North America & Oceania

Halliburton to Pay 1.1 Billion in Damages for Its Role in Largest Oil Spill in U.S. History

By Kathryn Maureen Ryan
Impunity Watch Managing Editor

Washington D.C., United States of America – Halliburton, North America’s largest oilfield services provider has reportedly reached a $1.1 billion settlement for the majority of claims related to its role in contributing to the BP (formally British Petroleum) Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010. The settlement, which includes legal fees, was announced on Tuesday and would be paid in three instalments into a trust until appeals are resolved over the next two years. The settlement is subject to approval by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, Halliburton said. The company announced the settlement on their website in broad terms without providing any statements form company executives.

The Deepwater Horizon oil spill, also known as the Macondo blowout, caused the largest oil spill in United States history effecting 2,500 to 68,000 square miles of the Gulf of Mexico. The spill called into question the safety of the controversial practice of deep sea oil exploration.

The settlement would protect Halliburton from certain punitive damages if the court were to rule later that the company had been negligent or ‘grossly negligent’ for its role in contributing to the blowout, the company’s Chief Financial Officer Mark McCollum said. Following the announcement Halliburton’s shares were down 0.18 percent at $67.49 in afternoon trading on the New York Stock Exchange. “We think this is a smart move by Halliburton,” said Stewart Glickman, an equity analyst at S&P Capital IQ. “While state claims by Louisiana and Alabama remain, we think this trims legal overhang.” Rig contractor Transocean, which employed nine of the 11 workers killed on the rig, agreed to pay $1.4 billion in settlement last year, while BP has paid about $28 billion so far.

The deal comes as Halliburton, BP and Transocean await a ruling form United States District Judge Carl Barbier in New Orleans on the degree to which each actor was negligent in the explosion and resulting oil spill. By settling, Halliburton would avoid the risk of higher damages if it is found to be grossly negligent. “This lifted the uncertainty and eliminated the impact of a potential negative ruling from Judge Barbier,” said Tom Claps, a litigation analyst at Susquehanna Financial Group.

Halliburton was BP’s cement contractor on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig that exploded on Earth Day 2010. The explosion killed 11 workers and triggered the largest oil spill in United States history, spilling 4.9 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico over 87 days. The company was responsible for the placement of centralizers that are intended to help stabilize the well bore during the cementing process. Halliburton had earlier blamed BP’s decision to use only six centralizers – to save “time and money” – for the blowout that caused the explosion and massive spill.

David Uhlmann, a law professor at the University of Michigan and a former chief of the Justice Department’s environmental crimes section, said that Halliburton does not admit any liability in the settlement. However, he argues that the company never have agreed to pay more than a billion dollars unless there was substantial evidence that it was negligent.” The oil spill cost billions of dollars in economic damages for Gulf residents and the regional economy and threatened critical ecosystems in the region. The long-term economic and environmental impacts of the spill remain unclear.

For more information please see:

Al Jazeera – Halliburton to Pay $1.1bn for US Gulf Spill – 2 September 2014

Reuters – Halliburton to Settle U.S. Gulf Spill Claims For $1.1 Billion – 2 September 2014

The New York Times – Halliburton to Pay $1.1 Billion to Settle Damages – 2 September 2014

The Wall Street Journal – Halliburton to Settle Deepwater Horizon Claims For $1.1 Billion – 2 September 2014

New Restrictive Abortion Law In Louisiana Is Blocked By Judge

By Lyndsey Kelly
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

 WASHINGTON, D.C., United States Of America –  A federal judge has temporarily blocked the enforcement of a restrictive new abortion law in Louisiana. The law signed by Louisiana Governor, Bobby Jindal, requires doctors who perform abortion procedures to have admitting privileges to a hospital within a 30-mile radius of their clinics.

Louisiana Governor, Bobby Jindal, signed into law a measure which would pre quire all doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital (Photo courtesy of Reuters).

Lawyers and advocates in the region have disagreed as to whether or not the judge’s order affects the physicians at all five of the abortion clinics in the state of Louisiana, or only the three clinics whose lawsuit challenges the measure. A lawsuit by the Center for Reproductive Rights claims that doctors have not been given enough time to secure privileges at local hospitals, and thus all five abortion clinics in the state would likely be forced to close.

