Carlos Ortega Delgado is a Colombian painter who specializes in the art of watercolors. Much of his education was received in Guayaquil, Ecuador, although he currently lives in Bogota. This painter often participates in the most important exhibitions of paintings in Colombia.

Toonari Post (TP): Tell us a little bit about yourself and your career.

Carlos Ortega Delgado (COD): Well, I am from Cali and I’m 37. I studied art at various sites, not only here in my city, but also in the neighboring country of Ecuador where I grew as an artist with many efforts. Due to my immediate needs to live in a foreign country when I was 21 years old, I began to paint in the embankment of the beautiful city of Guayaquil.

Once back to my country, I started to study graphic design at the prestigious Academy of Professional Drawing, where I learned many things, and currently I’m teaching what I learned during almost three years of stay in Ecuador.

TP: How did you find your passion for painting?

COD: Since my childhood, when my parents began to notice my penchant for artwork and manipulating the clay. I made incredible things like Christ paints and religious images. Somewhat surprising for a child of 7 years.

It was at that moment, when my parents decided to give me unconditional support to a successful career.

TP: Which painters have been the greatest influence in your life?

COD: There are several painters, but the most influential have been the great Colombian artist Luis Caballero. Another is the great Spanish artist Joaquin Soroya from the nineteenth-century, and now I have a significant influence from many watercolor artists who are the major figures in watercolor in the world, such as Steve Hanks.

TP: What kind of painting do you prefer?

COD: From watercolor, which is my specialty, I make all kinds of themes such as nudes, portraits, landscapes and so forth.

Commonly, I try to leave a message of reflection about the problems that weigh down our country.

TP: Why do you like the style of watercolors?

COD: Once in the school, I had the opportunity to meet a great teacher who introduced me to this lovely art. He told me that I had a lot of talent to be a great watercolorist. From there, I began to deepen into this technique, then I started to investigate its secrets and its greatest exponents.

TP: How do you know when an artwork is done?

COD: Never a work of art will be completed. Well, personally, no matter how beautiful that I see a painting; I will always have a “but,” and for that reason there will always be something missing to make this come to perfection.

TP: It is well known that Colombia is a country where the activity of artists is undervalued by society. Tell me, how have you developed your profession this type of situation?

COD: Actually, it was not easy. But I’ll tell you; sometimes you have that angel and destiny, even if you are not the best in the guild to achieve transcendence in this profession. But my merit, I think, is not giving up to my job, no matter how difficult the circumstances.

Another detail is to know how to look up contacts and sell.

TP: What advice would you give to young people who want to develop their art?

COD: Well, if they feel it in their heart; they need to have perseverance, and never give up for the difficult conditions in our country. Anyway, there is a famous saying that says: “There is no evil that lasts 100 years, there’s no body that can resist it,” and in the future in our country, conditions will change; and those who have managed to stay on the road to their dream of being great artists will achieve the greatest success of all. If it is not to achieve a work of art, it is making their lives art for art’s sake.

Image Courtesy of  http://acuarelasmipasion.blogspot.com

The article Colombian Painter Carlos Ortega Delgado Interview appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Julian Assange’s worst nightmare has finally come true. According to the London Police Station, Julian Assange has received a letter to report to London’s Belgravia police station this coming Friday at 11:30 p.m. Sam Jones, a reporter for ‘The Guardian,’ reported, “Assange has been seeking political asylum (where an individual seeks refuge in another country after not feeling safe in their own country, and if the country in which they are seeking refuge, approves of them being there) inside Ecuador’s embassy in London since last week” as he tries to avoid extradition to Sweden, where he is wanted for questioning about alleged sex offenses.”

For extradition cases, being court ordered via letter to attend a court hearing is considered the first step of the extraditing process. Assange is facing court orders to be extradited back to Sweden after he was found of accusations of raping a woman and molesting another while attending a lecture in Stockholm back in August of 2010.

Assange, the Wikileaks website founder, “published a mass of leaked diplomatic cables that embarrassed governments and international businesses, denies all allegations, saying the sex was consensual and the allegations against him are politically motivated,” according to The Guardian.

As of recently, a letter has been signed by leading political figures in the United States including that of Michael Moore, Oliver Stone, Noam Chomsky and Danny Glover. In addition to the letter that was sent to the embassy in Ecuador, a petition of over 4,000 American signatures arrived there as well, in hopes of Ecuadorian President, Rafael Correa approving Assange’s political asylum to stay in Ecuador.

According to Reporter Sam Jones, “The letter, which has been posted online, states that its signatories believe Assange has good reason to fear extradition from the UK to Sweden, “as there is a strong likelihood that once in Sweden, he would be imprisoned, and then likely extradited to the United States.”

If Assange is extradited to the United States, and is found guilty of his allegations, he will face the death penalty, according to the Espionage Act.

