Sudan Oil dilemma - Poverty or Prosperity for the people

Sudan is generally considered to hold significant oil and gas reserves, much of which are believed to be located in the southern part of the country. Due to Sudan’s civil war, which commenced in the late 1960’s, much of southern Sudan has remained unexplored and is now considered to be one of the few major and lesser-explored oil and gas regions in the world.
Sudan’s existing oil reserves are estimated at approximately 1.2 billion barrels with recoverable reserves estimated at greater than 800 million barrels. Southern Sudan is also rich in natural gas with current estimated reserves of 3 trillion cubic feet (3 tcf). Sudan currently produces approximately 500,000 barrels of oil per day and although it has been an oil producer for a number of years, the country, particularly Southern Sudan is considered to be vastly under-explored and exploited due to civil unrest. It is generally believed that the country holds a significant oil resource potential, as evidenced by the fact that Sudan was recently granted observer status at Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). The original estimate of undiscovered oil reserves in the explored parts of Southern Sudan is believed to be in excess of 10 billion barrels.
Recently a story was broadcast by CNN regarding pollution in the southern Sudan oilfields. The actual report was published by a German human right group "Sign of Hope." Their report says that there is a pollution problem in certain oilfields in Southern Sudan due to oil companies having been allowed to drill in order to discover more oilfields.
The people displaced by this activity have still not had their concerns addressed properly by the Khartoum government nor have they been compensated. One of the major problems is the environmental devastation and its impact on the inhabitants of South Sudan. Some nearby oilfields have affected various local drinking water. Southern Sudan relies on its natural water source, pastures for the animals and agriculture in general. These vital resources are being polluted due to a high degree of ignorance and, to some extent, deliberate under-management. The Government of Sudan and the international Companies are putting human life in Southern Sudan at risk due to their interest in the oil money. To make the matters worse, the South’s people are underrepresented at a global level thus making the population there vulnerable to dangerous pollutants.

Five years after the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM) and the National Congress Party (NCP) signed a Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) the Khartoum government, which is control by NCP, oil extraction began in south Sudan. This exploration has brought more suffering to our people, people that have had already suffered from the war. The drilling of oil is destroying the environment and the health of the local communities. Oil spills and waste dumping have poured toxins into the water and soil.
The samples that were taken for testing have been found to have a high level of contamination. The local communities relying on the land and natural waterways for their livelihood and sustenance will now have to drink, cook and wash in polluted water and eat fish that have sometimes been contaminated with toxins. If these activities continue local communities in the south may lose valuable farming land from oil spills as well as suffering the severe health consequences of that pollution.

The White Nile Petroleum Operating Company (WNPOC) and White Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Company (GNPOC) are the main operators in south Sudan covering 31,000 square kilometers.
Both the Khartoum government and these companies have, so far, shown no regard to the people of south Sudan when it comes to preventing or containing oil spills, waste dumping, or how to deal with clean up of oil operations. Nor have they come clean about the human rights impact of the oil industry.
"Sign of Hope", a human rights group, have spent eighteen months taking and testing more than 50 water samples and they have submitted their results to the United Nations. They indicated that they have found "persuasive" evidence of contamination. Hydrologists working for the group found salinity and nitrates in drinking water wells near the White Nile's oilfields. They have found levels way above the internationally recommended standards. They have also found a high concentration of minerals, such as cadmium and lead, in mud pits at more than 30 abandoned boreholes. The group claims that some of the heavy metal contaminants that may find their way into supplies of drinking water, and they claim to have found chromium in one well that measured eight times the World Health Organization guideline. Chromium is known to cause cancer and damage to vital organs like the kidneys, liver and the brain. Local communities are worried about their own health and that of the livestock that they depend on. They claim that this has already been occurring since the oil companies started their exploration for oil. The companies that are operating in the areas are owned by various nationalities although, in one of the companies, the Khartoum government is a major stakeholder.

The Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Company (GNPOC) is one of the petroleum exploration and production companies operating in Sudan. It was incorporated on 18 June 1997 and undertook construction of the Greater Nile Oil Pipeline, which links Sudan's inland oil fields with refineries at Khartoum and Port Sudan.
The GNPOC concession in the Western Upper Nile area includes the large Unity and Heglig oil fields plus smaller fields at El Toor, El Noor, Toma South, Bamboo, Munga and Diffra
GNPOC stakeholders are:
China National Petroleum Corporation: 40%
Petronas Carigall Overseas of Malaysia: 30%
ONGC Videsh (the overseas arm of ONGC) of India: 25%
Sudapet of Sudan: 5%

The White Nile Petroleum Operating Company (WNPOC) is another petroleum exploration and production company operating in Sudan. It was incorporated in 2001.
WNPOC stakeholders are:
Petronas Carigall Overseas of Malaysia: 50%
Sudapet of Sudan: 50%

