This is only a Preview!

You must Publish this diary to make this visible to the public,
or click 'Edit Diary' to make further changes first.

Posting a Diary Entry

Daily Kos welcomes blog articles from readers, known as diaries. The Intro section to a diary should be about three paragraphs long, and is required. The body section is optional, as is the poll, which can have 1 to 15 choices. Descriptive tags are also required to help others find your diary by subject; please don't use "cute" tags.

When you're ready, scroll down below the tags and click Save & Preview. You can edit your diary after it's published by clicking Edit Diary. Polls cannot be edited once they are published.

If this is your first time creating a Diary since the Ajax upgrade, before you enter any text below, please press Ctrl-F5 and then hold down the Shift Key and press your browser's Reload button to refresh its cache with the new script files.


  1. One diary daily maximum.
  2. Substantive diaries only. If you don't have at least three solid, original paragraphs, you should probably post a comment in an Open Thread.
  3. No repetitive diaries. Take a moment to ensure your topic hasn't been blogged (you can search for Stories and Diaries that already cover this topic), though fresh original analysis is always welcome.
  4. Use the "Body" textbox if your diary entry is longer than three paragraphs.
  5. Any images in your posts must be hosted by an approved image hosting service (one of: imageshack.us, photobucket.com, flickr.com, smugmug.com, allyoucanupload.com, picturetrail.com, mac.com, webshots.com, editgrid.com).
  6. Copying and pasting entire copyrighted works is prohibited. If you do quote something, keep it brief, always provide a link to the original source, and use the <blockquote> tags to clearly identify the quoted material. Violating this rule is grounds for immediate banning.
  7. Be civil. Do not "call out" other users by name in diary titles. Do not use profanity in diary titles. Don't write diaries whose main purpose is to deliberately inflame.
For the complete list of DailyKos diary guidelines, please click here.

Please begin with an informative title:

Chevron has been trying to delay, deny, and distort its responsibility for the billions of gallons of toxic waste left behind when it ceased operations in Ecuador 1992. In the words of one Chevron spokesman, "We’re going to fight this until Hell freezes over — and then we’ll fight it out on the ice."

But after almost 18 years, environmentalists and social justice activists have reason to celebrate. Last week, Chevron got smacked down in court twice over its attempt to avoid paying for the destruction it caused in the Amazon Rainforest in Ecuador. Not only did an appeals court uphold the $18 billion awarded by a trial court last year in Ecuador, but a US District Court judge dismissed its attempt to wriggle out of paying altogether.

Pics and a brief recap of the legal struggle below the orange squiggle of doom.


You must enter an Intro for your Diary Entry between 300 and 1150 characters long (that's approximately 50-175 words without any html or formatting markup).

A pipe drains crude oil and contaminated water from an unremediated toxic waste pit into a river near Lago Agrio, Ecuador. Hundreds of open waste pits are scattered throughout the area.
A little background is in order. The legal fight started so long ago that it has outlived the original company named in the suit. Texaco was responsible for the pollution, dumped there as part of its oil extraction operation in the Oriente region of Ecuador from 1964 to 1992. When Chevron bought Texaco in 2001, it also bought the court battles, already well into their eighth year (nice summary of the legal wranglings here).
A hand covered in the sludge from one of the hundreds of open toxic pits Chevron (formerly Texaco) abandoned in the Ecuadorean Amazon rainforest near Lago Agrio.
The plaintiffs, the Assembly of those Affected by Texaco or "Los Afectados," is a group of tens of thousands of Ecuadorans and Peruvians living in the affected area. In 1993, US attorney Steve Donzinger filed a class action suit on their behalf in US District Court. The suit claimed that Chevron had violated international law by failing to prevent pollution from the Oriente operation from affecting neighboring Peru. Patrick Keefe writes in his New Yorker article, Reversal of Fortune:
Since 1993, a group of Ecuadorans had been pursuing an apparently fruitless legal struggle to hold Texaco responsible for environmental destruction in the Oriente. During the decades when Texaco operated there, the lawsuit maintained, it dumped eighteen billion gallons of toxic waste. When the company ceased operations in Ecuador, in 1992, it allegedly left behind hundreds of open pits full of malignant black sludge. The harm done by Texaco, the plaintiffs contended, could be measured in cancer deaths, miscarriages, birth defects, dead livestock, sick fish, and the near-extinction of several tribes; Texaco’s legacy in the region amounted to a “rain-forest Chernobyl.”
A worker examines one of the hundreds of open, unremediated toxic waste pools left behind by Texaco that dot the Amazon Rainforest near Lago Agrio, Ecuador.
Despite literally tons of evidence to the contrary - huge areas devastated by deforestation and gigantic open pools of toxic waste next to the abandoned wells, containing raw crude oil as well as benzene, tolulene, xylene and other carcinogens - Texaco claimed it had cleaned up the oilfields prior to turning them over to the state-run oil monopoly, Petroecuador. Texaco maintained its operations were in accordance with the environmental standards of the time. Besides, the company claimed an agreement with the Ecuadoran government in 1995 protected it from any further liability (much the same as the Too Big To Fail banks are trying to do with the toxic mortgage mess they created in this country). That deal required the company to pay only $40 million for environmental remediation and community development.  