One of the individuals who signed the petition also wrote a letter to President Correa stating, “Because this is a clear case of an attack on press freedom and on the public’s right to know important truths about US foreign policy, and because the threat to his health and wellbeing is serious, we urge you to grant Mr Assange political asylum.”

Thus far, Assange has not received any charges from the country of Sweden.

Image Courtesy of  acidpolly

The article Will Assange be Extradited Back to Sweden? appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

A group of Yale students on a school trip in the Amazon recently discovered a species of fungus that gets its sustenance from plastic in airless landfills, the NZ Herald reported.

The students, taking part in Yale’s annual Rainforest Expedition and Laboratory, went with professor Scott Strobel of the molecular biochemistry lab into Ecuador’s wilderness.  The goal of the mission was to enable “students to experience the scientific inquiry process in a comprehensive and creative way.”

Plastic waste, a substance notoriously well known for its ability to more than likely last indefinitely, poses a huge threat to the environment.  While landfills offer a good way to dispose of the waste in the short term, its long-term effects are strongly felt by Mother Nature.

Countless animals each year, especially marine life such as turtles, which commonly mistake plastic bags for jellyfish, perish as a result of the waste.  The problem of plastic waste has escalated so quickly and extremely that there is a giant vortex of plastic waste in the Pacific Ocean called the Great Pacific Garbage Patch that is estimated to be roughly twice the size of Hawaii.

Samples of the fungi, named Pestoltiopsis microspora, were brought back from the trip by the group and could offer a solution to the plastic waste problem plaguing the environment today.

The fungi breaks down and digests polyurethane, a common plastic present in many various products, such as shoes, garden hoses, car seats, and other non-degenerating products. Interestingly, polyurethane by itself is enough to sustain the fungi, as it can exist and actually thrive in an anaerobic (oxygen-free) environment, which perfectly fits the conditions found in the bottom of a landfill.

Students recorded the amazing behavior of the microbe and were able to isolate the enzymes that allow the organism to turn plastic into a source of nourishment. The findings were published this past year in the journal Applied and Environmental Microbiology with the conclusion that the peculiar microbe is “a promising source of biodiversity from which to screen for metabolic properties useful for biomediation.”

The Amazon holds more species of flora and fauna within its borders than virtually anywhere else on the planet. The discovery raises the possibility of other unknown organisms existing there that may also perform similarly amazing feats and help better the environment.

While it is unclear if the microbe will be able to help break down plastic in the ocean, the find raises the hopeful idea that a plastic-free environment will one day be possible.

The article Plastic-eating Fungi May Help Solve Plastic Waste Problems appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Today has been a tense day in the National Court of Justice in Ecuador. Three judges Wilson Merino, Paul Íñiguez y Jorge Blum gave a verdict against “El Universo” newspaper executives: Carlos Perez, Cesar Perez y Nicolas Pérez and columnist Emilio Palacio.

The accused where given a sentence of three years in jail, followed by an indemnification payment of $40 million for Ecuador’s President, Rafael Correa.

One hour and 40 minutes before reaching a decision, Judge Wilson Merino asked both sides implicated, if they had found a resolution.

Monica Vargas, the defendant’s attorney express that the Guayaquil-based newspaper “has always been open to a solution”. She recalls that in the second instance the newspaper executives proposed the President to send a letter with the appropriated corrections made for its publication in the diary.

However, Correa exposed in his defense: “”in the face of such dirty tricks at this point in time an apology cannot be accepted.” The president clarified that he had to take action to the false accusations made against him, in a column written by journalist Emilio Palacio published by the newspaper a year ago.

Once the verdict was known, Correa greeted his lawyers, Gutemberg y Alembert Vera, his family, ministers, assembly members and the citizens which attended the court and supported him in the social networks. He exposed: “The country is changing; now you will understand that the liberty of expression is for everyone”.

According to the New York Times, “The defendants had called the case a farce and accused Correa of subverting the legal system, including allowing his attorney to write last July’s original lower-court ruling”.

The secretary of the Criminal Division, Honorato Jara, started by reading the list of lawyers involved. For the prosecution: Gutenberg Alembertand Vera, and for the defendant: Xavier Zavala, as judicial attorney of “El Universo”, Monica Vargas and Jorge Hernan Salgado Roditti  on behalf of Nicolas, Cesar and Carlos Perez.

The first one to speak was Xavier Zavala, whom argument for the impossibility to declare these executives as authors of a criminal offense.

To portray his words Zavala used the next example: On a criminal situation you cannot judge the weapon which has been used to commit the crime, but to its perpetrator. The object used, has no will”.

The intervention lasted for around 50 minutes, and Zavala made a call to the adjudicators, claiming Ecuador’s Justice has been damaged during this process and has become “The international laughingstock”.

This has not been the first case of attacking journalist in the courts from Correa´s part.

According to the New York Times: “Last week, a judge ordered two journalists to pay $1 million each to the president or offending Correa’s “honor” and “professional prestige” by claiming he was aware that his older brother had some $600 million in government contracts, primarily for road construction”.

