Belinda Beresford
International human rights activists are preparing to launch a boycott campaign on the internet against South African petroleum company Engen.
The “boycott Engen” campaign is being directed at Engen’s majority shareholder, national Malaysian petrochemicals company, Petroliam Nasional Berhad (Petronas). Engen is 80% owned by Petronas.
Petronas is one of several multinational energy companies involved in the development of oil reserves in southern Sudan – a process that has been marred by violence, with international agencies reporting on gross human rights violations against local residents.
There have been persistent reports that protecting the security of oil development schemes has seen the inhabitants of the areas driven from their homes.
In a report released in early May, Amnesty International said that since early 1999, Sudanese government forces have launched “ground attacks, helicopter gunships and indiscriminate high-altitude bombardment to clear the local population from oil-rich areas”.
Amnesty International cites reports that in one area “male villagers were killed in mass executions; women and children were nailed to trees with iron spikes”.
Sudan has been wracked by a 17-year internal conflict, which according to International Christian Concern has caused the deaths of an estimated 2-million people. Religious and cultural differences between Christians in the south and the Muslim government have fuelled the flames of civil strife.
The Sudanese government has been accused by the United States of using oil revenue to buy arms for the civil war.
In response to news of the boycott call, Engen said: “It would be essential to try to convince our stake- holders here that Engen itself has a very strong human rights record, and has spent millions of rands in doing nation-building work. Petronas is a strong supporter of that.”
One of the initiators of the call for the Engen boycott is Eric Reeves, a professor at Smith College in the United States. He says the consumer action is intended to drive home a message to Petronas: “Either withdraw from Sudan’s oil development project or use your influence in Sudan to work energetically for peace.”
Human rights activism has already claimed some scalps of companies involved in the controversial development in the Sudan.
Canadian gas and oil company Fosters Resources withdrew from the development, blaming human rights groups for the loss of financial backers.
Another Canadian company, Talisman, has suffered bad publi- city which some observers said led to the company’s shares trading at a discount. There have also been suggestions that the publicity concerning the involvement in Sudan of China’s National Petroleum Corp (PetroChina) tainted the company’s initial public offering on the New York Stock Exchange.