in connection with suppressing protest about oil company activities; a follow-up trip was made in early 1999. The investigation found repeated incidents of people being brutalized for attempting to raise grievances with the oil companies. In some cases security forces threatened, beat, and jailed members of community delegations even before they presented their cases. Often the victims were local people seeking compensation for ruined land and lost livelihoods.

Such abuses frequently occurred on oil company property, or adjacent to it, or in the immediate aftermath of meetings between company officials and community representatives. Some witnesses reported that company staff had directly threatened local residents, or were present when security force officers threatened residents with retaliation if there were disruption to oil production.

After the 1997 investigation, Human Rights Watch corresponded with the five multinationals who have the largest share of Nigerian production: Shell, Chevron, Mobil, Elf Aquitaine, and Agip. These five companies were asked to comment on particular incidents at their facilities, as well as on their approach to human rights and community relations in general, and on their relationship with the Nigerian authorities on security issues.

Shell, a Dutch-British company, has faced the greatest criticism for its Nigeria operations and provided the most ample response to Human Rights Watch's questions. Chevron gave responses on several specific incidents, while Mobil offered some more general information (both companies have faced pressure in the U.S., where they are based, concerning corporate responsibility in Nigeria). Elf Aquitaine, headquartered in France, answered most questions, but gave little detail and avoided some subjects entirely. Agip, an Italian state-owned company, provided only an uninformative, two-page general response.

Human Rights Watch is concerned at the level of secrecy that surrounds the security arrangements for oil installations. Not one of the five oil companies would release the security sections of its Memorandum of Understanding or Joint Operations Agreement with the Nigerian government. Not one would even reveal its internal company guidelines for protecting facilities. Human Rights Watch believes it is very important that there be transparency in these arrangements, and clear commitments from the oil companies to monitor security force performance.

None of the oil companies publish regular, comprehensive reports of allegations of environmental damage, sabotage, claims for compensation, protest actions, or police or military action carried out on or near their facilities. Often, based on Human Rights Watch's correspondence, the companies claim to be unaware that arrests, detentions and beatings have taken place, despite assertions that they are concerned to maintain good relations with the communities where they operate.

Human Rights Watch recommends that:

• Companies should require, in written agreements with the Nigerian government, that state security forces in the vicinity of company operations must conform to the human rights obligations the government has assumed under international treaties.

• Companies should make public the provisions of their security agreements with state entities and private organizations.

• Companies should insist on screening security force members assigned for their protection, to ensure that no member of the military or police credibly implicated in past human rights abuses is engaged in protecting oil facilities. Companies should similarly screen security staff in their direct employment.

• Companies should investigate abuses that do occur, and make public and private protests to the authorities where excessive force is used, or where arbitrary detentions or other abuses take place. Companies should publish details of such incidents in their annual reports both in Nigeria and in the country of their head office.

• Companies should publicly and privately call on the Nigerian authorities to institute disciplinary or criminal proceedings, as appropriate, against those responsible for abuses, and to compensate the victims. Companies should monitor the status of such investigations and press for resolution of the cases, publicly condemning undue delay.

• Companies should adopt internal guidelines surrounding the provision of security for their facilities, emphasizing the need to ensure respect for human rights, and should take disciplinary action against any employee that does not follow such guidelines.

There is an ever-growing likelihood that, unless corrective action is taken, protest in the oil areas will become violent in an organized and concerted way. If the security situation there gets worse, it will harm the interests of everyone in the delta region - Nigerian villagers and international oil companies alike.