He has won congressional approval to restrict news media for broadcasting or publishing any material or information that could arouse opinions about candidates during election campaigns.

Image Courtesey of  The Government of Ecuador 

The article Ecuador’s Newspaper Executives Condemned appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The Andean Commission of Jurists and five prestigious international law experts from around the world have joined a growing chorus of criticism targeting Chevron’s attempt to use a secret investor arbitration as part of its campaign to evade an $18 billion environmental judgment in Ecuador, according to letters released.

In a letter to United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, the Andean Commission said it was “alarmed” at Chevron’s attempt to use a private investor arbitration convened under the U.S.-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty (“BIT”) to influence the outcome of a private litigation between indigenous groups and Chevron in Ecuador’s courts.  The panel meets in secret and bars the Ecuadorians from appearing before it.

After an eight-year trial, a three-judge appellate panel in Ecuador on January 3 affirmed an $18 billion judgment against the oil giant for causing what experts believe is one of the worst oil-related disasters on the planet. The decision was based on a 220,000-page evidentiary record, more than 100 expert reports from both parties, and 18 years of litigation in the courts of the U.S. and Ecuador.

The letter from the Andean Commission, part of growing chorus of international criticism of Chevron, accused the oil giant of continuing to use “questionable litigation tactics to deny those injured any forum to seek justice and compensation for their injuries.”

“The latest such tactic is the issue by Chevron of … an arbitration … to force Ecuador’s government to violate international law and quash the human rights of its own citizens by essentially nullifying the result of their case after almost two decades of litigation,” said the letter.

The Andean Commission, which has consulting status with the United Nations, is one of the leading human rights organizations in South America.  Its board members include Diego Garcia-Sayan, the former Chief Justice of the Inter-American Human Rights Court; renowned investor-state arbitrator Pedro Nikken; and other distinguished jurists from Colombia, Chile, Bolivia, Ecuador, Peru and Venezuela.

Separately, five international law experts wrote a letter to a United Nations official who oversees international arbitrations to question Chevron’s attempts to bypass the public court system of a sovereign nation where it wanted the trial held just because it lost based on the evidence.

“Allowing (arbitration) panels to determine recognition and enforcement issues in private litigation transforms them into venues of final appeal in a way that was never intended and offends the inherent trustworthiness of legal systems around the world to determine matters for themselves,” the jurists wrote to Renaud Sorieul, the Secretary of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law.

“(Treaty) panel awards ordering States to interfere in private judicial proceedings between different parties is a direct violation of well settled principles of sovereignty and, in this particular case, human rights under international law,” the letter added.  The letter was sent Feb 9, when the U.N. arbitration body headed by Sorieul was in session in New York to discuss the need for greater transparency in investor-State arbitration.

Recently, distinguished international law jurist Jose Daniel Amado issued a separate letter to U.N. Secretary General Ki-moon asking for a review of Chevron’s “egregious misuse” of the BIT.  Amado, a specialist in international arbitration, told the Secretary General that Chevron’s attempt to use the arbitration “stands in direct violation of international law” and threatens to “quash” the fundamental human rights of the 30,000 citizens who initially brought suit against Chevron in the United States in 1993.

Chevron shifted the environmental lawsuit from U.S. federal court to Ecuador in 2002 after praising the country’s judicial system and promising to abide by any judgment there, subject only to narrow enforcement defenses that did not include international arbitration.

The five international jurists who signed the Sorieul letter are Donald K. Anton , Associate Professor of International Law, The Australian National University College of Law; Naomi Roht-Arriaza, Professor of Law, University of California, Hastings College of the Law; Jorge Avendano V., Principal Professor of Law, Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru; Timo Koivurova, Research professor, The Northern Institute for Environmental and Minority Law, Arctic Centre, University of Lapland; and Professor Cesare Romano, W Joseph Ford Fellow, Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.  Other jurists are expected to sign on in the coming days.

Separately, the indigenous rainforest communities filed suit last week in Washington, D.C. before a renowned international tribunal seeking an order that would prevent the oil giant from using the secret arbitration to violate their human rights.

The Ecuadorians are seeking an order from the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights requiring Ecuador’s government to protect their right to life, physical integrity, health, a fair trial, and equal treatment under the law as guaranteed by the American Declaration of the Rights of Man and other international human rights treaties.  Any order from the Commission, which was established by the treaty that created the Organization of American States, is binding on the government against which it is issued.

The Ecuador court found that Chevron deliberately dumped billions of gallons of toxic waste into Amazon waterways that local inhabitants relied on for drinking water. The Ecuador trial court found evidence that Chevron’s contamination decimated indigenous groups and caused an outbreak of cancer, spontaneous miscarriages, and other oil-related diseases.

On January 4, the day after the Ecuador appellate court decision, Chevron petitioned the private arbitration panel to order Ecuador’s President to interfere in its independent judiciary and block the ability of the indigenous rainforest communities to enforce their judgment in countries around the world. Chevron had stripped its assets from Ecuador to avoid paying the judgment.

