Resolved clauseShareholders request the Board of Directors commission an independent third-party report, at reasonable cost and omitting proprietary information, evaluating how effectively the company implements its Human Rights Policy and other company efforts to prevent, mitigate, and remedy actual and potential human rights impacts of its operations. The third-party should provide an opportunity for civil society and human rights organizations to provide input, and the report should be made public on Chevron’s website.
Whereas clauseChevron operates in over 180 countries and is one of the highest greenhouse gas emitting companies in the world. [1] Despite Chevron's commitment to human rights, its operations have been connected to human rights abuses that expose shareholders to financial, compliance, and reputational risks. An independent 2021 report examining 70 lawsuits against Chevron found that 65% of the cases involved “documented claims of severe human rights abuses, including torture, forced labor/slavery, rape, murder, and even genocide.” [2] Communities surrounding Chevron operations in Nigeria, [3] Kazakhstan, [4] Ecuador [5] , and the US [6] assert Chevron has failed to remediate oil spills, violated environmental protection laws, and fueled local conflict.
Chevron’s policies, processes, and disclosure fail to address how it manages material risks associated with human rights abuses, environmental damages, and poor community relations connected to its business operations. Chevron scored 33/100 on the 2023 Corporate Human Rights Benchmark, notably receiving a 0 for monitoring and corrective actions. The benchmark noted that “it is not clear how it monitors the implementation of its human rights policy commitments across its global operations.” [7]
Chevron has been accused of corrupt practices, including intimidating and harassing human rights defenders through the use of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs). [8] A 2020 report reviewing 152 SLAPP cases from the fossil fuel industry found that Chevron was one of the most prolific users of the tactic. [9] Chevron continues to deny responsibility for a $9.5 billion judgment against the Company for decades of contamination in Ecuador. [10] Chevron’s subsequent drawn-out legal and reputational attacks on Ecuadorian plaintiffs’ attorney, Steven Donziger, exposed Chevron to significant reputational risk. [11] The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention deemed Dozinger’s detention an arbitrary deprivation of liberty. [12]
Additionally, Chevron’s emissions contribute to the climate crisis, which disparately impacts people of color and furthers systemic racism. [13] Chevron’s operations, discharges, and leaks disproportionately burden communities of color with pollution and human health risks. [14] Chevron has faced multiple lawsuits, including from Delaware, [15] Oakland, CA [16], Hoboken, NJ, [17] and the District of Columbia, [18] alleging damages from climate impacts that disparately affect marginalized communities. The significant number of penalties, court filings, and fenceline community protests Chevron faces raises questions about how its policies and systems are effectively implemented to prevent, mitigate, and remedy adverse human rights impacts.