Civil society groups and environmental justice advocates have thrown their weight behind a landmark lawsuit by His Royal Majesty, King Bubaraye Dakolo, Agada IV of the Ekpetiama Kingdom, challenging oil giant Shell’s planned divestment from its onshore operations in Nigeria’s Niger Delta.
The lawsuit, filed at the Federal High Court in Yenagoa, names Shell, the Minister of Petroleum Resources, the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC), and the Attorney General of the Federation as defendants.
Groups supporting the suit, according to a statement they issued on Friday June 25, 2025, include Social Action Nigeria, Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF), the International Working Group on Petroleum Pollution and the Just Transition in the Niger Delta (IWG), Bayelsa State Non-Governmental Organisations Forum (BANGOF), HEDA Resource Centre, and the Kebetkache Women Development and Resource Centre.
Challenging Shell’s Exit Without Accountability
At the heart of the case is Shell’s plan to exit its onshore operations in the Niger Delta by divesting its interests in the Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC). King Dakolo and the Ekpetiama people argue that Shell must first address decades of environmental degradation, including oil spills, gas flaring, and toxic pollution, before leaving the region.
According to the suit, Shell’s operations in the Gbarain oil fields—located in the Ekpetiama Kingdom—have led to the destruction of rivers, forests, and farmlands, crippling the community’s fishing and farming-based livelihoods.
The plaintiffs are seeking a court order to halt the divestment process until Shell has:
- Cleaned up and remediated polluted sites;
- Decommissioned obsolete oil infrastructure;
- Compensated affected communities for environmental and economic harm;
- Fulfilled obligations under Nigerian law and international human rights frameworks.
“This divestment is a crude attempt by Shell to run away from the disaster it created,” King Dakolo alleged. “We demand justice, not abandonment. Shell must clean up, compensate, and decommission. Only then can it leave.”
Backed by Data: Bayelsa’s Environmental Crisis
The lawsuit is underpinned by findings from the Bayelsa State Oil and Environmental Commission (BSOEC), which revealed some of the worst oil pollution levels in the world. According to the Commission:
- Over 1.5 million Bayelsans are impacted by hydrocarbon pollution.
- Water sources have been contaminated by carcinogens like benzene and chromium.
- Soil and air quality have been severely compromised.
- Agricultural productivity and fish stocks have plummeted by over 70% in some areas.
- Shell and other oil majors have failed to properly decommission old infrastructure, leaving behind leaking pipelines and toxic waste.
“The Niger Delta cannot be a sacrificial zone for fossil fuel greed,” said Reverend Nnimmo Bassey, Executive Director of HOMEF. “We stand in solidarity with King Dakolo and the people of Ekpetiama. Shell must not be allowed to profit from destruction and then walk away.”
A National Test of Corporate Accountability
Civil society groups say this is more than a local dispute—it is a test case for how Nigeria handles corporate accountability, environmental justice, and energy transition.
“Shell wants to exit with profit, leaving behind toxic air, poisoned water, and broken communities,” said Dr. Isaac Asume Osuoka, Director of Social Action Nigeria. “We are here to say: no more. The onshore asset selloffs by transnational oil corporations must not become licenses to flee responsibility.”
Legal experts argue that the suit represents a broader effort to enforce constitutional rights and environmental laws that have too often gone unheeded in the oil-rich but impoverished Niger Delta.
“This action is about the fundamental right to a clean and healthy environment under the Nigerian Constitution and the African Charter,” said Chuks Uguru, lead counsel for the plaintiffs. “We are asking the court to hold Shell accountable and to compel Nigerian regulators to do their jobs.”
Implications for Global Energy Transition
The case also has international significance, with advocates warning that similar attempts to evade environmental responsibilities are happening across the Global South as oil majors shift operations.
“This case sets a precedent not just for Nigeria but for the entire Gulf of Guinea and beyond,” said Prof Engobo Emeseh, Head of the School of Law at the University of Bradford and a representative of the IWG. “There can be no just energy transition without accountability, restoration, and consent.”
Dr. Kathryn Nwajiaku‑Dahou, Director of the Politics and Governance Programme at ODI Global, added: “If a just transition is to mean anything, then cleanup, restoration, and repair must be mandatory before companies walk away.”
A Call to Action for the Nigerian Judiciary
The plaintiffs and their supporters are calling on the judiciary to act decisively and set a strong legal precedent. Specifically, they are urging the Federal High Court to:
- Restrain Shell from proceeding with any asset sale until it fulfils its environmental obligations;
- Compel regulators like the NUPRC to enforce the Petroleum Industry Act and other environmental laws;
- Affirm the rights of indigenous communities in the Niger Delta to clean water, healthy livelihoods, and a safe environment.
“This is a crucial moment in Nigeria’s environmental and legal history,” said Olanrewaju Suraju, Director of HEDA Resource Centre. “The court has a unique opportunity to uphold justice, protect the rule of law, and demonstrate that no corporation is above accountability in Nigeria.”
A Community’s Demand for Justice
For the people of Ekpetiama Kingdom and countless other communities across the Niger Delta, the outcome of this case may determine not only whether they get justice for past harms—but whether they have a future free from pollution and corporate neglect.
As the court proceedings begin, one thing is clear: the demand for justice is growing louder, and the world is watching.
‘Shell denies liability’
However, Shell often denies the claims, attributing oil spills to third-party activities
In particular, the firm claims that a significant portion of oil spills are caused by sabotage of their pipelines and equipment by individuals involved in oil theft and illegal refining.
It also argues that the activities of illegal artisanal refiners, who process stolen crude oil, also contribute to pollution and that Shell is not responsible for their actions.
The multinational often asserts that it cannot be held liable for spills resulting from the actions of third parties engaged in illegal activities, even if those activities take place on or near their infrastructure.
Watch: https://youtu.be/lplQoubuM1U?si=0azY9rumzfVovaQp
For further information, contact:
Botti Isaac Otito – Social Action Nigeria – botti@saction.org – https://saction.org/ Kome Odhomor – HOMEF – kome@homef.org – https://homef.org/
