May, 20 2016, 04:30pm EDT
Chevron CEO Faces Pressure Cooker Over Ecuador, Climate Change at Shareholder Meeting
OAKLAND, Calif.
Chevron's unprecedented $11 billion pollution liability in Ecuador and its refusal to address climate change are set to dominate the company's annual meeting as CEO John Watson faces increasing pressure from his own shareholders, court rulings, and environmental groups who are accusing the company of trying to intimidate critics and evade its legacy contamination problems.
A renowned indigenous leader, Humberto Piaguaje of the Secoya nationality, is traveling from his jungle home in the Ecuadorian Amazon to confront Watson over Chevron's refusal to pay the historic court judgment requiring that the company remediate billions of gallons of toxic waste dumped into the rainforest. The court judgment is considered one of the greatest triumphs in the corporate accountability movement in history and prompted a U.S. congresswoman to demand an SEC investigation of company management for hiding the risk from shareholders.
(Here is a summary of the evidence against Chevron. Here is a 60 Minutes segment documenting the company's toxic dumping in Ecuador. Here is a recent podcast interview about the case conducted by Alec Baldwin.)
"John Watson and Chevron's Board are facing a perfect storm of burgeoning problems stemming from the company's poor environmental record and primitive governance structure," said Paul Paz y Mino, Associate Director at Amazon Watch, an Oakland-based environmental group that works with Chevron's victims. "Watson's refusal to clean up his toxic waste in Ecuador and his evasive approach to climate change might explain why the company is now seen as the poster child for corporate greed.
"These issues will come to the fore in a big way both inside and outside the shareholder meeting, where protestors will gather to urge responsible action from Chevron's narrow-minded management team," Paz y Mino said.
Chevron operated in Ecuador under the Texaco brand from 1964 to 1992, leaving behind an environmental and public health catastrophe called the "Amazon Chernobyl" by locals. The pollution has devastated dozens of indigenous and farmer communities, driven up cancer rates, and cost Chevron an estimated $2 billion in legal and other fees while the company's reputation has been pounded by journalists and good government groups.
A top Chevron official has said the company would fight the indigenous groups "until hell freezes over" and "then fight it out on the ice." Although Chevron insisted for years that the environmental claims be heard in Ecuador and had accepted jurisdiction there, the company later sold all of its assets in the country and now refuses to pay the judgment.
The indigenous groups last year won a resounding victory before Canada's Supreme Court in their effort to force Watson to comply with the judgment by seizing the company's assets. In Canada, Chevron has an estimated $15 billion worth of oil fields, bank accounts, and refineries - or more than enough to pay the entirety of the Ecuador judgment. Watson and his chief lawyer, R. Hewitt Pate, have tried to argue that company assets in Canada should be off limits to the Ecuadorians because they are held by a wholly-owned subsidiary.
Chevron also faces mounting pressure from a growing international movement of communities from Europe and Latin America who have banded together to oppose the company's sub-standard environmental practices. This year's action, called the "Anti-Chevron Day", will take place from May 20-21 and will include online and live activities in several countries that will denounce Chevron's environmental and human rights violations. (See here for background.)
Apart from pressure from the Amazonian communities, some of Chevron's own shareholders are also demanding that Watson - who in 2015 personally earned $22 million despite a 75% drop in company revenue - comply immediately with the Ecuador court judgment and clean up the estimated 1,000 toxic waste pits and other pollution it left behind when it departed the South American nation in 1992.
Seattle-based Newground Social Investment this year filed a shareholder resolution (see p. 80 of Chevron's 2016 proxy) that sharply rebukes Watson for his mishandling of the Ecuador litigation. Chevron has used dozens of law firms and up to 2,000 lawyers to fight the indigenous groups, but it continues to suffer courtroom setbacks.
Eighteen consecutive appellate judges in Ecuador and Canada have now ruled against Chevron in a case that is fast becoming a potential "litigation catastrophe" for the company. The Supreme Courts of both Ecuador and Canada have unanimously ruled against Chevron; another U.S. appellate court unanimously ruled against the company when it tried to use a U.S. trial judge to block enforcement of the Ecuador judgment anywhere in the world.
The Newground resolution calls for Chevron to make it easier to hold special meetings given that Watson's management team "has mishandled a number of issues in ways that significantly increase both risks and costs to shareholders. The most pressing of these issues is the ongoing legal effort by communities in Ecuador to enforce a $9.5 billion Ecuadorian judgment for oil pollution." (The judgment is now roughly $11 billion because of statutory interest.)