Lawyers for the Ecuadorians say the arbitration panel does not have the authority to do what Chevron is seeking, and that in any event Ecuador’s government is obligated to ignore its orders given its own binding legal obligations under the Ecuador Constitution and various international treaties protecting the human rights of its citizens.

The private arbitration system under the BIT has come under withering criticism for its conflicts of interest and lack of due process.  Some commentators have likened the secret arbitration panel to a “kangaroo court” imbued with a pro-business culture.

The three arbitrators hearing the Chevron claims – all private lawyers who represent clients before other arbitration panels in the same treaty system – stand to personally reap millions of dollars in fees if they grant jurisdiction over the case, which in itself is a hotly contested issue given that Chevron left Ecuador five years before the U.S.-Ecuador BIT took effect.

In any event, it is clear that any “award” from the panel will be treated with skepticism in countries that observe the rule of law and will not be an obstacle to enforcement of the Ecuador judgment, said Amado.  ”It is our duty as international arbitration experts to prevent it from causing collateral damage to the international legal order that protects the human rights of all peoples worldwide,” he emphasized.

Image Courtesy of   http://www.flickr.com/photos/rainforestactionnetwork/

The article Chevron Tries “Secret” Panel to Evade $18 Billion Ecuador Judgment appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Indigenous rainforest communities from Ecuador who recently won an $18 billion judgment against Chevron for environmental damage have filed suit  before a renowned international human rights court seeking an order that would prevent the oil giant from using a secret arbitration to violate their legal rights.

The Ecuadorians filed a petition (attached) before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights strongly criticizing Chevron’s “egregious misuse” of the U.S.-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty (“BIT”) to violate human rights protections. They are seeking an order requiring Ecuador’s government to protect their right to life, physical integrity, health, a fair trial, and equal treatment under the law as guaranteed by the American Declaration of the Rights of Man and other international human rights treaties.

The petition was filed against Ecuador’s government because Chevron is seeking an order from the private investor arbitration panel mandating that the country’s President freeze the court proceedings until the BIT panel can rule, a process which normally takes three years.  Such an order would violate Ecuadorian and international law as well as the human rights protections that the Commission is sworn to uphold, said Pablo Fajardo, the lead lawyer for the Ecuadorian plaintiffs in the underlying environmental case.

The Commission, located in Washington, D.C., hears claims for emergency relief from individual human rights victims and derives its authority from the multilateral international treaty that created the Organization of American States, of which Ecuador and the United States are members. Any order from the Commission is binding on the government against which it is issued.

“The threats are serious and urgent,” the plaintiffs wrote in their petition, referring to their own plight living near extensive levels of toxic oil contamination in the Amazon rainforest for almost 50 years.  An Ecuadorian court in 2011 found Chevron liable for dumping billions of gallons of toxic waste into the Amazon when it operated under the Texaco brand from 1964 to 1992, causing dramatically increased rates of cancer and decimating indigenous groups.

“The idea that an arbitral panel would even contemplate ordering a sovereign state to violate its human rights obligations is repugnant not only to the substance of international human rights law but to the very core of the international legal order,” the petition added.

The petition also argues that the relief sought by Chevron extends well beyond the scope of the BIT in that it does not authorize private investor arbitration panels to act as a “transnational” appellate court that can override decisions in a public court system of a sovereign nation.  The BIT is normally limited to allowing investors to seek monetary damages directly from a government if it feels it has been treated unfairly, a claim that Chevron makes but that the indigenous communities reject.

The Ecuadorians believe the investor arbitral panel convened by Chevron violates international law in that it bars the rainforest communities from appearing before it, does not publish its decisions, and does not inform the public about when and where it meets.  Further, its three members — all practicing lawyers — suffer from a conflict of interest in that they each stand to reap millions of dollars in fees paid in part by Chevron simply by granting jurisdiction over the case when there is little if any basis to do so.

“What Chevron is trying to with this secret arbitration is utterly offensive to anybody who believes in the rule of law,” said Fajardo, whose clients initially filed the environmental lawsuit against Chevron in 1993 in U.S. federal court in New York before it was shifted to Ecuador at Chevron’s request.

“Chevron is trying to convince the private arbitral panel to override the decisions of a public court in a sovereign country where Chevron chose to litigate, even as Chevron continues to pursue appeals in that country making the same arguments it makes before the secret panel,” he added.  “It’s just an outrageous abuse of judicial process.”

“Any decision by the panel granting Chevron’s requests would violate international law and certainly would not bind the indigenous communities who are not a party to the proceedings,” he added.  “We also believe it will backfire against Chevron if the company carries through on its threats to try to block enforcement of the legitimate Ecuador judgment in courts around the world.”

Ecuador’s government has argued that the oil giant has no right to even file the claim under the BIT given that the treaty did not take effect until 1997, or five years after Chevron left the country.

