Shell knew the risks from ageing and leaking infrastructure, including an old pipeline internally described as \u201ca basket\u201d [case], yet kept oil flowing. It later decided to divest its onshore business rather than face the enormous cost of clean-up and decommissioning, including an internal US$10.9 billion decommissioning estimate. A separate internal presentation stated that 375km\u00b2 of mangrove forest had been harmed by pollution.<\/p>\n
Amnesty International wrote to Shell on 3 July 2026 to share its findings related to the disclosed documents. In response to Amnesty\u2019s report, Shell wrote that: \u201cThe characterisation and portrayal of Shell in your letter is not one we recognise. Shell is committed to honesty, integrity and respect for people, and to conducting business in an ethical and transparent manner.\u201d Shell says that the findings do not reflect the \u201cchallenging operating environment in the Niger Delta at the time\u201d. Their full response is included in the report.<\/p>\n
\u201cShell has long blamed oil theft and sabotage for pollution in the Niger Delta. But these documents cut through years of denial and raise grave questions about what Shell knew, what it allowed to continue, and whether it then sought to walk away from the costs of its toxic legacy,\u201d said Isa Sanusi, Director of Amnesty International Nigeria.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe scandal was not simply illegal \u2018bunkering\u2019 or oil theft. The real scandal is Shell\u2019s pursuit of profit at the expense of people\u2019s rights. Shell was willing to accept further environmental damage in Nigeria that would not have been tolerated elsewhere, and years of public denial are now challenged by its own documents.\u201d<\/p>\n
The real scandal is Shell\u2019s pursuit of profit at the expense of people\u2019s rights.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Isa Sanusi, Director of Amnesty International Nigeria<\/p>\n
The report is published by Amnesty International together with The Corner House<\/a>, Hawkmoth<\/a>, HEDA Resource Centre<\/a>, Kebetkache Women Development & Resource Centre<\/a>, Miideekor Environmental Development Initiative (MEDI)<\/a>, Recommon<\/a> and Social Action<\/a>. For affected communities, the findings confirm what many have said for decades: oil pollution has damaged water, farmland, fisheries, health and livelihoods, while companies continued to profit and deny responsibility.<\/p>\n \u201cShell cannot be allowed to take the oil, take the profits and leave the pollution behind. Communities in the Niger Delta deserve truth, justice, clean-up and full remedy,\u201d said Olanrewaju Suraju, Chairman of the HEDA Resource Centre, a Nigerian governance and environmental justice NGO.<\/p>\n Concerns over role in oil theft, broken rules and failing infrastructure<\/p>\n The documents show that even while Shell blamed criminal gangs for oil theft, senior staff allowed illegal taps to remain on pipelines because removing them would \u201ctake considerable system downtime\u201d, meaning the temporary suspension of profitable crude oil flows. One senior Shell manager wrote in 2013 that this had led the Nigerian security force responsible for pipeline security to accuse Shell of being \u201ccomplicit\u201d in oil theft \u201cbecause we are not removing the bunkering points.\u201d A Shell presentation that year, referring to the effects of the illegal tapping, asked: \u201care we comfortable to continue producing, KNOWING that further environmental damage WILL occur?\u201d<\/p>\n The report also reveals that Shell exempted its Nigerian subsidiary, Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) from key elements of its global health and safety standards so oil could continue flowing through tampered pipelines, even when not deemed safe under Shell\u2019s own safety rules. This was an approach one senior Shell executive appeared to acknowledge would not be tolerated elsewhere. Internal documents additionally show Shell executives suspected staff and contractors may have been involved in oil theft, with one email warning: \u201cwe have to work on the assumption that the bunkerers get good access to SPDC planning data.\u201d<\/p>\n Internal audits further exposed serious weaknesses in Shell\u2019s pipeline management, including a major maintenance backlog, weak oversight systems, and poor records on pipeline clamps that Shell had allowed to become permanent repairs on leaking pipelines. More than 1,600 clamps were registered, including older clamps whose locations were unknown.<\/p>\n A 2012 technical review also found that SPDC flowlines were supposed to be replaced every 15 years, but this was \u201cnot being followed\u201d and only \u201cbreakdown maintenance\u201d was being applied.<\/p>\n Shell cannot be allowed to take the oil, take the profits and leave the pollution behind.\u00a0<\/p>\n Olanrewaju Suraju, Chairman of the HEDA Resource Centre<\/p>\n \u2018Missing\u2019 oil wells, weak monitoring and flawed spill monitoring<\/p>\n An internal report in 2014 to Shell\u2019s then CEO said there were \u201chundreds\u201d of SPDC onshore wells that were either missing from its electronic well-tracking system or whose condition could not be verified. Shell later launched a \u201cwell hunt campaign\u201d, which identified 750 overdue maintenance tasks that contributed to an \u201cunsatisfactory\u201d audit rating. A 2013 report also found that SPDC\u2019s pipelines had no real-time monitoring system, despite the fact that quickly detecting spills and limiting contamination is key to reducing pollution. Without such monitoring, anything short of a major rupture could go unnoticed.