Newground asserts that under Watson's leadership, Chevron "has yet to properly report these risks in either public filings or statements to shareholders. As a result, investors requested on several occasions that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigate whether Chevron had violated securities laws by misrepresenting or materially omitting information" relevant to the Ecuador liability.
Chevron also faces several other shareholder resolutions - one sponsored by the Union of Concerned Scientists - that suggest the company has fallen well behind its industry peers in reducing its greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to the challenges of climate change. One such resolution calls on the company to produce reports establishing company-wide goals for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Another asks for a change in dividend policy given that the global shift away from fossil fuels will likely lead to billions of dollars of stranded assets in the form of oil reserves. Watson and Chevron's Board oppose all of the climate change resolutions.
Piaguaje's trip, being made on behalf of dozens of indigenous and farmer communities devastated by Chevron's pollution, will culminate in an expected face-to-face showdown with Watson on May 25 at company headquarters near San Francisco. Piaguaje will confront Watson with the extensive evidence of the company's toxic dumping relied on by Ecuador's Supreme Court to unanimously affirm the judgment.
Chevron continues to get hit hard on the Ecuador issue. Several months ago, Chevron's star witness admitted lying under oath after being paid more than $2 million by the company, moved to the United States, and coached for 53 consecutive days by Chevron lawyers before being allowed to testify. Separately, Amazon Watch recently disclosed a Chevron whistleblower video showing company scientists trying to fraudulently hide extensive evidence of oil pollution from the Ecuador court. The video has been seen millions of times on the internet.
Piaguaje and other Ecuadorian rainforest leaders - including Goldman Environmental Prize winners Luis Yanza and Pablo Fajardo - have been pressuring Watson for years to pay the pollution liability so their ancestral lands can be remediated. Disease rates have skyrocketed in the affected area, groundwater has been contaminated, and there is virtually no clean water for tens of thousands of people. Piaguaje's Secoya community has seen its culture decimated because of a lack of fresh water and clean food, according to evidence in the case.
"Our leaders plan to confront Mr. Watson with judgments from multiple courts mandating the company pay its pollution bill to the people of Ecuador," said Piaguaje. "Mr. Watson needs to accept responsibility for Chevron's environmental crimes in Ecuador, apologize to the company's victims, and abide by court orders that compensation be paid.
"Until he abides by the rule of law, Mr. Watson and Chevron's Board members will be considered by us to be fugitives from justice subject to arrest for crimes against humanity under principles of universal jurisdiction," he added.
In previous shareholder meetings, Chevron's management has suffered a series of sharp rebukes over its Ecuador liability. One resolution calling on Watson to separate the positions of Chairman and CEO - widely considered a corporate governance anachronism - received a whopping 38% support from all company shareholders. Normally, any shareholder resolution that receives more than 10% support is considered successful.
In addition, in 2011 several of Chevron's institutional shareholders with more than $580 billion in assets under management sent Watson a letter urging the company to settle the Ecuador case. Amazon Watch also organized a letter signed by 43 non-profit human rights and corporate accountability groups blasting the company for trying to silence its critics over the Ecuador issue.
"In failing to negotiate a reasonable settlement prior to the Ecuadorian court's ruling against the company, we believe that Chevron's Board of Directors and management displayed poor judgment that has exposed the Corporation to a substantial financial liability and risk to its operations," said the investor letter.
U.S. Congressman James McGovern (D-MA), who visited the affected area in 2008, also sent a letter to President-elect Obama describing the horrid living conditions caused by Chevron's dumping practices. The company has also been criticized for trying to silence an anti-Chevron activist in Canada, for trying to intimidate lawyers and scientists for the villagers by suing them privately under racketeering laws, and for trying to shut down dissent by issuing subpoenas to more than 100 journalists, bloggers, and even some of its own shareholders who have questioned management. In 2010, his first year as CEO, Watson lost his cool at the shareholder meeting and had five people arrested who had challenged him over Ecuador.
Deepak Gupta, a prominent U.S. appellate lawyer who represents U.S. attorney Steven Donziger (the main target of Chevron's retaliation campaign), recent called Chevron's litigation strategy an "intimidation model" in an interview with Rolling Stone.
Chevron faces a critical court hearing in Canada in September that could knock out most of the company's case that it plans to use to evade enforcement of the judgment.