Chevron’s latest maneuver prompted renowned Latin American jurist Jose Daniel Amado to send a letter to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon asking for a review of what he called an “improper and illegal expansion of arbitral powers” by the panel. The Amado letter gained immediate support from jurists around the world, who sent a separate letter (attached) backing Amado’s arguments to the U.N. official in charge of international arbitration, Renaud Souriel.

Souriel is hosting a meeting this week in New York to evaluate the issue of “transparency in investment-State arbitration.”

Chevron is seeking any forum it can to delay the Ecuador proceedings given that the company could soon face judgment enforcement actions around the world, said Fajardo. Chevron stripped its assets from Ecuador and a company spokesman said the oil giant would fight the rainforest communities “until hell freezes over, and then skate it out on the ice.”

“Chevron lost the trial,” Fajardo said.  “It lost the first-level appeal in Ecuador.  It lost in the United States.  It has very few options left other than a secret arbitration that will carry no weight in any country that observes the rule of law.

“Nevertheless, by filing this petition, we are showing that we will use every legal means available to expose Chevron’s disrespect for the rule of law and to protect the rights of our clients.”

Chevron tried a similar maneuver before, and it backfired.

Image Courtesy of   http://www.flickr.com/photos/rainforestactionnetwork/

The article Ecuador Communities Target Chevron’s Secret Investor Arbitration appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

A distinguished international law jurist from Latin America has issued a letter to United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, asking for a review of Chevron’s “egregious misuse” of an investor treaty to evade its $18 billion liability in Ecuador for creating one of the world’s worst oil-related disasters in the Amazon rainforest, according to a letter released to thousands of arbitration specialists around the globe.

Jose Daniel Amado, a leading law scholar in Peru and a specialist in international arbitration, told the Secretary General that Chevron’s latest attempt to deny the legal claims of the rainforest communities to be decided by an arbitration panel that meets in secret “stands in direct violation of international law” and would “quash” the fundamental human rights of the 30,000 citizens who initially brought suit against Chevron in the United States in 1993.

Chevron shifted that lawsuit to Ecuador in 2002 after praising the country’s judicial system and promising to abide by any judgment there, subject only to narrow enforcement defenses that did not include international arbitration. ”Chevron has constructed what appears to be a calculated plan to manipulate a commercial investment dispute system to evade the outcome of a private litigation,” wrote Amado, who has served as a consultant to the Ecuadorian plaintiffs.

Amado asked the Secretary General to conduct a review of the matter “to ensure that the BIT arbitration system is not used by Chevron to undo international law protections guaranteeing access to justice.”

In January, after a nine-year legal proceeding, a three-judge panel of the Ecuador appellate court confirmed an $18 billion award against Chevron for the deliberate dumping of billions of gallons of toxic waste into Amazon waterways that local inhabitants relied on for drinking water.  The Ecuador trial court found evidence that Chevron’s contamination decimated indigenous groups and caused an outbreak of cancer and other oil-related diseases.

The trial in Ecuador produced 220,000 pages of evidence and more than 64,000 chemical sampling results from independent laboratories which proved that dozens of Chevron oil production facilities suffer from extensive levels of life-threatening heavy metals and toxins, according to the findings of the Ecuador court.

On January 4, the day after the Ecuador appellate court decision, Chevron petitioned a private arbitration panel convened under the U.S.-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty (“BIT”) to order Ecuador’s executive branch to interfere in its independent judiciary and block the ability of the Ecuadorian citizens to enforce their judgment in countries around the world.  Chevron had stripped its assets from Ecuador to avoid paying the judgment.

Lawyers for the Ecuadorians say the arbitration panel does not have such authority, and that in any event Ecuador’s government is obligated to ignore its orders given its own binding legal obligations under the Ecuador Constitution and various international treaties protecting the human rights of its citizens.

The arbitration panel prohibits the Ecuadorians from appearing before it and takes no steps to inform them (or the public) of the status of its proceedings or when or where it is meeting.  Nor does it release its decisions in a system that clearly lacks due process of law, said Aaron Page, who represents the Ecuadorians and who has represented governments in the arbitral proceedings.

Some commentators have like ecuadorians end the secret arbitration panel to a “kangaroo court” rife with conflicts of interest and imbued with a pro-business culture.

The arbitrators are private sector lawyers who generally rule in favor of investors and against sovereign governments — a fact which in recent years has led several countries to withdraw or threaten to withdraw in recent years from the arbitral system, said Page. ”Chevron’s radical request for relief in this case potentially undermines the credibility of the entire investor arbitral regime,” Page said.

In the letter to Ban Ki-moon, Amado noted that a recent “interim” order by the arbitration panel asking Ecuador’s government to freeze the environmental case “makes a travesty of the bilateral commercial treaty system” and represents an “illegal expansion of arbitral powers with wide-ranging implications for well-settled principles of international law, including fundamental human rights and state sovereignty.”

