Swiss court release loot to Mobutu Sese Seko family.

[DeepThought]

@Albany

In 2006, for instance, Shell was fined $1.5 Billion for oil pollution in the Niger Delta region by a Nigerian high court but, even though Shell has assets in Nigeria, it has refused to pay that fine till today. In contrast, BP was fined a total sum of $373 Million in 2007 for violating environmental laws and for oil spills in Texas and Alaska respectively and they have since paid that fine. What i am trying to point out is that, even if the Congolese were to win the case aginst UBS in a congolese court, UBS can still ignore them like Shell did in Nigeria and America would not intervene for obvious reasons.

That Shell agreed to an out of court settlement for a few millions may have been bourne out of fear that the U.S court may indeed take into consideration previous judgement against Shell in a Nigerian court.
But in the long run, it remains to be seen whether this is a good thing or not.


@Wayo,
Smart? Me? I no know boookru like you people O.

O.K, I don't mean to be pessimistic, but I guess how we see the world differ. There are people who think it is possible to work from within a system to change it. And that may be right. However, you have to still believe in that system.

Unfortunately, I don't believe in most of the systems in place, both locally and internationally.I don't believe that equity can ever be found or obtained in any assymetrical relationship. So yes, your analysis is quite workable, but doesn't satisfy a person with my mindset.

Sometimes what we achieve by our seemingly brilliant legal resorts only on the long run does infinitely more harm ( by further entrenching other people's rules, paradigms, mores, systems and legality over us.)

We first have to agree that a system is in need of either reformation or overthrow and then we have to decide in which direction to proceed.
Usually, the first consideration of most sane people is reformation even though it takes a very long time and entails many compromises. It also entail working with and within the system.

The problem with reformation is that some systems are built (inadvertently I may add) very resilient to reformation. They corrupt the reformation and the reformer, confuse or deceive the reformer into thinking he or she is achieving progress, when in fact the reformer has only become a tool for further entrencing the system. Such systems have to be overthrown.

I guess you now know (if you didn't already) where I am leaning.


@Dapxin

Not that I want anyone to throw bombs O , but we have to admit, when other options have been rendered useless, it does come down to that.
And believe me, if things continue the way it is going, history tells me that sooner or latter, the time for Bomb throwing will come . Its now happening in Nigeria, is it not?

[WayoGuy]

Originally Posted by Albany

.

Wayoguy,

it seems you are unaware of the hypocrisy in International Relations and the 'gang-up' against Africa. Don't you know that the West uses a different set of parameters to measure justice when an African country is involved ? Can you mention just one Afrcian country that ever used the process you outlined to obtain justice in an American court against a western multinational company ?

Bros, the proper question is “Can you mention even one African country that has tried the process I suggested in an American court and failed?” If you start from a defeatist state of mind, how will you ever find out that the process will not work? That state of mind needs to end. Regardless of what any person says, American courts are more likely to rule objectively than African courts. Let us use them and stop complaining. The Philippines successfully collected millions of dollars that their president Ferdinand Marcos stole. They collected the money through the U.S. courts. Philippines is not a European country. See the case of Republic of Philippines v. Pimentel, et.al. United States Supreme Court.

Over the years, we have always heard that Nigeria is the (second ?) most corrupt country in the world or that Mobutu stole his country blind but you never get to hear that the moneys are being stashed in Swiss or Western banks. Why is it so ? Do you think that Transparency International never knew that those monies have been in Switzerland all along?

This is not quite accurate. It has been in the news all along that Mobutu stashed his stolen loot in Western banks. But that is not pertinent to the legal issues that we are discussing here.

If the Congolese were to file a lawsuit in the Congo against UBS, what exactly would they be praying the court to do? The court of law is not a shrine where you swear that you never did this or that. If you claim that your stolen monies are being stashed in Swiss Banks, you should be able to say how much it is, or provide proof. Otherwise, the Swiss would just reply that it would take years to decode the actual amount Mobutu stole and they would finally pay you any amount they want, since you lack the proof of the actual amount stolen.