"The damage is so extensive that it is unclear whether the full amount of the judgment would be sufficient for a comprehensive clean-up," Piaguaje said. "The humanitarian crisis in our communities due to Chevron's pollution is dire and getting worse."
Amazon Watch is a nonprofit organization founded in 1996 to protect the rainforest and advance the rights of indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with indigenous and environmental organizations in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability and the preservation of the Amazon's ecological systems.
LATEST NEWS
Trump Admin Terminating TPS for Haitians Slammed as Potential 'Death Sentence'
"Ending TPS for Haitians is cruel and dangerous, and a continuation of President Trump's racist and anti-immigrant practices," said Amnesty International USA.
Jun 28, 2025
Outrage over U.S. President Donald Trump's administration terminating Temporary Protected Status for around half a million Haitians, despite dire conditions in the Caribbean country, continued to mount on Saturday, with critics decrying the decision as harsh and hazardous.
"This is not just cruel—it's state-sanctioned endangerment," declared Haitian Bridge Alliance executive director Guerline Jozef.
U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said that the Trump administration "just decided to send thousands of innocent people who have been living and working here legally into imminent danger in Haiti. Trump will tear apart families, rip up communities, and leave businesses and nursing homes shorthanded. And no one will be safer."
Warren's fellow Massachusetts Democrat, Sen. Ed Markey, also weighed in on social media Saturday, arguing that "the Trump administration knows Haiti is not safe. This is a callous and shameful political decision that will have devastating human consequences. Saving lives will always be in the national interest."
"This is a callous and shameful political decision that will have devastating human consequences."
TPS was initially granted after an earthquake hit Haiti in 2010. The designation expires August 3, and Trump's Department of Homeland Security announced in a Friday statement that the termination will be effective on September 2. A DHS spokesperson said that "this decision restores integrity in our immigration system and ensures that Temporary Protective Status is actually temporary."
"The environmental situation in Haiti has improved enough that it is safe for Haitian citizens to return home," the spokesperson added. "We encourage these individuals to take advantage of the department's resources in returning to Haiti, which can be arranged through the CBP Home app. Haitian nationals may pursue lawful status through other immigration benefit requests, if eligible."
While the DHS statement claims Haiti is safe, ignoring the deadly gang violence that has engulfed the country, the Trump administration's official notice has another focus, as some critics highlighted.
The notice states that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem "has determined that termination of TPS for Haiti is required because it is contrary to the national interest to permit Haitian nationals (or aliens having no nationality who last habitually resided in Haiti) to remain temporarily in the United States."
The Miami Heraldreported that the U.S. Department of State currently "warns Americans not to travel to Haiti 'due to kidnapping, crime, civil unrest, and limited healthcare.' This week, the agency also urged U.S. citizens to 'depart Haiti as soon as possible' or 'be prepared to shelter in place for an extended time period.'
According to the newspaper:
And just on Thursday, Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau questioned the lack of action at the Organization of American States to address the crisis in Haiti.
"Armed gangs control the streets and ports of the capital city, and public order there has all but collapsed," he said. "While Haiti descends into chaos, the unfolding humanitarian, security, and governance crisis reverberates across the region."
The Miami Herald reached out to the State Department, asking the agency to explain its recommendations. A State Department spokesperson said the department does not comment on deliberations related to TPS determinations and referred questions to DHS.
"The administration is returning TPS to its original temporary intent," the spokesperson said. "TPS is a temporary protection, not a permanent benefit."
Noting the discrepancy between the two departments, Congressman Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.) denounced the termination as "a deliberate act of cruelty."
Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) said that "this is an act of policy violence that could literally be a death sentence. We should NOT be deporting anyone to a nation still dealing with a grave humanitarian crisis like Haiti. I stand with our Haitian neighbors and urge the Trump administration to reverse course."
Also urging the administration to "reverse this inhumane decision immediately," Amnesty International USA said that "ending TPS for Haitians is cruel and dangerous, and a continuation of President Trump's racist and anti-immigrant practices. Haitian TPS holders have built lives here—working, raising families, and contributing to their communities—all while fleeing unsafe situations in Haiti."
The termination came just two weeks after Volker Türk, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, said that "at this time of untold suffering and fear, I reiterate my call to all states not to forcibly return anyone to Haiti, and to ensure that Haitians who have fled their country are protected against any kind of discrimination and stigmatization."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Mike Lee Tries to Sneak Public Land Sale Back Into 'Big, Ugly Bill' Ahead of Senate Vote
"Republicans are STILL trying to sell off public lands in their budget bill," said Sen. Ron Wyden. "If you care about keeping your public lands please make your voice heard."
