gravenewworld said:
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...ports-amazon-defense-coalition-107526353.html
This is set to be one of the biggest court cases in the history of the world, and a ruling is for the 17 year old case is expected within the coming months. Chevron has tried everything for the past two decades to avoid paying a huge settlement. If the Amazonian people win, this will be a monumental victory in a truly David vs. Goliath case.
Err, this is only the case if you were impyling that Chevron was David and the state of Ecuador Goliath.
This is a nonsense political case devoid of facts or merit that would have never proceeded farther than pre-trial hearings in the States, despite the fact that American courts are themselves prone to frivolity, loose standards of evidence in civil hearings, and a general anti-corporate bias in judicial tendency and regulatory structure. The plaintiffs claims are just
that bad.
http://www.chevron.com/ecuador/background/patternoffraud/
Chevron has had to resort to forcing discovery proceedings in US courts (which operate far more efficiently and transparently than their Ecuadorian counterparts), due to an abandonment of the local courts evidence-gathering process (precisely because the evidence has proven disastrously unfavorable for plaintiffs). The notion by plaintiffs that Chevron, a major domestic corporation, lied to US courts is patently abusrd. If there were any evidence, the reprecussions for the company would be severe. At the very least, corporate counsel involved in deliberate deceit would be subject to disbarrment and criminal penalties. If those claims were made domestically, they'd be libelous.
http://www.texaco.com/sitelets/ecuador/en/history/
"Thereafter, the plaintiffs began an intense campaign to abort the evidentiary process and increase the circus of protests designed to bring pressure on the court. They ceased paying their share of court ordered settling expert fees, bringing their work to a standstill. They "waived" the inspection of the remaining 64 sites, while contending that they should still be allowed to claim damages from these un-inspected sites, without first substantiating their claims with proof. And, most importantly, they demanded that the court proceed directly to a liability determination phase and that it appoint a single expert of their choice - not the same settling experts initially appointed by the court - to perform the entire assessment.
With the election of a new government in Ecuador and the appointment of a new judge, plaintiffs' wishes have come true. Having completely abandoned the evidentiary process required under Ecuadorian law and observed by the court through over three years of litigation, the new judge terminated the evidentiary phase and assigned a single Ecuadorian mining engineer to assess all of the alleged environmental damage.. Moreover, the new executive branch of the Ecuadorian government now has abandoned even facial adherence to the rule of law, having formed an open working partnership with the plaintiffs to use the full force of the Ecuadorian government to hold Chevron responsible for the 17 years of environmental damage caused by its own state oil company, Petroecuador. Senior members of the GOE have spoken on-record through official GOE channels and even taken high visibility trips to the region to exhort the court to find Chevron liable.
In short, this case has now descended into a judicial farce. Chevron is left with no alternative other than to speak openly about the denial of justice that is occurring in Ecuador. In our view, this proceeding no longer has any legal validity, and our company will fight this embarrassing display of hometown injustice in every conceivable forum."
The courts in Ecuador are responding to social pressure, not legal merits, in allowing this nonsense case to proceed. People would do well to think critically on subjects before jumping to inane conclusions on the basis of nonsensical statements by interest groups (ooo, big bad corporation is destroying nice pretty rainforest because they are eeeevil, i know its true because PR Newswire, a bastion of objective investigative journalism, told me so).