“Such a result is simply untenable under international law — BIT arbitral panels cannot be called on by investors to set aside countries’ constitutional systems and sovereignty, which are essential components of modern democracies,” he added.

Concern over Chevron’s latest stratagem, Amado pointed out, is shared by a U.S. federal appellate court which ruled last year that the longstanding legal claims of the Ecuadorians “cannot be settled” through the BIT arbitration given that they are not a party to those proceedings.

“The international legal community was shocked by this [interim] Order, which Chevron interpreted to force the Ecuadorian executive branch affirmatively to interfere in a judicial process and limit Ecuador’s sovereignty vis-a-vis a case that has been in the courts for 18 years,” he said.

The Amado letter was emailed to 7,000 arbitrators around the world by the Peruvian Arbitration Institute, which said it considered the letter to “of high interest” to the international arbitration community.

Amado is a graduate of Harvard Law School and the founding partner of Miranda & Amado, one of Peru’s leading law firms.  He has published numerous articles on international law topics, has lectured in various countries, and has represented both private investors and governments before BIT arbitration panels.

Amado is also a member of the American Chamber of Commerce in Peru and is President of the Energy Legal Committee of Peru’s National Mining, Oil and Energy Society.

The three arbitrators hearing the Chevron claims — all private lawyers who represent investors before other arbitration panels in the same treaty system — stand to personally reap millions of dollars in fees if they grant jurisdiction over the case, which in itself is a hotly contested issue given that Chevron left Ecuador five years before the U.S.-Ecuador BIT took effect in 1997, Page said.

R. Doak Bishop, an American from the firm King & Spalding who is Chevron’s lead lawyer in the Ecuador matter, has served as an arbitrator in numerous cases convened under the BIT process while he simultaneously represents private clients in the same system.  Ecuador’s American lawyers are only putting up a nominal defense, essentially leaving the Ecuador plaintiffs without representation before the panel, said Karen Hinton, the U.S. spokesperson for the plaintiffs.

In any event, it is clear that any “award” from the panel will lack legitimacy in countries that observe the rule of law and will not be an obstacle to enforcement of the Ecuador judgment, said Amado.

“This is a far-fetched strategy by Chevron that has little chance of working,” said Amado.  “But it is our duty as international lawyers to prevent it from causing collateral damage to the international legal order that protects the human rights of all peoples worldwide.”

Image Courtesy of   http://www.flickr.com/photos/rainforestactionnetwork/

The article Letter to UN Asks for Review of Chevron in Ecuador Case appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

U.S. courts are showing increasing hostility toward Chevron and its CEO John Watson over the company’s $18 billion Ecuador liability as the oil giant’s plan to quash the landmark case continues to falter in the hands of American law firm Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, said representatives of the Amazon indigenous groups who offered an analysis of the 18-year case to its shareholders and industry analysts.

Leaders of the indigenous groups in Ecuador – who last year won the largest environmental court case in history — are presenting their analysis because Watson misled company shareholders about the case in an earnings call last Friday.  Watson failed to disclose his own conflict of interest in that he was a key Chevron executive who drove the purchase of Texaco in 2001 without properly vetting the company for its massive Ecuador liability, said Karen Hinton, the U.S. spokesperson for the Ecuadorians.

In the earnings call, Watson charged that the Ecuador case is part of an elaborate “fraud” to extort money from Chevron — a false statement that directly contradicts court findings based on scientific evidence, including evidence provided by Chevron itself, said Hinton.

“Watson uses rhetoric as a device to hide his failed leadership on the Ecuador case,” said Hinton.  “His comments about the Ecuador liability on the earnings call were misleading and should be treated with extreme skepticism by shareholders.”

For a more accurate analysis of the risks facing the Ecuador case than that Chevron is making in its quarterly calls or in its disclosures to the SEC, Hinton said shareholders should reference a report on the Ecuador case by Simon Billeness and Sanford Lewis that was published in May of last year prior to the company’s annual meeting. Both point out risks that Chevron has not completely disclosed, including the likelihood of standard collection actions against Chevron assets in various countries that are critical to the company’s operations.

Watson’s comments on the earnings call omitted key information that has emerged recently, as follows:

After eight-year trial, the Ecuador court in February 2011 found the company liable and imposed damages of $18 billion. The court found Chevron itself proved the company discharged billions of gallons of toxic waste into the environment, decimating indigenous groups and poisoning rivers and streams that local inhabitants rely on for drinking water.

On January 3, an Ecuador appellate court affirmed the trial court judgment and blasted Chevron for its “abuse of the judicial process” in Ecuador by filing frivolous motions and threatening a judge with jail time.  The court also upheld a punitive damages sanction against the company.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in New York last week rejected a Chevron attempt to seek a worldwide injunction blocking the Ecuadorians from enforcing their judgment, essentially nullifying the centerpiece of the U.S. component of the oil giant’s legal strategy.

Chevron’s lead outside law firm, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, has created even greater risk for Chevron shareholders by bungling key aspects of the litigation.

Since the firm took over the matter in 2009, Chevron lost the underlying case;  lost at the appellate level; lost a motion to attach  assets of the Ecuadorians in the U.S.; seen its plan to block enforcement overturned by the U.S. federal appellate court; and been exposed to potential criminal liability for trying to bribe Ecuador’s government.

Documents recently obtained via U.S. discovery actions shows that Chevron engaged in extensive acts of corruption and fraud in Ecuador.  Chevron doctored soil samples to mislead the Ecuador court and used a secret lab to hide evidence of toxic contamination; paid $2.2 million in hush money to a man who threatened to expose the company’s corruption in the Ecuador trial; tried to entrap an Ecuadorian judge with secret video recordings, and used U.S.-based experts to lie to the Ecuador court about the company’s deceptive field sampling.

U.S. and Ecuadorian courts have sanctioned Chevron for the use of unethical litigation practices done at the behest of Gibson Dunn and its lead partner, Randy Mastro.  Several U.S. and Ecuadorian judges sanctioned Chevron for harassing witnesses, filing a frivolous lawsuit, and abusing the judicial process.

Recognizing it could not win the lawsuit on the merits, Chevron recently tried to bribe Ecuador’s government with a “donation” to an environmental project in exchange for the “settlement” of the legal case without the involvement of the plaintiffs, according to sources within Ecuador’s government. Chevron never denied the reports of the attempted bribe, which might violate criminal laws in both Ecuador and the U.S.

Chevron also suffered a major setback in a U.S. federal appellate court in Philadelphia when Mastro was harshly criticized for seeking the case file of an American lawyer who represented the Ecuadorians.  The panel unanimously overturned a trial court order secured by Mastro.

Chevron faces potential criminal and civil liability for orchestrating a video scandal to entrap the Ecuador trial judge in a trumped-up bribery scandal.  Several lawyers working for Chevron, including Robert Middlestadt of Jones Day, have been deposed or face potential depositions in the matter.

One of Gibson Dunn’s investigators on the Ecuador matter, San Anson, was caught trying to pay an American journalist to spy on the plaintiffs.

The Gibson Dunn strategy also includes fomenting open conflict between Chevron and Ecuador’s government, a tact considered grossly impolitic for an oil major.  Chevron is already facing likely criminal charges in Brazil – a country with enormous reserves coveted by the company — for lying about its recent spill off the coast of Rio province.

Mastro, the mastermind of Chevron’s increasingly shaky legal strategy, was laughed at as he was unable to answer basic questions posed by the New York appellate panel that issued its order last week.  One judge even asked whether Chevron’s legal expenditures on the case was a good use of shareholder money.

Hinton said shareholders needed full information to be able to understand the risks facing the company.

“With these numerous setbacks over the last several months, it is even more apparent that John Watson and Gibson Dunn have brought Chevron’s shareholders to the edge of the proverbial cliff,” said Hinton.

“No matter what Watson does, Chevron simply cannot change the fact its horrific contamination in Ecuador is visible to the naked eye and has been confirmed by journalists and courts the world over,” she added.  “The evidence is so overwhelming that no amount of trickery can save the day for Chevron at this point.

“It is also becoming increasingly obvious that Gibson Dunn has sold Chevron’s management a bill of goods for which it has charged hundreds of millions of dollars over the last two years,” added Hinton.  “If this management team doesn’t monitor the situation more carefully, some additional and very unpleasant consequences for the company’s shareholders could be in store.”

Image Courtesy of     http://www.flickr.com/photos/rainforestactionnetwork/

The article Chevron CEO’s Plan to Evade $18b Ecuador Liability Falters appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

After being found liable in Ecuador for creating one of the world’s worst oil disasters, Chevron filed a notice of appeal to Ecuador’s highest court where it seeks special treatment not afforded any other litigant under the nation’s laws — the waiver of a bond required to suspend enforcement of a judgment during the pendency of any appeal.

It would be illegal under Ecuadorian law for the appellate court to grant Chevron’s unusual and unprecedented request to waive the bond requirement, said Pablo Fajardo, the lead attorney for the indigenous and farmer communities who brought suit against the oil giant for the dumping of billions of gallons of toxic waste into the waterways used by several indigenous groups and farmer communities.

“Chevron has every right under the law to seek an extraordinary appeal to the highest court as long as it can cite a proper legal basis,” said Fajardo.  “But Chevron is yet again seeking a special exemption under Ecuadorian law when it claims the bond requirement should not apply to it, while it applies to every other litigant in the country.”

“Chevron behaves in Ecuador as if it is above the law while thousands of people continue to suffer the devastating effects of the company’s toxic contamination,” said Fajardo.  ”This abuse of the judicial process must end.”

