ECOS' response to Dagens Nyheter editorial
Dagens Nyheter’s editorial yesterday [June 23] was correct in its conclusion that the issue at the heart of the ECOS report ‘Unpaid Debt’ is “who should compensate the hundreds of thousands of Sudanese who were displaced during oil exploitation”. It would indeed be a shame if speculation around the Foreign Minister should overshadow the report’s call that Sweden takes action for peace and reconciliation in Sudan.
Dagens Nyheter also suggests that the construction of Lundin’s oil road might qualify as a development project. In ECOS' opinion it does not. Dagens Nyheter own report of 28 April 2001 vividly narrates how the road was “bordered with misery and military”. Building a road is not a crime and nowhere in Unpaid Debt is it claimed that the member companies of the Lundin Consortium shared the criminal or other intent of those responsible for deliberately depopulating large areas by force. The report argues why the building and commissioning of infrastructure by the Lundin Consortium enabled the Sudan Armed Forces and allied armed groups to perpetrate crimes against humanity which could not have otherwise been committed. The road expanded the geographic reach of armed groups, enabled year-round access to formerly isolated communities and facilitated the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) and armed groups to violently displace much of the population. We confirm the pattern of displacement with satellite analyses of the area. The road is one of the many relevant factors that we have thoroughly researched and describe in detail.
Nowhere in Unpaid Debt is it alleged that the member companies of the Lundin Consortium “acted criminally in Sudan”. Instead, ECOS argues that ‘intention’ is no prerequisite for complicity under international law, and that a company may be found complicit in gross human rights abuses when it contributed to the perpetration of crimes, knew or should have known that its conduct would be likely to do so, and had close relations to the perpetrators. ‘Unpaid Debt’ presents a detailed factual account of the horrific events in Block 5A and concludes that there are grounds to investigate possible complicity of oil companies. No more, no less. Whether Lundin, OMV and Petronas are criminally liable will have to be decided by a competent court.
According to the eminent academic Dr. Douglas Johnson, the military strategy that the Sudanese Government adopted in the oilfields differed from those employed elsewhere in that it aimed at total removal of the population and from the vicinity of oil operations. Whereas in the earlier theatres of war women and children were abducted, here they were killed. He notes that the strategy developed in the oil fields was later transferred to the new theatre of war in Darfur. Compared to Dr. Johnson’s detailed findings that are copied in the report, the claims that Lundin’s operations have contributed to peace in Sudan are vague, and they are not backed up by known facts.
ECOS is calling upon the Swedish Government to lead an investigation into the activities of the Lundin Consortium and to ensure appropriate compensation for all persons whose rights have been violated in the course of the war for control over Sudan's oil fields. This would restore Sweden’s well deserved reputation as a shield against injustice. It can be done.
Egbert Wesselink
European Coalition on Oil in Sudan
For the Editorial by Dagens Nyheter, visit their website.
- Database Search
- Unpaid Debt A comprehensive overview of the role of the Lundin Consortium in the oil war. ECOS calls upon the Swedish, Austrian and Malaysian governments to investigate whether, as a matter of international law, Lundin, OMV and Petronas 'were complicit in the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity by others during the period 1997-2003.’ In response, the Swedish Public Prosecutor for International crimes opened a criminal investigation into ‘links between Sweden and the reported crimes’.
- In Depth For more specific information about the Lundin court case please visit the Unpaid Debt dossier.
