Presentacion chevron ingles

Introduction

The Government of the Republic of Ecuador decided to start an international campaign, “The Dirty Hand of Chevron”, to defend itself against the smear campaign that was initiated by the multinational Chevron-Texaco corporation against Ecuador.

Chevron-Texaco operated in Ecuador from 1964 until 1990 and

extracted millions of barrels of oil without having applied the techniques they agreed upon in the operating agreement for the preservation of nature. This caused serious environmental disasters. It left a trail of immeasurable contamination in the vast Amazon region that up until now is still visible.

But Chevron-Texaco still refuses to acknowledge its responsibility and even tries to blame the Ecuadorian State

Introduction

In the light of the multimillion-dollar campaign of Chevron-Texaco to discredit the Ecuadorian State by all possible means, the Government of the Citizen’s Revolution calls upon the international community, States and journalists who seek the truth, the intellectuals, all personalities, human rights defenders and simple citizens and citizens of the world:To come and see the TRUTH here in Ecuador!

To let the world know the TRUTH!

Texaco’s presence in Ecuador

• 1964: the Government of the Republic of Ecuador signs a concession agreement with Texaco granting the company the right to explore for and produce oil in the Amazon region. Texaco assigned half of its interests to the Ecuadorian Gulf Oil company, creating a consortium in which Texaco is the sole operator of oil operation and exploitation.

• 1967: The Texaco-Gulf Oil consortium drills the first commercial well in the Ecuadorian Amazon.

• February, 1972: the General Guillermo Rodríguez Lara regime establishes the Ecuadorian State Petroleum Corporation (Corporación Estatal Petrolera Ecuatoriana—CEPE) to buy the majority stake of the Texaco-Gulf consortium.

Texaco’s presence in Ecuador

• 1973: Texaco and Gulf celebrate a new concession agreement with Ecuador, through CEPE, the government corporation that was created in 1971. CEPE acquires 25% of the consortium and subsequently buys the interests of Gulf, acquiring 62, 5% of the consortium. Texaco is, however, still the sole operator of oil operation and exploitation of the consortium.

• 1990: Petroecuador (new name for CEPE) takes over as consortium operator because the parties failed to reach an agreement to extend the term of the 1973 Agreement of which the expiration date was set for June the 6th, 1992.

What you need to know about

Texaco’s presence

6

Article 46 of the exploitation agreement signed by Texaco and Ecuador’s state oil company clearly stipulated that the multinational company

committed itself to using technologies with safe reinjection systems of toxic waste in the subsurface.

Despite this, though they used patented technologies that met these requirements in the United States, they never used them in Ecuador. In our country Texaco decided to use outdated techniques in order to have higher

profits.

The result: Texaco drilled and operated 356 oil wells and opened 1.000 pits without any type of recoating. Texaco threw all kinds of waste, mainly oil, drilling

mud and toxic water into them, which caused immeasurable environmental damage and deteriorated the quality of life of the communities. Altogether they are responsible for spilling no less than 71 million of liters of waste oil and 64

millions of liters of crude oil on more than 2 million hectares of the Ecuadorian Amazon.

Texaco leaves Ecuador

• 1992: Texaco leaves Ecuador (it no longer has assets in the country )

• 1995: Texaco signs a Remedial Action Plan that says that they commit themselves to cleaning 162 pools

• 1998: The government of Jamil Mahuad signs a Deed of Settlement that releases Texaco from any claim of the Ecuadorian State after Texaco’s “environmental remediation”.

• 2001: Chevron (the second largest oil company in the United States and the seventh largest of the world) engulfs Texaco knowing that it is being sued by affected Ecuadorian citizens.

Texaco failed to meet its obligations of

environmental remediation

The US Company did not apply any effective remediation techniques, not even for the 162 pools that they promised to clean.

The “remediation” technique applied by the Company consisted in covering hundreds of pools of toxic waste, product of the extractive activities, with a

superficial layer and leaving them in the same pollutant state as before.

The Deed of Settlement signed by the Ecuadorian State considered the relationship between the State and Texaco as finalized. Not concerned at all with the Amazon communities and it was not a waiver on behalf of the third

parties, as confirmed by the Court of Arbitration constituted under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules.

Affected citizens

versus Chevron-Texaco

The Aguinda case : in 1993, a citizen of the affected indigenous communities

demands, the remediation of the environmental damage caused by Texaco in the Oriente region, in eastern Ecuador, before the Courts of New York. From that moment on Texaco has done everything in its power to move the trial to Ecuador and finally obtained what it wanted: the Courts of New York decided that it should be the Ecuadorian court who deals with this matter because they are acquainted with the process.