The trial in US District Court didn't rule on Texaco's arguments. Instead, in 2002 the court ruled that despite the increased incidence in both Ecuador and Peru of health conditions associated with the chemicals present in the waste pools, there wasn't sufficient proof that the pollution from Texaco's wells was responsible. The plaintiffs appealed, and lost again. The appeals court agreed with Chevron that the matter should properly first be addressed by the Ecuadoran judicial system.

Maria Hortencia Punina, 38, on her family's farm near Lago Agrio. The area is contaminated from crude oil and other toxic chemicals in the open waste pits that dot the area. The pits have claimed their cow, pigs, and other animals that fell into it and died. Three years ago, Maria's 22-year-old sister also died of toxication. Donald, a member of the Cofán tribe, examines one of the many open-air toxic waste pits in the Lago Agrio area in Ecuador where he lives.
Finally, in February 2011 - after 18 years and seven different Ecuadoran and US District Court judges - an Ecuadoran court ruled against Chevron. Judge Nicolás Zambrano ordered the company to pay over $18 billion (yes, that's billion with a "B") to Los Afectados, the largest ever for an environmental protection case. Judge Zambrano ordered $8.2 billion for remediation, plus 10 percent to be awarded to the plaintiffs for damages, and an additional $9 billion if the company did not issue an apology.

As you might have guessed, the verdict was appealed - but by both Chevron and the plaintiffs. Chevron claimed the damages awarded were excessive; the plaintiffs had argued for as much as $27 billion for remediation. In addition, Chevron filed a RICO suit (Chevron Corp. v. Donzinger et al, 783 F.Supp.2d 713 (2011)) in US District Court. If it had been successful, Chevron would have been able to nullify the award by preventing the claimants from collecting the money.

But US District Judge Lewis Kaplan wasn't buying it. Last week, Judge Kaplan dismissed the suit (scroll down - short article about halfway down the page), noting that not only had Chevron failed to show any damages from the alleged fraud, but that they had not even attempted to quantify them. And in Ecuador last Tuesday, an appellate court upheld Judge Zambrano's decision of culpability on Chevron's part, and reaffirmed the $18 billion award for damages.

The battle is won, but the war is not over. Paying damages to ordinary people who they've injured may be anathema to big business, but when it comes to spending money to avoid responsibility, the sky's the limit. Chevron spent millions on a PR campaign to discredit Donzinger and Los Afectados. That effort included a fourteen minute documentary-style film featuring former CNN correspondent Gene Randall to tell Chevron's "side" of the story. And last year, there were allegations that the oil giant offered $1 billion to persuade the Ecuadoran government to set aside the damages. If nothing else, the company can still appeal to the supreme court of Ecuador - provided they pay a filing fee equal to one percent of the damages awarded.

For now, at least, the verdict is in: a supermajor oil company is being held accountable for the devastation it caused to the Amazon Rainforest and the people who live there.

Justicia por los efectivos
(Thanks to the Overnight News Digest crew for pointing me to the original story.)
Extended (Optional)

Your Email has been sent.