News and information on Royal Dutch Shell Plc
By John Donovan
Yesterday, the sub-headline in a PR article about Steve Phimister published by EnergyVoice.com proclaimed: “The mastermind behind Royal Dutch Shell’s £36billion takeover of BG Group has been appointed to the board of industry trade association Oil and Gas UK”.
I wondered if the very impressive claim, perhaps made in the heat of excitement about his latest appointment, might upset his boss, Shell CEO Ben van Beurden, who might believe that he masterminded the deal, not Phimister. Lo and behold the claim vanished overnight from the online article without explanation.
Nigeria detained a vessel with crew members from countries including Pakistan, Indonesia and Ukraine for alleged theft of crude from a facility owned by Royal Dutch Shell Plc, the navy said.
The New York City Bar Association has joined the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in backing law firm Cravath Swaine & Moore in its appeal of an order to turn over documents belonging to client Royal Dutch Shell plc in a possible overseas lawsuit accusing the oil giant of facilitating human rights violations.
Royal Dutch Shell and Oman Oil Company Exploration & Production (OOCEP) have signed a Heads of Agreement for cooperation in resource exploration in an oil and gas block in Oman, the Omani company said on Twitter on Wednesday.
“I think Mr Campbell’s comment regarding “Business Principles” is entirely valid. I worked for a time in Shell in the business sphere which developed the (then) Group’s approach to the demands for “Corporate Social Responsibility” (CSD). I took it seriously as did many of my colleagues. The “Business Principles” were a part of what we delivered. It was endorsed by the Committee of Managing Directors (CMD) and became Group policy. What was lacking, however, was consistency in application. All too often, when push came to shove, the Principles were bent to allow the pragmatic pursuit of commercial goals. Shell’s competitors generally did not feel the need to promote their CSD or did so in a more limited way. Shell in some instances wanted it both ways. They wanted to be seen as corporately responsible, but they also wanted commercial progress. The pursuit of profit. Nothing wrong with the latter of course, it’s what business is about. But to do this at the cost of corporate responsibility at the same time as promoting your unique commitment to CSD reeks of hypocrisy”
By John Donovan
The battle in the US courts over Shell discovery documents was uneven from the start. Esther Kiobel versus Shell’s formidable US lawyers CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE, LLP. The Nigerian-born widow of a murdered Ogoni leader on one side, still fighting to put Shell on trial for complicity in his murder, and a giant law firm on the other, which since 2002, has been blocking her path to justice.
Nonetheless, a US Judge granted her recent petition for Cravath to hand over more than 100,000 Shell discovery documents stored in the USA so that Esther can use them in a pending action against Shell in the Netherlands. In response, Cravath hired another top law firm Hogan Lovells led by one of America’s top lawyers Neal Katyal to represent them in an appeal, thus becoming a battle between Esther Kiobel (now a US citizen) and two giant law firms. No doubt with the malevolent presence of Shell lurking behind the scenes pulling the strings.
By John Donovan
It is timely, given current OPL 245 events involving the integrity of Malcolm Brinded and Shell, to remind ourselves of his 6-page letter to Vince Cable a few years ago in his then capacity as UK Secretary of State for Business, describing Cable as the “contact minister for Shell”. Even if just an attempt to be jocular, the description was inappropriate. Since Vince Cable was once Shell’s Chief Economist, an approach on that basis, attempting to exploit his past relationship with Shell was entirely improper and created a clear conflict of interest on the part of the minister. Brinded was trying to persuade Cable to support Shell’s views in relation to the European Fuel Quality Directive. It is obvious from the content of the first paragraph that Shell was already exploiting to the hilt the fact that Cable was a past Shell man. The oil giant was trying to improperly influence/control the UK government just as it was doing with the corrupt Nigerian government.
By Bill Campbell (Retired HSE Group Auditor Shell International)
I have read through the Ben van Beurden/Simon Henry phone transcript but frankly cannot understand the apparently relaxed attitude, with many chuckles and laughter on the phone.
It seems clear also that RDS had been or were still pursuing some kind of internal investigation into the matter.
They raised but then thought lightly it would seem, of the emails that are incriminating, as though these did not involve their own employees whether direct or indirect, ex MI6 etc.
By John Donovan
No one has issued more warnings that we have on this website about the integrity of Malcolm Brinded, often in conjunction with comments by the retired Shell International HSE Group Auditor, Bill Campbell.
Shown right is a self-explanatory “WANTED” poster we have had on permanent display on our websites for years and featured in many articles. Please also read the related 20-page forensic indictment by Bill Campbell published on 6 March 2015 under the title: The Case against Malcolm Brinded CBE. It was about the “Touch Fuck All” Brent Bravo scandal and cover-up stretching back to 1999, which cost the lives of Shell workers.
Abigail Elise: National Curator. Apr 20, 2017
WASHINGTON — Shell Oil Co. and Dow Chemical hid a cancer-causing chemical in two commonly-used pesticides that contaminated the drinking water of millions of people in the state of California, according to lawsuits detailed in a report from the Environmental Working Group earlier this month. TCP, a poisonous insecticide gas, was used for decades in the pesticide Telone, made by Dow, and D-D, made by Shell.
Court proceedings are due to begin in Italy today to determine whether oil giant Shell will face trial on corruption charges over the purchase of one of Africa’s most valuable oil blocks.
Italian prosecutors claim Shell and Italian oil major Eni concluded a deal for the rights to exploit the Nigerian deepwater oil block OPL 245 with knowledge that the money would fall into the hands of a convicted money-launderer and be turned into political kickbacks.
Shell and Eni are waiting to learn whether a judge will accept a request from a Milan prosecutor for the two companies and individuals — including Claudio Descalzi, chief executive of the Italian energy group — to face trial for alleged corruption.
Cannot see why a prosecution could not go ahead and be successful, it appears abundantly clear from the correspondence that handouts to certain individuals would be required to secure a deal and many senior officers in the RDS organisation were aware of this and were complicit indirectly or directly. Their defence may be well that’s what it takes to operate with Nigeria but that is not a pertinent defence in international law and dare I state the obvious that this behaviour is a million miles from the intent of those wonderfully worded but completely ignored business principles that all in RDS from Chairman to office boy are supposed to hold as sacrosanct. My experience after many years especially as an Auditor for the then SIEP and then RDS is that compliance with the aforestated principles diminishes exponentially the nearer you get to the Boardroom. Time will tell.