Jun 28, 2025
Ahead of a vote on Republicans' budget reconciliation package expected as soon as noon Saturday, U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Chair Mike Lee revived his effort to sell off public lands.
Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough has blocked multiple provisions of the GOP megabill, including several under the jurisdiction of the Utah Republican's panel. Among them is his attack on public lands.
"Here we go again," Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said on social media after Lee released new text for his committee late Friday.
"Republicans are STILL trying to sell off public lands in their budget bill," Wyden continued. "Republicans are trying to get this over the finish line by the end of the weekend. If you care about keeping your public lands please make your voice heard."
"Americans left, right, and center have come together with one voice to say these landscapes shouldn't be sold off to fund tax cuts for the uberwealthy—not now, not ever."
Athan Manuel, director of Sierra Club's Lands Protection Program, said in a Saturday morning statement that "the new version of Mike Lee's public lands sell-off is like cutting 'most' of the mercury out of your diet. The fact of the matter is that Mike Lee has spent the better part of a decade trying to privatize our public lands, and with his new power in the Senate, he's trying to push that agenda even further without public input, without transparency, and shame."
"Americans left, right, and center have come together with one voice to say these landscapes shouldn't be sold off to fund tax cuts for the uberwealthy—not now, not ever," Manuel added. "Congress needs to listen to their constituents, not billionaires and private developers, and keep the 'public' in public lands.”
A document from Lee states that his "amended proposal dramatically narrows the scope of lands to be sold for housing... in communities where it is desperately needed" in the U.S. West. The new version would exclude all Forest Service land and reduce the amount of Bureau of Land Management acres to be sold by half.
"It's still bullshit,"responded Noelle Porter, government affairs director at the National Housing Law Project.
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), the ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, has recently said: "This isn't about building more housing or energy dominance. It's about giving their billionaire buddies YOUR land and YOUR money."
"From the Sierra Club to Joe Rogan, everybody is pissed off about Republicans' public lands sell-off," he wrote on social media Friday. "This is the broadest coalition I've seen around public lands in my lifetime, so keep making sure your voices are heard because we're winning."
Jane Fonda's climate-focused political action committee similarly stressed on social media Friday that "Lee is committed to including a massive public land sale provision in the Big Beautiful Bill. We need you to keep up the pressure and reach out to your senators today and demand they reject any new sales of public lands in this legislation."
And it's not just the land sales in the Friday night text of what critics call the "big, ugly bill." It also "creates new fees for renewable energy projects on public lands, and cuts royalty rates for oil, gas, and coal production on public lands," noted Sam Ricketts, co-founder of S2 Strategies, which is working to build a clean energy economy. "Make it make sense."
As Manuel and Heinrich pointed out, some right-wingers are also outraged by Lee's push to sell off public lands. Benji Backer, founder of Nature Is Nonpartisan and the American Conservation Coalition, took aim at the committee chair on social media Friday night.
"Mike Lee just quietly doubled down on his mass public lands sel-loff by releasing new text," Backer said. "The Senate could consider it as soon as tomorrow. The secrecy is gross—and intentional. Lee knows it's his only path. America, we NEED to stand strong.
Tagging the Senate GOP account and Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), Backer added that "Americans are entirely UNITED in opposition against this. Please ask Sen. Lee to let this provision... stand on its own—at the very least."
Even if the Senate somehow advances Lee's legislation, it could face trouble in the House of Representatives, which is also narrowly controlled by the GOP. On Thursday, Republican Reps. Ryan Zinke (Mont.), David Valadao (Calif.), Mike Simpson (Idaho), Dan Newhouse (Wash.), and Cliff Bentz (Ore.) warned that "we cannot accept the sale of federal lands that Sen. Lee seeks."
"If a provision to sell public lands is in the bill that reaches the House floor, we will be forced to vote no," warned the lawmakers, led by Zinke, who was the interior secretary during President Donald Trump's first term. Lee's provision, they wrote, would be a "grave mistake, unforced error, and poison pill that will cause the bill to fail should it come to the House floor."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Senate GOP and Fetterman Block Effort to Stop Trump's War on Iran
"The current cease-fire is fragile—and the only path to lasting peace is diplomacy, not another cycle of American military escalation," one campaigner stressed after lawmakers refused to advance the resolution.
Jun 27, 2025
Nearly all U.S. Senate Republicans and Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania on Friday evening blocked a resolution that reiterated Congress' authority to declare war and would have ordered President Donald Trump to stop taking military action against Iran without congressional approval.
