Proposal to Lundin Petroleum’s Shareholders
On 4 May 2017, the shareholders of Lundin Petroleum voted about the ubnderneath proposal to address the right to remedy of victims of Sudan’s oil war.
Proposal Regarding an Unpaid Debt
A shareholder proposes that the Annual General Meeting calls on the Board of Directors to
- allocate SEK 5 billion to remedy the company’s adverse human rights impacts in Sudan, and
- request the Swedish Government to design a related remedy mechanism that is impartial, protected from corruption, free from political or other attempts to influence the outcome, effective, and enjoys the confidence of the victims.
There is overwhelming evidence that Lundin’s activities in Sudan have had adverse human rights impacts and the company has never presented any facts or assessments that indicate otherwise.
Lundin Petroleum has endorsed the UN Guiding Principles, including that companies must know and show their impacts, and provide for or cooperate in the remediation of adverse human rights impacts of their operations. Nevertheless, the company has not assessed its human rights impacts in Sudan. Nor has it shown an interest in the victims of the abuses to which its activities were directly linked. Instead, the company confuses the fact that it has had adverse impacts with the fact that the Swedish State suspects Mr Ian Lundin and Mr Alexandre Schneiter of aiding and abetting certain war crimes. However, the company is not part of any judicial proceedings and the public prosecutor is not assessing its human rights impacts.
The burden of proof for war crimes is very high and the ability of a prosecutor to investigate crimes that have been committed in other countries is limited – especially in countries with governments that are not functioning or cooperative, like South Sudan and Sudan. The objectives, procedures and standards for assessing human rights impacts are far removed from those of criminal investigations. They are carried out by the company itself and/or independent experts and look at the full spectrum of human rights, attaching importance to the perspectives of all stakeholders in an effort to seek the truth, not to plead innocence. By confusing the two processes, the company has chosen for polarization, blocks the path towards a constructive resolution, and fails its commitment to human rights.
Lundin Petroleum can still start living up to its principles and make up with the people that it left behind in Sudan. That will have to start with a compelling show of goodwill. Only by allocating a convincing amount of money for the remedy of victims, that reflects the measure of their suffering and damages, can the company demonstrate a credible level of commitment. SEK 5 billion is a fair and reasonable amount. Together with sincere efforts to realize a proper remedy mechanism, this would start rebuilding trust in the company’s societal commitments and moral integrity.
A majority of 99,84 % rejected the proposal.
Click here to see the recommendation by the Board of Lundin Petroleum to vote the proposal down.
In 2012, following a negative advise by the Board, Lundin Petroleum’s shareholders voted overwhelmingly against two proposals to carry out an independent investigation into the company’s role in Sudan.
In 2013, again following the Board’s advise, Lundin Petroleum’s shareholders voted overwhelmingly against a proposal to implement the UN Guiding Princples for Business and Human Rights, including an assessment of the company’s human rights impacts.