Prominent British Figures Call on ExxonMobil to Respect Venezuelan Sovereignty

Over 50 prominent figures representing a wide section of British society have signed a statement raising concern over legal action taken by oil giant ExxonMobil to prevent the Venezuelan government from exercising its right to control its natural resources. They have urged ExxonMobil to work for "the amicable settlement" of its dispute with the Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA through international arbitration.

The statement is published as Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA goes to the High Court to appeal an English court's decision to freeze its assets in England and Wales.

The statement points out that "The action by ExxonMobil was in response to the policy of the Venezuelan government to take back majority control of their own oil resources. Unlike other international oil companies, where some 30 out of 32 contracts have been successfully renegotiated and amicable agreements and compensation terms reached with the Venezuelan government, ExxonMobil refused the terms offered."

The statement concludes "We further restate our support for Venezuela's national sovereignty, including the right to determine its own policy in relation to its oil and natural resources in favour of the people of that country, rather than in the interests of multinational companies."

Signatories to the letter included writer and film-maker John Pilger, veteran political activist Tony Benn, Bruce Kent, Vice President of CND, Ann Pettifor, founder of Jubilee 2000, Brian Wilson, Chair of the Scottish Venezuela Society, an MEP and many MPs from 5 parties, a number of leading writers, artists and academics and many senior national trade union leaders.

Colin Burgon MP, Chair of Labour Friends of Venezuela group of parliamentarians said: "Millions of Venezuelans are now benefiting from free healthcare and education thanks to the Chavez government's greater control over that country's oil resources. Government's must have the right to be able to put the interest of people ahead of company's profits".
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/3209

Thanks for posting this, Joanne98. Hope a lot of people will take the time to get the facts straight, for a change.

The statement, itself, published in your article:

STATEMENT RE EXONNMOBIL AND PDVSA

We note with deep concern that on 7 February an English court granted an injunction to US multinational oil company ExxonMobil freezing the assets of the Venezuelan oil company PDVSA in England and Wales. The order covered assets to the value of US$12 billion.

The Venezuelan Government was given no notice of the case and was not afforded any opportunity to be represented at the hearing.

This week PDVSA will appeal the decision in the High Court and seek to revoke the injunction.

The action by ExxonMobil was in response to the policy of the Venezuelan government to take back majority control of their own oil resources. Unlike other international oil companies, where some 30 out of 32 contracts have been successfully renegotiated and amicable agreements and compensation terms reached with the Venezuelan government, ExxonMobil refused the terms offered.

We believe that the action by ExxonMobil, and the ruling by the court, contravenes the right of the democratically elected government of Venezuela to exercise sovereignty over its natural resources. The nationalisation of Venezuela's state oil company, holder of some of the world's largest oil reserves, under the government of President Hugo Chavez has allowed Venezuela to tackle a range of social inequalities, by taking back the oil wealth and redistributing it to benefit the Venezuelan people.

We urge the amicable settlement of this dispute through arbitration under the auspices of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, a body of the World Bank, as sought by the Venezuelan government in compliance with the terms of the contract signed between PDVSA and ExxonMobil in 1995.

We further restate our support for Venezuela's national sovereignty, including the right to determine its own policy in relation to its oil and natural resources in favour of the people of that country, rather than in the interests of multinational companies.

SIGNATURES

~~~~~~~~~~~Venezuela resists ExxonMobil’s blackmail
by Kiraz Janicke, Caracas
Monday, February 18, 2008

“This is pure judicial terrorism”, Venezuelan energy minister Rafael Ramirez told reporters in Caracas on February 8, in response to court injunctions obtained by US-based ExxonMobil Corp. — the world’s largest oil corporation — in January.

The injunctions froze more than US$12 billion worth of assets of the Venezuelan state-owned oil company PDVSA in Britain, the Netherlands and the Dutch Antilles. ExxonMobil, parent company in Australia to Esso and Mobil, has also frozen $300 million of PDVSA funds held in a US bank account. “If they think that with this they will get us to backtrack on our nationalisation policies, well, gentleman from ExxonMobil, you are dead wrong again”, Ramirez declared.

As part of a drive to recover full sovereignty over its natural resources, the Venezuelan government of socialist President Hugo Chavez nationalised ExxonMobil’s 41.7% stake in the Cerro Negro project in the Orinoco oil belt in May last year with an offer for compensation. Other major oil companies including US-based Chevron Corp., France’s Total, Britain’s BP PLC, and Norway’s Statoil negotiated deals with Venezuela to remain on as minority partners in the Orinoco oil belt projects following the May 2007 nationalisations.

As well as ExxonMobil, US-based company ConocoPhilips also rejected the nationalisations, but has said it is seeking an “amicable resolution” with Venezuela. ExxonMobil, however, rejected an initial compensation offer from Venezuela and has demanded arbitration. Although the oil giant has not specified how much it wants in compensation, it said its investment in the project was valued at $750 million at the time the assets were taken over. The injunctions were solicited by ExxonMobil in anticipation of an arbitration ruling by the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes over a compensation claim.

More:
http://togsplace.blogspot.com/2008/02/venezuela-resists-exxonmobils-blackmail.html

"The Venezuelan Government was given no notice of the case and was not afforded any opportunity to be represented at the hearing."

Now that is dirty pool. See my analysis of this situation at

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3205269

...which I think is related to Donald Rumsfeld's op-ed in the Washington Post, of Dec 1,2007 (just after Exxon Mobil's initial move against Venezuela), and is stage one (destabilization of Venezuela) as prep for Oil War II--regaining global corporate predator control of all of the Andes oil fields (in Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Argentina--all now with leftist, social justice governments).

Thanks for the info. I remember now when Exxon Mobil struck, a few weeks ago--running into "first world" courts for a quick freezing of $12 billion in Venezuela's assets. I didn't think of it at the time. Why wasn't Venezuela present? Because these warmongering shits didn't tell them about it! Jeez.

Don't know if Chevron is funding climate change denyers, but Exxon jolly well is.