Our people had suffered from a decade’s long war, they had experienced all sorts of adversity during the conflict. Their houses had been burnt down, their properties had been looted and millions were displaced.
After signing the CPA in 2005, between the Sudan People’s Liberation Moment (SPLM) and the National Congress Party (NCP), brought hope to the people of south Sudan. As they are now making the transition from war and poverty to peace, stability, prosperity and a better future but that hope has been shattered by the activities of these oil companies and the lack of a regulatory system in Sudan, a failure of the Khartoum government.
However, there is a widespread concern especially in the South, since signing CPA there are many things that have not being implemented by the Khartoum government- such us sharing of oil revenues and national ministries and so on. More importantly the mismanagement of resources in the south and the impact it’s on the lives of the local communities have yet to be addressed.
Our people in south are the most vulnerable - their lives and health are placed in jeopardy by the actions of irresponsible corporations and the Khartoum Government.
They do not care about our people in the south, all they appear to care about, is the revenue that comes from the oil. Can you imagine or can you believe that Sudan, one of the major unexplored oil and gas in the world, still does not have regulatory system, policies or a mechanism in place to protect its people from human rights abuse and environmental destruction.

Following the signing of Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2005 between Khartoum government and Sudan People's Liberation Movement, the oil clause was that the revenues will be shared equally, despite this agreement, it’s clear that the Khartoum government is not cooperative and honest, as they have sidelined SPLM in many of the major decisions that have been made since the CPA came into being.

Let’s revisit the issue of the management of resources in the south – pollution, destruction of the environment and its impact to the local communities in the southern Sudan oilfields.
So the question is what can we do as a present generation to help our people back home?
Here are some of things that we can do to advance our people and our nation:
 First we need to work hard to raise awareness of this issue and to bring it to our people’s attention back home. We need to bring the impact of oil drilling and environmental destruction on the local communities to the attention of the international community. The international community can then apply pressure on the Khartoum government to implement and maintain regulatory systems to prevent corporations from abusing human rights and degrading the environment.
Also we want to expose the practices of these corporations, their irresponsible behavior in failing to adopt the international standards expected of companies that operate in oil production.
 As we approach the upcoming referendum next year, it is time for us to engage with our people back home. We must make our people politically aware and well informed about the referendum, and what it really means to us as southern Sudanese. So our people can make an informed decision as what is best for us, thus that we can determine our own future, and quell the kind of behavior of abuse and misuse of our resource by the corporations and Khartoum government.

This front line requires all of us, particularly the young people, to endeavor to ensure that every person in the south votes and that every effort is made to make our people politically aware of the referendum and its consequences.
My dear brothers and sisters this is not just a political challenge, nor a human rights challenge, nor an environmental challenge.
It is the moral challenge of our generation.
We cannot just leave it to our leaders alone or leave things as they are now, hoping they will get better.

As we understand it, the Khartoum government has failed to protect our people’s human rights against harm caused by these corporations. It is clearly a violation of human rights under international law.
The salient facts are that the Khartoum government is a partner in these oil companies operating in the south and has, so far, been reluctant to take any action against the companies causing environmental destruction and bringing harm to our people’s lives and livelihoods.

In some instances in other countries, we have been witnesses to how some oil companies’ behavior, those who once engaged in irresponsible conduct, were brought to justice and held accountable for their reckless conduct.
For example, Shell petroleum has been sued in law courts for their irresponsible behavior towards local communities and the environment in Niger Delta region. Chevron, the giant oil multi-national, has been sued by the Bowoto for gross human rights violations including extrajudicial killing and cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment of the people in the Niger Delta region.
On May 28th 1998 the unarmed residents of the Niger Delta protested against Chevron’s offshore Parabe Platform, demanding that the corporation stop polluting water, destroying their environment and contribute more resources to the development of the impoverished oil-rich region. They were shot at and some killed by Nigerian Government soldiers and Chevron security personnel who were transported to the platform on Chevron-leased helicopters. Chevron is also being sued for causing the destruction of riverbeds, natural ecosystems, and contributing to extreme land erosion. As more oil and extractive resources are being discovered, such violations of human rights and environmental destruction are now setting a precedent.

CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY
The baseline responsibility of companies is to respect human rights.
As Professor John Ruggie, UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on business and human rights, corporate responsibility for human rights has said - when a government fails to protect people’s human rights against harm by non-state actors, this amounts to a violation under international law. However, the fact is that government failure to protect it people human rights does not absolve the non-state actor from responsibility for their actions and the impact of those actions on human rights. When companies undermine or abuse human rights, it is, in many cases due to a lack of Government regulations, due diligence and proper planning, or because of deliberate action of non-state actors.
Some corporate actions and inactions would constitute criminal or civil wrongs in the country where they operate and the emerging consensus on corporate responsibility for human rights is that companies should – at a minimum – respect all human rights.
This is the position articulated by Professor John Ruggie (UN SRSG) on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, in his report to the Human Rights Council. In the context of the oil industry, there are international standards for oil industry operations that oil companies should be well aware of and these standards have been underlined in the UN Report.
Moreover, most of the oil companies have in place policies which commit them to good practice in terms of environment and social impacts. Given the vast experience that the multinational oil companies have had in oil production and their professed commitment to the environmental, corporate and social responsibility, it is not credible to conclude that the oil companies are unaware of good standards and good practice. The UN has underlined that corporate responsibility in respect of all human rights has a corresponding requirement for concrete action by companies to discharge their responsibility with due diligence.
This concept describes the steps a company must take to become aware of, prevent and address adverse human rights impacts. The assessment of human rights impact is increasingly seen as vital for businesses, particularly in sectors that are highly physically invasive, such as extractive industries. According to the UN “While these assessments can be linked with other processes like risk assessments or environmental and social impact assessments, they should include explicit references to internationally recognized human rights. Based on the information uncovered, companies should refine their plans to address and avoid potential negative human rights impacts on an ongoing basis.”
A corporate sector is not free to ignore the consequences of its actions because a government failed to hold them to account.
The international standard is clearly not “what a company can get away with”. Human right groups believe that some oil companies have exploited the weak regulatory system in some countries, and their actions and failures cannot be attributed to ignorance or lack of understanding about how they should behave.

STANDARDS AND THE OIL INDUSTRY.
There exist a range of internationally accepted standards and good practices in relation to oil industry operations. For example, the International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA), established in 1974, has developed a range of information and guidance documents on issues that cover the procedures of oil production, including oil spill response, social impact assessment and the impact of oil spills on fisheries. All the major multinational oil companies that operated in oil production, including Sudanese once, are members of the International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA). However, these multinational oil companies are well aware of these standards, and that compliance with them is not mandatory unless required by national law. So the responsibility still lies with the sovereign government.

FAILURE TO TAKE PREVENTIVE ACTION
Human Right Groups’ research found serious failures by some companies when it comes to identifying and preventing pollution and environmental harm that leads to human rights abuses. This was because of one or more of the following:
A significant gap between policy and practice, the lack of effective oversight; Some company practices went beyond failure to ensure that their operations do not harm the environment, and could not be viewed as anything other than acts of negligence. Companies have also impeded effective monitoring of the impact of the oil industry on the environment and communities by failing to disclose information in a clear and systematic way.


FAILURE TO APPLY ACCEPTED STANDARDS OR GOOD PRACTICE.
The social and environmental impacts of oil exploration and production are relatively well known, and a number of accepted practices, in terms of oilfield operations, environmental management and engagement with communities, have been established. The International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA) standard requires companies to adhere to good oilfield practices and to take steps to prevent and clean up environmental pollution. Moreover, the companies have in place policies and practices for their global operations that should ensure that negative impacts are minimized and problems are dealt with swiftly and effectively. Indeed, several companies have been underlined by human rights groups for their global and local policies and systems for ensuring they do not harm the environment or the people.
Obviously, these corporations sometimes do not follow these policies. The reality on the ground in oilfield such as Southern Sudan and the Niger Delta are evidence of this. Again it comes down to governmental responsibilities, a conclusion that the government has failed to enforce laws and regulations. In those cases of corporate policies on social responsibility, ethics and protection of the environment and human rights, the regulations are either poor or inadequately implemented. The majority of the evidence gathered by human rights groups on environmental damage in respect of petroleum, pollution and poverty relate to joint ventures operated by the corporations and government entities.
The local communities which have a significant dependence on their environment for food and water, they require the utmost care and, if necessary additional protection measures.

My dare brother and sisters this issues requires all of us, particularly young people and the people who live in diasporas to stand up together - on behave of our local communities who are voiceless can’t advocate for themselves due to the circumstances that they are in. so I want you to understand that you are the only voice and the hope of our people, that you will come to their rescue. As I stated earlier there are two things you can do at the moment – to raise awareness to the international community and making our people politically conscious about adverse effects of careless oil exploitation and referendum and what it really means to us as southerners, such that our people can make a wise decision and what is best for us, and so that we can determine our own future.

There are so many ways we can help, so if you are interested in helping our people please join me in raising political awareness back home as we are going into a cruel moment in our national history. Also if you are environmentalist activities who wish to help us – please join us in this issue at international level – voice your environmental concerns and its impact on the local communities in the southern Sudan. If you have any suggestions or comments you can leave them on my blog or you can contact me via email, majok76@hotmail.com or majok.doong@live.vu.edu.au
Below is a video that was broadcast on CCN in regarding pollution back home.