Judge John w. deGravelles of the Middle District of Louisiana said that the law will take effect on Monday, 1 September 2014. However, doctors should not be penalized for breaking the law while the challenge to the law is heard. Additionally, deGravelles wrote that the Board of Medical Examiners made no promises regarding the prosecution of doctors who violated the law starting Monday. Doctors who violate the ruling risk fines of up to $4,000 and the loss of their license to practice. A status conference will be called within 30 days from the enactment of the law to check on the progress of the plaintiffs’ applications.

Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, one of the many groups representing two Louisiana clinics and the doctors practicing there, stated, “Today’s ruling ensures Louisiana women are safe from an underhanded law that seeks to strip them of their health and rights.”

Laws regarding abortion clinics have become a hot topic in the recent months. Louisiana is among 11 states that have passed similar laws. Additionally, courts have recently ruled measures put in place in Alabama and Mississippi to be unconstitutional.

 

For more information, please see the following:

BUSINESS INSIDER – Judge Blocks Law That Could Close All Louisiana Abortion Clinics – 31 August 2014.

REUTERS – Judge Temporarily Blocks Law That Could Close All Louisiana Abortion Clinics – 31 August 2014.

NEW YORK TIMES – Judge Blocks Abortion Law in Louisiana – 31 August 2014.

NPR – Federal Judge Blocks Enforcement of Louisiana Abortion Law – 31 August 2014.

 

Multinational Observation Group to Oversee Upcoming Elections in Fiji

By Max Bartels

Impunity Watch Reporter, Oceania 

 

Suva, Fiji 

Fiji is set to have their first democratic election since the military coup of 2006 and many are nervous that the elections will change nothing. Military leader Frank Bainimarama seized power in 2006 and has been the nation’s dictator ever since, he has now stepped down from that role and runs as a candidate in the presidential elections taking place next month. There are mixed feelings about Bainimarama’s time in power, many Fijians praise his efforts to improve the standard of living for the islanders others found his style of rule oppressive. There have been many reports of human rights abuses under Bainimarama’s watch that is why Fiji has asked for outside help to observe the elections and ensure that there is no corruption involved and the will of the people is effectively implemented.

IW #12 MOG
Frank Bainimarama during his recent campaign visit to New Zealand
(Photo Curtesy of ABC News)

Australia has been invited by the interim Fijian government to co-lead the Multinational Observation Group (MOG) along  Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and India. Many other nations have also been invited and are in the process of sending observers including Israel, South Africa, Brazil, Russia, Turkey, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Iran and the U.K. Canada and the U.S have also been invited to send observers and have expressed interest in doing so. Australia is especially excited to participate in the election according to Peter Reith, the appointed head of the observational group, Australian are keen to repair relations with Fiji since the 2006 coup.

The observation group is said to be given complete freedom of movement across Fiji and complete access to deal with the Fijian Government, political parties and organizations. Two reports will be issued as a result of the operation, one will be issued immediately after the election, the other will be released within two months of the election. The first is focused on whether the election was effective and allowed the Fijian people to represent their will. The second will contain recommendations as to how the Fijian Government can be more effective in implementing elections in the future. The point of both is to provide confidence in the results not just for the Fijian people but for the international community as well.

Bainimarama stated recently during a campaign trip to New Zealand that he will accept the results if the election goes against him. He swore to upheld the newly created constitution that protects Fiji from another military coup. The MOG is already on the ground in Fiji observing the political parties, candidates and preparations for the elections.

For more information, please see:

The Fiji Times — Watch and Improve — 27 August, 2014

ABC News — Elections: Australia to Co-Lead Multinational Observation Group with Indonesia, India and PNG — 15 August 2014 

ABC News — Interim Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama Pledges to Accept Election Results During NZ Visit — 11 August 2014

ABC News — Fiji Leader Frank Bainimarama Greeted by Protesters Outside Sydney Election Rally — 23 August 2014

 

 

Fijian Police Investigate Violent Shooting Shown in a YouTube Video

By Max Bartels

Impunity Watch Reporter, Oceania

 

Suva, Fiji

To add to the mounting domestic struggles in the island nation of Fiji in the wake of elections and government repression, a YouTube video has surfaced claimed to be showing a Fijian fishing crew being gunned down just outside Fijian waters as they clung to their submerged craft. Fijian police have yet to identify the victims in the video, confirm that they are indeed Fijian citizens or that it actually occurred in the South Pacific. The amateur video shows the assailants on another boat laughing and taking selfies in the wake of the killings. The Sydney Morning Herald has reported that the vessel the assailants were on has been identified as a Taiwanese tuna fishing vessel. The vessel in question has had its  Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) turned off for the past three months and has not been located since. The Taiwanese fishing boat is reported to have been licensed to fish for tuna in the waters around Southern Australia and New Zealand last year.