Every other member of the Democratic Caucus and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) supported holding a final vote on the resolution—which Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), a member of the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees, announced last week, before Trump's weekend bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities.
"We commend Sen. Kaine for his steadfast leadership in bringing this resolution, and the U.S. senators who stood on the right side of history today in safeguarding against yet another senseless war."
Citing the U.S. Constitution and the War Powers Resolution of 1973, Kaine's measure states that "the question of whether United States forces should be engaged in hostilities against Iran should be answered following a full briefing to Congress and the American public of the issues at stake, a public debate in Congress, and a congressional vote."
Pointing to various other federal laws, Kaine's resolution "directs the president to terminate the use of United States Armed Forces for hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran or any part of its government or military, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force against Iran."
In a statement after Friday's 47-53 vote, Kaine said that "the Framers of our Constitution gave Congress the power to declare war because they believed that the decision to send our nation's men and women in uniform into harm's way was too big for any one person. The Trump administration's chaotic strategy on Iran confused the American people and created significant risks for service members and their families."
"I am disappointed that many of my colleagues are not willing to stand up and say Congress needs to be part of a decision as important as whether or not the U.S. should send our nation's sons and daughters to fight against Iran," Kaine added. "I will continue to do all I can to keep presidents of any party from starting wars without robust public debate by Congress."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who caucuses with Democrats, was among the lawmakers who spoke in support of Kaine's resolution ahead of the vote. "We do not need another unnecessary and costly war. We have had enough of them," he said on the Senate floor, pointing out that the Vietnam War and the U.S. invasion of Iraq were "based on a series of lies."
"We should not go to war against Iran," Sanders declared. He condemned Trump's recent attack on the Middle Eastern country as "unconstitutional," and argued that "diplomacy is a better path," as demonstrated by the nuclear deal in 2015—which Trump ultimately ditched during his first term.
Sanders also made the case that the U.S. should not be allied with "war criminal" Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who started the bombing of Iran and is wanted by the International Criminal Court for his mass slaughter of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
"Enough is enough," the senator said, noting that the U.S. gives Netanyahu's government billions of dollars in annual military aid. "It is beyond absurd that we continue to finance Israel's wars while neglecting the needs of our own people."
Meanwhile, in response to a question from a BBC reporter on Friday, Trump said that he would "without question, absolutely" consider bombing Iran again if intelligence suggested the country could enrich uranium to a level that concerned him.
After the Senate vote, National Iranian American Council president Jamal Abdi said that the outcome "says more about the makeup of the Senate than it does the merits of the resolution. Regardless, we saw a near majority do the right thing and stand up against war and for democracy, despite a cavalcade of misinformation from war hawks. We will continue to press the case that war with Iran is against U.S. interests and U.S. security, and redouble our work to prevent the conflict from reigniting."
"We commend Sen. Kaine for his steadfast leadership in bringing this resolution, and the U.S. senators who stood on the right side of history today in safeguarding against yet another senseless war," he continued, noting the cease-fire between Israel and Iran that Trump announced earlier this week.
"Though a cease-fire is holding for now, the most certain way to guarantee peace is through an abandonment of war and a bold pursuit of sincere negotiations," Abdi added. "We urge our Members of Congress to change course, and urgently support a return to U.S.—Iran talks and a diplomatic pathway forward for both countries."
We took an oath to defend the Constitution - just like every Senator. Today, Republicans broke that oath. We WILL hold them accountable. (2/2)
— VoteVets (@votevets.org) June 27, 2025 at 7:09 PM
Also responding to the Friday development in a statement, Demand Progress senior policy adviser Cavan Kharrazian asserted that "today's vote sends a powerful message: There is a bipartisan movement to reject more war in the Middle East and prevent us from being unilaterally dragged into war before Congress and the American people can have their say."
"We thank Sen. Kaine for his leadership and Sen. Paul for his principled vote to stand up for the Constitution," Kharrazian said, urging the House of Representatives to pass a similar resolution led by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).
Ahead of the Senate's vote, more than 41,000 people nationwide had signed a petition from the progressive group MoveOn Civic Action that calls on Congress to vote for the resolutions in both chambers.
"The current cease-fire is fragile—and the only path to lasting peace is diplomacy, not another cycle of American military escalation," Kharrazian emphasized. "The U.S. must lead with restraint, not repeat the mistakes of endless war."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular