Oil and Human Rights (article for Sudan Mirror Human Rights supplement)

Oil is perhaps the resource which has caused the most conflict and suffering in the modern world. It is a resource which has enormously transformed the world in which we live for better and for worse. Many people in Sudan have suffered hardship and displacement as a result of oil companies and government actions. Sadly such occurrences are not isolated. Oil has led to conflict in many parts of the world including in Iraq and Nigeria. It is in the interests of oil companies to extract oil in order to make profits for their shareholders. It is however not one of their main priorities to safeguard the environment or the welfare of those who live in and around the oil producing area.

The oil which they are extracting however is the property of these same people who they inflict suffering upon. The resources of a land belong to its people. Normally the conduit through which companies gain access to the oil however is the government of the country in which the oil is. They will act as the representatives of the people in dealings with the oil companies who want to extract the oil. Unfortunately when a government is corrupt they will more be likely act in their own interest rather than that of the people and those people living closest to the oil, rather than benefiting from it, will suffer terribly. So rather than investing revenues back into the country the government will take it for themselves. This however will produce huge levels of discontentment in the oil producing areas and will jeopradise oil production. As a result massive amounts of money will be spent on security. That is, ensuring the security of the oil companies from the people to whom the oil rightfully belongs.

However many governments will claim that it is in the national interest to extract the oil and that those who oppose the extraction are being unrealistic as they do not appreciate the benefits the oil will bring. However if we are to look at the case of Nigeria we can see that for most people living in the oil rich Niger Delta all that almost fifty years of oil production has brought is environmental destruction and suffering. Here fishermen have found that the waters which once teemed with life now carry little more than poisonous oil slicks and this pollution has led to sickness as well as poverty. Farmers found that the oil giants were able to come in and seize their land with impunity and construct pipelines where they pleased. Further to this flaring of gas meant that some children have grown up constantly in the shadow of the smoke from the flarestacks. The main culprit in this exploitation was Royal Dutch/Shell, the same company who own the refinery in Khartoum. Any community who dared to voice any opposition was dealt with harshly and swiftly. Although Shell claimed to have had no involvement in the atrocities carried out on communities local residents reported seeing soldiers carried in on helicopters and boats that were owned or leased by Shell.
The writer and academic Ken Saro-Wiwa was so appalled by the suffering of his people, the Ogoni, that he was moved to set up the Movement Of the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP) which practiced non-violent resistance and protest. In the book Where Vultures Feast: Shell Human Rights and Oil, Ike Okonta and Oronto Douglas detail how Saro-Wiwa and eight other leaders of MOSOP were framed for murder and were hanged on the 10th of November 1995. The two main prosecution witnesses later admitted to fabricating their evidence and claimed that they had been paid by Shell.

The constitution of Southern Sudan guarantees certain rights to the people when it comes to oil. Even in the preamble it states itself as being; 'Conscious of the need to sustainably and efficiently manage our natural resources for the benefit of the present and future generations and to eradicate poverty and attain the Millennium Development Goals.' So that oil should be used for the benefit of the people of South Sudan is enshrined in its constitution, not just here but in several places. Article 40.2.(b) states that one of the duties of the government is to 'protect and ensure the sustainable management and utilization of natural resources including land, water, petroleum, minerals, fauna and flora for the benefit of the people of Southern Sudan.'
So not only should the revenue from the oil be used for the benefit of the people but the oil should be extracted in a sustainable manner to ensure its long term benefits and this should be done in an environmentally friendly manner. The oil industry is one of the most notorious polluters on the planet. The Interim constitution however promises people a clean and healthy environment in article 44;
'44. (1) Every person shall have the right to a clean and healthy environment.'
The next section of this article puts responsibility for this on the government;
'(2) Every person shall have the right to have the environment protected for the benefit of present and future generations, through reasonable legislative action and other measures that:
(a) prevent pollution and ecological degradation;
(b) promote conservation; and
(c) secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while promoting rational economic and social development so as to protect the bio-diversity of Southern Sudan.'
Section (c) above is very important as it states that not only should the development of South Sudan's resources be sustainable but that they should be used for rational economic and social development. Further to this part three of article 44 also states that not only are people entitled to share in the economic benefits that oil production will bring but that their energy needs must be met also;
'(3) All levels of government in Southern Sudan shall promote energy policies that will ensure that the basic needs of the people are met while protecting and preserving the environment.'

