Krænkelser af oprindelige folks rettigheder er dårlig forretning

Forfatter billede

Udvindingsindustrien har indset, at der er dårlig økonomi i ikke at respektere oprindelige folks rettigheder, fordi det kan betyde store bøder til virksomhederne eller sociale optøjer, der mærkes på bundlinien, skriver Cultural Survival fredag.

Let’s face it, Indigenous Peoples are all but irrelevant in most people’s lives. The biggest news on Indigenous Peoples lately is whether or not the Washington Redskins will change their name, writes Cultural Survival Friday.

Roger Goodell, NFL Commissioner, and Redskins owner Dan Snyder are trying to spin “Redskins” as a “unifying force that stands for strength, courage, pride and respect.” Why? Because Forbes calculates the value of the Redskins brand to be $131 million.

Changing the name of one of sports’ most valuable brands would cost millions. Who would have thought that Native Americans could have such an impact on a company’s bottom line?

In fact, Indigenous Peoples across the world are one of the fastest growing risk factors impacting corporate profits, especially those in extractive industries. As oil, gas and mining companies explore the globe for new production sites, they are finding those resources on or near Indigenous Peoples’ land.

In the past, that didn’t matter much. For the right price, governments cleared the people away, rented or sold the land, and companies profited handsomely. But now, it’s not that easy.

The investment risk associated with not respecting Indigenous Peoples’ rights is real and growing. The oil industry is holding its collective breath over Chevron’s $18 billion case in Ecuador.

Indigenous Peoples sued Texaco, which was bought by Chevron in 2001, for faulty drilling practices that damaged wide areas of the Amazon in the 1970s and 1980s. In February 2008 the Ecuadorian court found Chevron guilty and fined the company $8 billion, which was increased to $18 Billion after Chevron’s refusal to pay.

This ruling was upheld in 2012 and the Ecuadorian court froze $200 million worth of Chevron’s assets for continued refusal to compensate Indigenous communities.

Some of Chevron’s shareholders are not happy and responded with a letter questioning, “whether the company’s leadership can properly manage the array of environmental and human rights challenges and risks that it faces.”

A week later, 38 percent of Chevron’s shareholders voted in favor of a resolution reprimanding CEO John Watson for his handling of the Ecuador situation, and some have gone so far as to ask the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to investigate the company for misleading investors.

Læs hele artiklen her:

Begynd ved: “Chevron is not an isolated case.”