<\/p>\n \u201cA fossil fuel giant that could not verify the location and integrity of hundreds of wells and pipeline clamps, and lacked effective leak detection, cannot credibly claim it had pollution under control. Shell must stop deflecting blame,\u201d said Dr Emem Okon from Kebetkache Women Development & Resource Centre, a Nigeria-based group promoting women\u2019s rights and environmental justice.<\/p>\n Shell\u2019s claim that oil theft caused most pollution is also weakened by its own documents, which show staff were not properly equipped to tell whether spills were caused by corrosion or third-party interference. This matters because, although companies must clean up spills regardless of cause, under Nigerian laws affected communities are only entitled to compensation where spills are classified as operational rather than sabotage or theft.<\/p>\n \u201cFor communities seeking justice, Shell\u2019s flawed spill monitoring could mean the difference between compensation and abandonment,\u201d said Celestine Akpobari from MEDI, an NGO rooted in the Ogoni struggle, advocating for environmental restoration and justice.<\/p>\n For communities seeking justice, Shell\u2019s flawed spill assessments could mean the difference between compensation and abandonment.<\/p>\n Celestine Akpobari from MEDI<\/p>\n \u2018Basket\u2019 pipeline left full of crude<\/p>\n The report also finds that Shell failed to properly decommission the old Nembe Creek Trunk Line after replacing it in 2010. A 2014 internal email said around 80km of the old pipeline was still filled with stagnant crude, with six operational spills since 2010, and could not be decommissioned because of budget constraints. The email described the pipeline as \u201ca basket\u201d and warned that more spills would follow without urgent action. The response appeared to confirm that the failure to decommission was primarily financial, despite recognition that action was needed to reduce environmental impact and liability.<\/p>\n \u201cShell knew old infrastructure was leaking and needed decommissioning, yet the documents suggest action was delayed because of cost. Communities should never have been forced to live with pollution because a company did not want to pay to clean up its own mess,\u201d said Simon Taylor, co-founder of Hawkmoth, a Netherlands-based NGO advancing a just, accountable transition away from fossil fuels, with experience of challenging oil and gas abuses, including in Nigeria.<\/p>\n Divestment and unanswered US$10.9bn decommissioning costs<\/p>\n An internal report sent to Shell\u2019s then CEO in 2014 estimated that decommissioning all existing SPDC assets could take decades and cost US$10.9 billion, equivalent to US$14 billion today, apparently excluding clean-up costs. Another internal presentation on past oil spills identified 375km\u00b2 of affected mangrove forest and asked whether Shell had the \u201cappetite\u201d to take on the \u201copen-ended problem\u201d. Shell later sold SPDC to Renaissance Africa Energy in 2025, despite concerns over the new company\u2019s capacity, limited public financial information and the need for up to US$1.2 billion in secured loans from Shell to support the acquisition itself.<\/p>\n \u201cShell\u2019s divestment cannot become a corporate escape route. After decades of profiting from Niger Delta oil, Shell must not transfer the risks of ageing infrastructure and legacy pollution to communities or to a buyer whose capacity remains in serious doubt. It must pay its fair share whether or not it has the \u2018appetite\u2019 for accountability,\u201d said Isaac Osuoka, Director at Social Action which advocates for environmental justice, community rights and accountability in the Niger Delta.<\/p>\n Shell must stop deflecting blame.<\/p>\n Dr Emem Okon from Kebetkache Women Development & Resource Centre<\/p>\n Clean-up, remedy and reform<\/p>\n Amnesty International and partner organizations are calling on Nigerian authorities to overhaul its oil industry oversight, require accessible audits of all operational and decommissioned infrastructure, and establish a properly resourced Niger Delta clean-up superfund.<\/p>\n \u201cShell is one of the world\u2019s largest investor-owned fossil fuel companies. Its documents are now in the open. The question is whether governments will act on them,\u201d said Isa Sanusi. \u201cIn addition to living with unacceptable oil pollution, Nigerians are experiencing extreme heat, deadly flooding and other extreme weather events linked to the global heating caused by the use of Shell\u2019s primary product: fossil fuels. Nigeria must overhaul oversight of the oil industry, while UK and Dutch authorities must investigate whether Shell misled shareholders, regulators and affected communities about the true state of its operations and liabilities. Shell must stop hiding behind divestment, disclose the truth, fund clean-up and remedy, and ensure that affected communities finally receive justice.\u201d<\/p>\n Shell must stop hiding behind divestment, disclose the truth, fund clean-up and remedy, and ensure that affected communities finally receive justice.<\/p>\n Isa Sanusi<\/p>\n Background<\/p>\n In 2015, the Ogale and Bille communities filed UK legal action against Shell Plc and SPDC over serious oil pollution. The Bille case is due to be heard in March 2027.<\/p>\n![\"Map](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Map-of-Shells-pipeline-network-in-the-Niger-Delta-1024x800.jpg\")
<\/p>\n