A coalition of 50 environmental groups has sent a letter to President Joe Biden, requesting him to pardon Mr. Steven Donziger, a United States human rights lawyer. Mr. Donziger rose to fame following his legal case against Chevron over a decades-long pollution in the Amazon.
The legal battle began in 1993 in an Ecuadorian court. Despite initially securing a judgment against the fossil fuel giant, Mr Donziger’s subsequent legal battles over his ethical conduct in the case have resulted in house arrest, monitored by an ankle bracelet.
Authors of the letter to President Biden urge him to comply with the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which had previously criticised the judicial process against Mr. Donziger and found his detention “arbitrary”. However, despite a major international organisation speaking out on the matter, the United States government has never responded.
The groups call upon President Biden to issue a pardon, as it would serve a threefold purpose: confirming intolerance for judicial overreach, commitment to human rights standards, and showing support for environmental and human rights advocates.
Mr. Donziger has consistently proclaimed his innocence, rejecting all accusations of ethical or legal misconduct, leaving us to wonder – what truly transpired behind the scenes?
Steven Donziger’s Fight for Justice in the Amazon
The oil pollution in the Ecuadorian Amazon is considered one of the worst-ever environmental disasters. Toxic wastewater resulting from Texaco’s (later acquired by Chevron) oil production had spilt into the rainforest.
Texaco has since admitted to dumping approximately 15.8 billion gallons of wastewater. According to Drilled, the lack of a regulatory framework in Ecuador led to Texaco “dumping its oily waste into unlined pits” in places where “it was most convenient”, even if this was near residential areas or in areas that may affect drinking water.
Mr. Donziger obtained a $18 billion judgment against Chevron in an Ecuador court due to the environmental and social harms suffered in the region. The case had been brought by Mr. Donziger and his team on behalf of Ecuadorian residents and indigenous peoples. The award has since been adjusted to $9.5 billion.
Chevron Strikes Back With Fraud Allegations
However, Chevron retaliated against Mr. Donziger by filing a lawsuit of its own, claiming $60 billion in damages in what the International Association for Democratic Lawyers deemed “the highest personal liability in US history”. Chevron soon dropped the claim for monetary damages in order to prevent a jury trial.
Three years following the judgment against Chevron, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that the Ecuadorian judgment had been the result of fraud. Chevron had filed a lawsuit against Mr Donziger using the United States’ Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organisations (RICO) Act, which extends criminal charges to corrupt and criminal organisations.
Although the court here recognised that Mr Donziger set out his legal mission “with a desire to improve conditions in the area in which his Ecuadorian clients live”, he was found to supposedly have engaged in “corrupted” methods, submitted fraudulent evidence, coerced a judge, made false representations, and told half-truths. His team ended up writing the Ecuadorian judge’s judgement and promised him $500,000 to rule in their favour.
Following this decision in the United States, Chevron was able to defend itself against foreign enforcement of the Ecuadorian ruling. Indeed, in a statement, Chevron said, “Any court that respects the rule of law will find the [Ecuadorian] judgment to be illegitimate and unenforceable”. Hence, victims of the pollution were left without any access to justice yet again.
During the proceedings against Mr. Donziger and his team, the presiding Judge Kaplan had demanded disclosure of all documents related in any way to the case. Mr. Donziger refused to comply, arguing this would violate attorney-client privilege. Judge Kaplan then charged Mr. Donziger with criminal contempt of court and a separate contempt case was held against him. Mr. Donziger’s laptop and cell phone were seized by the court, and he was disbarred, preventing him from practising law in the United States. The contempt case against Mr. Donziger had not been conducted by the Department of Justice, as it had declined to pursue the case. Instead, Judge Kaplan retained a private law firm to conduct a private prosecution.
Chevron’s Star Witness Exposed, but Donziger’s Ordeal Continues
Later, it came to light that the team of lawyers from Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher hired by Chevron had trained their star witness for 53 days in a hotel room. The star witness was Alberto Guerra, an Ecuadorian judge whose tendency to accept bribes had previously resulted in his removal from the bench. As a result of the 53-day training, Guerra claimed that Mr. Donziger had indeed engaged in bribery in Ecuador, despite any evidence being offered.
After the fraud trial against Mr. Donziger, Guerra admitted to lying under oath about the bribe. Guerra had made these admissions before an international Arbitration Tribunal. When the testimony transcriptions were released by the international tribunal in 2015, Mr. Donziger told VICE that “The latest iteration of Guerra’s testimony proves clearly that Chevron paid its star witness huge sums of money to present false evidence to frame the very people in Ecuador the company poisoned”. In particular, Guerra admitted that he had lied about receiving a bribe in order for the plaintiffs in the Ecuadorian case to “ghostwrite” the judgment.
Regardless of Guerra’s admissions, Mr. Donziger remained on house arrest for 800 days until the contempt case against him was completed. He lost his case and was sentenced to six months in federal prison, but he only served 45 days. After a short prison stint, he returned to house arrest until 25 April 2022.
In a letter to the United States Department of Justice in 2017, Mr. Donziger provided information about what he refers to as “a conspiracy by the Chevron Corporation … to engage in witness bribery, perjury, and obstruction of justice”. Furthermore, he highlights that since 2011, “Chevron has paid at least $2 million and likely much more in cash and benefits to … Alberto Guerra, in exchange for false testimony and for maintaining his ongoing silence involving possible criminal misconduct by Chevron”. Moreover, Mr. Donziger refers to taped conversations disclosed by Chevron, in which Guerra and Chevron were negotiating Guerra’s payout. In his references to the payments, Guerra says, among other things, “Money talks, but gold screams”.
Corporate Legal Power Vs. Ethical Advocacy
Mr. Donziger’s case against Chevron highlights profound ethical and legal dilemmas in environmental and human rights advocacy. According to Mr. Donziger, Chevron’s legal team at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher reportedly amassed over $1 billion in fees, underscoring the enormous financial resources available to corporate entities in legal battles against advocates for social and environmental justice.
This stark disparity raises serious concerns about the lengths to which powerful corporations will go to discredit and neutralize opposition. The tactics employed, including allegations of fraud and misconduct, not only jeopardized Mr Donziger’s career and personal freedoms but also cast a shadow over the integrity of environmental litigation.
The case reveals a troubling dichotomy: on one hand, the ethical expectations placed on human rights and environmental lawyers to uphold justice and accountability, and on the other, the aggressive and sometimes unethical manoeuvres employed by corporate legal teams to protect their interests.
Advocates like Mr Donziger, who champion the rights of vulnerable populations and seek accountability from multinational corporations, require protection not only from physical and financial repercussions but also from reputational and legal attacks aimed at undermining their work.
Moreover, Mr. Donziger’s prolonged legal ordeal serves as a critical call to action for the legal community and regulatory bodies to scrutinize and address ethical breaches within corporate legal practices. As environmental and climate litigation continues to gain importance globally, ensuring the integrity and fairness of legal proceedings is vital to safeguarding the interests of affected communities.
Comments