abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

The content is also available in the following languages: français

Article

23 Mar 2022

Author:
Reuters,
Author:
// AFP

Nigeria: Dutch court rejects suit of ‘Ogoni Nine’ widows against Shell

A Dutch court has thrown out a suit against Shell brought by four widows of activists who were executed by late Nigerian military leader Sani Abacha in 1995 after protests against the company’s exploitation of the oil-rich Niger Delta.

The court said there was not enough evidence to support the widows’ claim that Shell had been involved in bribing witnesses related to the case.

In 2019, the court had handed the widows a rare win in their long-running battle by allowing the case to continue. But it had also said the claimants needed to prove Shell’s liability.

Shell has always denied wrongdoing.

Esther Kiobel, whose husband Barinem Kiobel was among those executed, said she would file an appeal at The Hague.

“We can’t do it in Nigeria because they [the government] are the collaborators,” she said. “I want their [activists] names exonerated. That’s what I want and that’s what I’m fighting for.”

The lawyer for the widows, Channa Samkalden, said the others were also considering filing an appeal.

The court heard testimony from five witnesses, including several who said they had been paid by Shell representatives for rehearsed false testimony in the trial that led to the men’s execution...

“The witnesses’ testimony relies for a large part on assumptions and interpretations and cannot be enough to conclude that the money that they received at the time actually was from SPDC, and that actual employees of SPDC were present,” Judge Larissa Alwin said.

Timeline