To achieve this, Texaco promised to respect the decision of the

Ecuadorian court, describing it as suitable and capable to know about

the case.

Affected citizens


The Lago Agrio case: citizens of the same indigenous communities sue Chevron-

Texaco, before the Provincial Court of Justice of Sucumbíos in 2003. The first instance ended in 2011 with a verdict in favor of those affected. The Ecuadorian court sentenced Chevron to pay $ 9,6 billion and to apology in public within the next two weeks. Otherwise, the amount would be doubled. Chevron refused to do so, which led to the ratification of the sentence and the multinational was obliged to pay $ 19 billion.

The judicial sentence was ratified under appeal and is

currently pending on cassation appeal before the National

Court of Justice of Ecuador. So strictly speaking, the process is

not over yet.

Affected citizens


• The RICO case: Chevron sues the defenders of the Amazon Defense Coalition under

the RICO Act (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) before the Federal Court of New York in 2010, claiming that the plaintiffs are part of a criminal organization whose business is to extort the company…

• This October 15th the judicial process begins before the Federal Court of New York.

This is what Chevron, within the framework of its social media

campaign, calls “The Fraud of the Century”.

Chevron-Texaco versus the Ecuadorian

State: The “Chevron I” case

• The case: In 2004, Chevron-Texaco initiates an arbitration process in New

York against PETROECUADOR based on two clauses of the Joint Operating Agreement (JOA) signed in 1965 by Gulf and Texaco: an arbitration clause and an indemnity clause which required the non-operating parties of the JOA to indemnify the operator for any sentence rendered against him related to the developed activities.

• The case is closed.

In 2009 a New York federal judge

accepts the position of the Ecuadorian State that Petroecuador was not obliged

to attend an arbitration initiated by Chevron- Texaco.


State: The “Chevron II” case

• The case: In 2006, Chevron-Texaco initiates an arbitration process against the

Ecuadorian Sate before the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague based on:

• -the Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (BIPA) between Ecuador and the United States

• -7 commercial lawsuits initiated by Texaco against Ecuador before Ecuador`s National Court in the early nineties that remained unsettled, which establishes this as an alleged case of “undue delay” in the Administration of Justice under International Law.

• The current situation of the case : the Court assumed jurisdiction and

ordered the State of Ecuador to pay the sum of $ 96 million for the violation of Article II (7) of the Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT), signed between Ecuador and the United States, for not having granted the Chevron-Texaco Corporation any effective means to resolve its disputes.

Ecuador has filed a nullity action

against the decision.

The “Chevron II” case:

what you need to know

The BIT between Ecuador and the United States was signed in 1993 and took effect in 1997 or in other words, five years after Texaco’s investments in the

country. Assuming jurisdiction based on this BIT is a retroactive action.

The BIT between Ecuador and the United States does not include any retroactive clauses.

The fact that the lawsuits of Texaco remained unsettled before the Courts until 2006 proves that Texaco had not taken the necessary steps to settle them (they did not send the documents that the Courts were asking for).

Chevron-Texaco versus the Ecuadorian State: The “Chevron III” case

• The case: In 2009 , Chevron-Texaco sues the Ecuadorian State before

the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague to manifest: - that Ecuador breached the BIT with the US (again) - that Chevron-Texaco is not responsible for the environmental damage caused in

the Amazon region but that it is Petroecuador who is responsible for this, which is why the Ecuadorian State has to pay the amount of the sentence of the Lago Agrio trial

- that Chevron is not responsible for the environmental damage caused in the Amazon after their operation in Ecuador since it has been released by the 1998 Deed of Settlement

-that Chevron-Texaco should be morally compensated!

Chevron spends hundreds of dollars on their smear campaign against

Ecuador to evade its responsibility and we would have to pay those campaign

expenses!


State: The “Chevron III” case

• The current situation of the case: The Court has assumed

jurisdiction under the BIT but is still evaluating whether or not it has jurisdiction. On September the 17th the Court declared that it has not released Chevron-Texaco of its responsibility towards the citizens of Ecuador.

Meanwhile, the Court ordered Ecuador to take “all available steps to suspend the enforcement or recognition of any sentences against Chevron in the Lago Agrio case in Ecuador and abroad” and condemns the Ecuadorian State not to execute this measure.

The Ecuadorian State cannot do this! We are a Government ruled by Law; there is a clear

separation between State powers. The sentence is being executed since October the 17th with the royalties of the Chevron brands.

The “Chevron III” case: what you need to know

The BIT between Ecuador and the United States was signed in 1993 and took e�ect in 1997 or in other words, �ve years after Texaco’s investments in the country. Assuming jurisdiction based on this BIT is a retroactive action and this BIT does not include any

retroactive clauses.