IW #11 Fiji Fishing Shooting
In a still from the video one of the victims clings to the wreckage of his boat as bullets tear into the water around him.
(Photo Curtesy of the Daily Mail)

A Fijian college student originally uploaded the video to YouTube. Police say that the student found a mobile phone left inside a taxi that contained the video. The Fijian authorities have asked for help from Interpol to further the investigation.

The Fiji Tuna Boat Owners Association President, Mr. Southwick has stated that he believes the video actually originates from the coast of Somalia. It has been recorded that Taiwanese tuna crews have been making record catches of tuna off the coast of Somalia in recent years and have been risking the pirate infested waters ever since. It is Mr. Southwick’s contention that the incident shown in the video is actually a well-known event that occurred off the coast of Somalia. Somali pirates attempted to board a tuna boat but were shot by armed guards on the boat.

There is no evidence linking the video to Fiji or any evidence to reveal the victims in the video or indeed whether they are the victims in the situation at all. Even though the fishing boat had been previously licensed in the south pacific it is not uncommon for the boat to move to different waters. However, Southwick went on to say that he is aware that violence often erupts in pacific waters. The completion for tuna has grown quickly in recent years as tuna has become rare and where large amounts of money are at stake there is always a possibility for foul play.

For more information, please see:

ABC News Australia — Men Shot at Sea: Fiji Police Told Gruesome Video Showing Men Being Shot at Sea Originated in Somalia — 19 August 2014

The Guardian — “Fijian Fisherman Being Shot” Video Posted on YouTube — 19 August 2014

The Sydney Morning Herald — Fiji Police Investigate High- SeasShooting Video — 19 August 2014

The Daily Mail — Shot at Sea: Shocking Video Posted on YouTube Appears to Show Fisherman “Murdered” in Fiji — 19 August 2014 

 

 

Washington Post Considers The Word ‘Redskins’ A Slur And Refuses to Use the Word In It’s Opinion Columns

By Lyndsey Kelly
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON, D.C., United States of America – The editorial board of the Washington Post has decided to no longer use the word “Redskins” when referring to Washington’s professional football team in opinion articles. The board stated that the term degrades Native Americans and was the reasoning behind their decision.

The Washington Post editorial board says that the word ‘Redskins’ is a slur and it’s opinion columns will no longer use such word (Photo Courtesy of The Washington Post).

Washington Post’s editorial board operates separately from the news staff and controls only the paper’s opinion pages. The Post’s newsgathering side will continue to use the Redskins name.

The Post’s editorial board stated, “We have decided that, except when it is essential for clarity or effect, we will no longer use the slur ourselves,” and continued to state, “that’s the standard we apply to all offensive vocabulary, and the team name unquestionably offends not only many Native Americans but many other Americans, too.” The board also made it a point to state that it did not think that fans who supported the team’s name had racist feelings towards Native Americans.

Opposition to the name has been extant since the 1960’s. However, the campaign has recently taken off as a result of efforts made by the Oneida Indian Nation. Ray Halbritter, the representative of the New York State tribe, and Jacqueline Pata, the executive director of the National Congress of American Indians calls the Post’s decision, “appropriate and honorable.”

The owner of the Washington Redskins, Daniel Snyder, who bought the team in 1999, has refused to change the name, and says that he honors Native Americans. Roger Goodell, the NFL Commissioner and a group of Redskins players have voiced their support for Snyder’s opposition to change the team’s name. Snyder has come under pressure from U.S. Senators, journalists, newspapers, and the President to change the team’s name.

In June, the U.S. patent office cancelled six of the trademarks belonging to the Redskins, due to their finding that the team name is a slur against Native Americans, thus making it ineligible for trademark protection. The team has decided to appeal the patent office’s decision, which would ultimately force the franchise to drop the team’s name.

 

For information, please see the following:

BBC – Washington Post Editorial Board abandons ‘Redskins’ – 22 August 2014.

NEW YORK TIMES – Washington Post Editorial Board No Longer Using Word ‘Redskins’ – 22 August 2014.

REUTERS – Washington Post Editorial Board No Longer Using Word ‘Redskins’ – 22 August 2014. 

WASHINGTON POST – Washington Post Editorial Board Stops Using the Word ‘Redskins’ – 22 August 2014.