13 Examples that Expose a Corporate Cover-up

Does Chevron respect the law and human rights in Ecuador? You decide.  On its website Chevron pledges to “conduct business in a socially responsible and ethical manner” and “to respect the communities” where it operates.  But Chevron’s defense in the historic environmental trial in Ecuador’s rainforest (“Lago trial”) – where damages could be in the billions of dollars – can hardly be considered “ethical” or respectful of human rights. 

Chevron operated an oil concession in Ecuador’s rainforest from 1964 to 1992.   The company admits during this time that it dumped 18 billion gallons of toxic waste in an area that was home to six indigenous nationalities – one of which is now extinct. 

For the last four decades, Chevron has treated Ecuador as an image problem to be managed rather than a humanitarian crisis that compels a compassionate and real solution.  When one connects Chevron’s dots in Ecuador, what emerges is a coordinated series of frauds marked by misinformation designed to deceive courts, the public, shareholders, and the financial markets. 

The purpose of this scheme is to avoid paying the cost of a real clean-up, and it matters not that vulnerable rainforest peoples – among them thousands of children – have died or suffer grievously as a result.  Already, the government of Ecuador has charged Chevron with fraud in U.S. federal court over a purported clean-up.  The company also is being targeted by the SEC for hiding its Ecuador liability from shareholders. 

Still further, these problems have prompted a criminal investigation by Ecuador’s national prosecutor that could ensnare current Chevron managers – a fact the company has yet to disclose to shareholders or the SEC.  Chevron’s Board of Directors appears asleep at the switch on this issue, raising questions about its corporate governance responsibilities.  This section provides some leading examples of Chevron’s fraud in Ecuador.