Texaco is responsible for the contamination and not Petroecuador. There are plenty of witnesses and evidence. In fact:

- the citizens of the indigenous communities have never �led lawsuit against Petroecuador which they did do against Chevron-Texaco.

- no court decision has determined the responsibility of Petroecuador, but there is, however, a court decision that determines the responsibility of Chevron -Texaco.

- there are pools that have never been exploited by Petroecuador that are still contaminated. People all over the world were able to see this due to “The Dirty Hand of

Chevron” campaign.

Chevron-Texaco has never been released from its responsibility towards the a�ected citizens, which was confirmed by the Court’s decision on

September the 17th.

Chevron’s smear campaign

and the TRUTH (1) CHEVRON CONSISTENTLY LIES ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY FOR THE AFFECTED

CITIZENS TO SUE THEM

• Chevron says: “The authorities of the Republic of Ecuador approved the

remediation and released Texaco of any past and future environmental responsibility.”

• It’s a lie! Texaco was never released of its past and future environmental responsibility”. In 1998, the government of Jamil Mahuad signed a Deed of Settlement releasing Texaco from any claims from the Ecuadorian State but not from those presented by the people. The Deed of Settlement considered the relationship between the State and Texaco as finalized. Not concerned at all with the Amazon communities and it was not a waiver on behalf of the third parties. In fact, it is the Amazon Defense Coalition, a group of affected communities in the Amazon who is suing Chevron, not the government.


and the TRUTH (2)

CHEVRON CONSISTENTLY LIES ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE IT CAUSED

• Chevron says: “President Correa provided a distorted and inaccurate account of

the history of these oil fields and who is responsible for any environmental impact.”

• It’s a lie! Texaco was the sole operator of oil exploitation in the Amazon region until 1990. It carelessly poured formation water (with oil residues) into the Amazon region. It clearly had to undertake remediation of the environmental catastrophe that was caused due to its actions. Chevron-Texaco is obviously responsible for the environmental damage caused in the region. There are plenty of witnesses and evidence. Until today, people still find pools that have been kept hidden by Chevron-Texaco instead of performing the environmental remediation that it was obliged to do.


and the TRUTH (2) • Chevron says: “Any environmental impact on the extinct consortium area is

exclusive to Petroecuador, which for more than 20 years, continues to operate here”

• It’s a lie! Texaco drilled and operated 356 oil wells and opened 1.000 pits without any type of recoating. Texaco threw all kinds of waste in them, which caused immeasurable environmental damage. The US Company did not apply any effective remediation techniques, not even for the 162 pools that they promised to clean. The damage is still visible, as shown by President Correa, who put his hand into well AG-4 on Tuesday, September 17.

• Chevron says: “Any environmental impact in the region is the sole and full responsibility of Petroecuador, a fact that the authorities of Ecuador have recognized publicly and privately on several occasions”

• It’s a lie! The authorities of Ecuador have never “admitted” such a thing. It is a distortion of the facts. The contamination denied by Chevron is a direct result of Texaco’s oil exploitation and of a poor remediation technique, which is far from fulfilling its objective and continues to harm the people and the environment.


and the TRUTH (3)

CHEVRON CONSISTENTLY LIES SAYING THAT THE ECUADORIAN STATE INTERFERES IN THE LAGO AGRIO CASE

• Chevron says: “President Correa decided to interfere once again in the Chevron case, despite the cassation appeal filed by the Company before the National Court of Justice”

• It’s a lie! President Correa is not interfering in the Lago Agrio case (the case Chevron refers to when they talk about appeal in cassation) and has never done or is able to do so because in Ecuador there is a clear separation between State powers. He visited the region to check the environmental damage of which the existence has been denied by Chevron and who wants to blame the state company Petroecuador. This does not prove at all that the executive interferes in the Ecuadorian judiciary.


and the TRUTH (4)

• Chevron says: “The interference of the Ecuadorian government in the trial against Chevron has been evident”

• It`s a lie! The President decided to listen to the concerns of the affected citizens. But this is no evidence of interference in the judiciary. In fact, the representatives of previous governments held eleven official meetings with representatives of Chevron. These interviews were assisted by, not one but two Presidents, a Vice President, two ministers of Energy, an Interior minister and an Attorney. But they never talked about “interference in the trial”. The double standard is obvious.

Come and see the environmental damage of Chevron-Texaco with your own eyes

Denounce lies and ask for truth to those who lie

Let the world know the TRUTH!

Presentacion chevron ingles

Travel