Yes, the court of law is not a shrine. The Congolese can find the documentation to support their claims in court if they really tried. Here again is the defeatist state of mind at work. We give up without even trying. Recall that the Swiss had, a long time ago, revealed how much was being held by the bank. That would be a starting point for the Congolese. Besides, if a default judgment is issued it will be entirely on the testimony of the plaintiff; and if the bank appeared in the Congolese court, the process we call “discovery” will eventually force them to produce the financial documents. Someone once said that any person who does not even try has already failed. If you read that July 16 story of the Swiss court awarding the money to Mobutu’s family, you will notice that it was the lawyers for the Congolese who failed to claim the funds within the statute of limitations – an unforgivable professional breach of duty.

In 2006, for instance, Shell was fined $1.5 Billion for oil pollution in the Niger Delta region by a Nigerian high court but, even though Shell has assets in Nigeria, it has refused to pay that fine till today. In contrast, BP was fined a total sum of $373 Million in 2007 for violating environmental laws and for oil spills in Texas and Alaska respectively and they have since paid that fine. What i am trying to point out is that, even if the Congolese were to win the case against UBS in a congolese court, UBS can still ignore them like Shell did in Nigeria and America would not intervene for obvious reasons.

How do you know, a priori, that the American court “would not intervene” if a judgment from Nigeria or Congo were filed in an American court for collection of the judgment under the principle of international comity? Has any person tried it and failed?

In another development, it took the Ogonis 13 years to get Shell to pay a paltry $15.5 Million, part of which would still be used in settling legal costs. Isn't that frustrating ?

This “thing” about the Ogonis and Shell settling a case for only $15.5 million is something that needs to be taken up with the parties and lawyers involved. American courts did not force them to accept such small change.

Well, i wish the Congolese all the luck in the world, if they choose the option you suggested.

They can’t choose my option anymore. The case is over because, while sitting on their butts, they allowed the statute of limitations to expire on their claims. Sad.

[Albany]

Originally Posted by DeepThought

@Albany


That Shell agreed to an out of court settlement for a few millions may have been bourne out of fear that the U.S court may indeed take into consideration previous judgement against Shell in a Nigerian court.
But in the long run, it remains to be seen whether this is a good thing or not.

Thanks, DT, for that salient point. Thanks too to Wayoguy for the elaborate (and optimistic) analysis. It will be nice to witness the demystification of the almighty Western multinationals in an American court. Waiting for the trailblazer...

[DaBishop]

Originally Posted by WayoGuy

>>
> >
Ah, my learned brother, you know how it is now. If you and I can find a client who has legal standing or, as you put it, is aggrieved, we will be ready to go. The major obstacle to following my plans in a Naija case is that the foreign defendants have learned how to throw a few dollars to hungry Naija plaintiffs and sometimes judges to persuade them to abandon perfectly good cases when a good lawyer has barely started. It is frustrating to hardworking lawyers. Other than that, I cannot see why we can’t follow this plan in Naija. European countries have used it many times to gain access into ffice:smarttags" />lace w:st="on">U.S.lace> courts to collect on judgments. >>

The issue of legal standing...is the crux of the matter...

Again, would a non-profit solely incorporated to fight corruption, in your opinion, have automatic standing? What do you think?

How about fighting Dollar for dollar with the deep pockets or using other means not known yet..to stop them from corrupting the judex?

[WayoGuy]

Originally Posted by DaBishop

The issue of legal standing...is the crux of the matter...

Again, would a non-profit solely incorporated to fight corruption, in your opinion, have automatic standing? What do you think?

How about fighting Dollar for dollar with the deep pockets or using other means not known yet..to stop them from corrupting the judex?

Learned bros, it is today that I saw these questions that you posed for me. Check your PM.