Oil is a finite resource and one that is in great demand all over the world. In the past year prices have reached unprecedented levels due to declining availability of easy to access stocks and global economic and political conditions. Those countries with the greatest thirst for oil have long since depleted the stocks available to them on their own soil. For this reason they are anxious to gain access to new reserves. The new but fragile peace in South Sudan means that many companies are willing to exploit the massive reserves which are now accessible. However it will be in the interests of the oil companies to extract the oil at as low a cost as possible in order to maximize their own profits. This may often mean infringing on the rights of the people by not fairly compensating them or doing excessive damage to their environment.

However if a company feels that the only way to guarantee their profits is by acting in an ethical manner it may provide some incentive for better practice. An example of this can be seen with the French company Total. Total suspended their operations in White Nile State due to the outbreak of civil war in 1985. However they paid a retainer fee to the Sudanese government on an ongoing basis to guarantee their access to the oil if the situation ever improved. This however did not stop the GOSS from granting their concession to another company, the aptly named White Nile. Under this deal White Nile will have sixty percent of the concession block and the remaining forty percent will be controlled by Nile Petroleum corp. the state oil company of South Sudan. Total is challenging this in the UK courts but is also considering allowing the South a share in the block in order to make themselves seem a more attractive partner. Indeed Total seems to be very anxious to resume activities in Southern Sudan and sees the disputed block as a very lucrative prospect. Also in order to avoid the pitfalls of operating inside a hostile situation they are attempting to make themselves seem attractive to the local community as well. This is in direct contrast to the Canadian owned company Talisman energy who willing collaborated with the Khartoum government in displacing people and destroying homes in order to gain access to oil in the south. However such was the outcry that Talisman were forced to examine if it was still profitable to operate in a situation where their reputation was being damaged around the world and so they eventually sold their stake in 2003.

In September of 2005 Total undertook a research trip with the Corporate Engagement Project in order to access how they could operate in South Sudan with the minimum of conflict with local people. They met with local as well as government representatives and decided that such things as employing as many local people as possible and educating outsiders on Dinka customs and culture would create less conflict. They also decided that opening more offices in the South would help them to liaise better with authorities there. Such measures however are still only recommendations and there can be no guarantee that they will actually be put into practice. However it shows how anxious Total are to recommence operations in South Sudan and how lucrative of a prospect it must be. Their approach is however a marked contrast to the actions of the Chinese National Petroleum Corporation who willingly collaborated with the Khartoum government. When International pressure was being brought to bear on the Government of Sudan not only were the Chinese happy to exploit the nation's resources they were also willing to sell arms and equipment to the Sudanese army. This cooperation had notable benefits for them with some seventy percent of Sudan's oil exports going to China, fulfilling six per cent of its rapidly increasing energy demands. There are also reports that Chinese workers were armed and opened fire on civilians as they were fleeing.

So as we can see oil can produce great incentives for governments and corporations to infringe on human rights. Not just on peoples rights to have control of their resources but also on their most basic right s and freedoms by unleashing campaigns of violence and intimidation. Further to this they may cause untold environmental damage and further take away this most basic right from people. It will be the duty of the Government of South Sudan to negotiate the best deal possible for its people and guarantee the rights of its people when negotiating with those who want to exploit the abundance of natural resources that exist inside its territory. However it will be the people who will suffer most if this does not transpire and so they will have to remain ever vigilant throughout the time of rapid change that oil drilling will bring.