For execution of a court judgment in Ecuador to be suspended pending appeal to the highest court — called the National Court of Justice — the losing party must post a bond that is usually calculated at roughly 8% of the amount of damages awarded (roughly $1.5 billion in this case). Chevron is seeking to have enforcement suspended even without posting a bond even though the indigenous and farmer communities continue to suffer grave health effects engendered by the company’s delaying tactics, said Fajardo.

Karen Hinton, the U.S. spokesperson for the Ecuadorians, said in a statement that “for almost two decades, Chevron has stood in the way of a comprehensive cleanup of billions of gallons of crude oil and toxic waste water it deliberately dumped into the pristine rainforest of Ecuador.”

“Thousands of people have died or suffered from illnesses as Chevron and its army of lawyers have waged a campaign to distract attention from the overwhelming scientific evidence against the company,” said Hinton. “Chevron has always believed that Ecuador’s many laws prohibiting environmental contamination should not apply to its misconduct.”

The bond requirement, typical in countries around the world including the U.S., is intended to protect the winning side from unnecessary delays during appellate review.  Ecuador’s first-level appellate court already affirmed the trial court judgment that the company is required to pay $18 billion for a clean-up, a relatively modest amount compared to BP’s estimated $60 billion liability for the smaller Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Fajardo also said that an arbitral order cited by Chevron as justification for its request for a bond waiver is not binding on the rainforest communities as they are not a party to that proceeding, which is held in secret pursuant to a U.S.-Ecuador investment treaty.

In any event, the arbitral panel never ordered — and under the law cannot order — that Ecuador’s courts take steps that would “clearly violate” Ecuador’s Constitution and international treaties binding the government to protect the fundamental human rights of its citizens, including the right to life and the right to seek legal redress in national courts, said Fajardo.  Further, the arbitral panel has never even held an evidentiary hearing on Chevron’s claims that a remediation contract with Ecuador’s government released it from liability.

“We believe Chevron clearly is misinterpreting the scope of authority of the arbitration,” he added. ”We want to reiterate that Chevron has every right to appeal to Ecuador’s National Court of Justice, but it has no right to special treatment during the pendency of the appeal,” Fajardo added.

The trial court decision, issued in February 2011, found that Chevron systematically dumped billions of gallons of toxic waste into the Amazon, poisoning waterways that local inhabitants use for drinking water and causing increased cancer rates. Damages were set at $18 billion.  In 2002, the case was shifted from U.S. federal court to Ecuador at Chevron’s request.

The trial court in Ecuador also repeatedly sanctioned Chevron’s legal team for filing frivolous motions intended to delay the proceedings, and for threatening a judge with jail if he did not rule in favor of the company.  These actions led to a punitive damages award that accounts for roughly half of the total judgment.

Chevron has roughly two more weeks under Ecuadorian law to determine if it will publicly apologize for its misconduct, which would allow it to eliminate the punitive damages component of the award.

As support for the contention that Chevron believes it does have to adhere to the law in Ecuador, Hinton cited a comment in a 60 Minutes interview where Chevron attorney Silvia Garrigo – pressed as to why the company said it would never pay any adverse judgment in Ecuador – said: “We don’t believe we should be in any court, much less the courts of Ecuador.”

The 188-page trial court judgment is undergirded by a wide body of scientific and testimonial evidence submitted during eight years of proceedings that prove Chevron designed a system of oil extraction that deliberately discharged toxic oil waste into the environment to keep production costs to a minimum. Chevron also has been heavily criticized for trying to defraud the Ecuador court and sabotage the proceedings.

In briefs submitted to U.S. and Ecuadorian courts, the rainforest communities submitted evidence that Chevron technicians staked out “clean” spots at contaminated well sites to test prior to court-supervised judicial inspections; sent dirty soil samples to a secret lab to prevent their disclosure to the court; and doctored a “judicial playbook” document so two academic experts in the U.S. would endorse the company’s misleading sampling protocol, among other charges.

A separate ruling by a New York federal appellate court marks Chevron’s third consecutive legal setback in its effort to block enforcement of the Ecuador judgment.

In September, a federal appellate panel blocked Chevron’s attempt to seek an unprecedented worldwide injunction blocking enforcement. In January, a federal district court judge denied Chevron’s illegal attempt to freeze the assets of the plaintiffs. And on January 3, Ecuador’s first-level appellate court confirmed the validity of the trial court judgment.

The article Chevron Claims Special Treatment Under Ecuadorian Law appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

In a stark departure from its normal litigation practices, Chevron has refused to request that the Ecuador appellate court that recently affirmed the $18 billion judgment against the oil major reconsider or clarify its decision.

Chevron let a deadline pass that allowed either party to contest or clarify the decision, which was issued on January 3. The appellate court on Friday January 13 reaffirmed its original decision in response to ten separate clarification requests submitted by lawyers for the rainforest communities.

Normally in Ecuador, the losing party in an appeal seeks clarification of an appellate court decision unless it decides it is withdrawing from the litigation or simply accepting the result. Asking for clarification in Ecuador is roughly similar to filing a motion for reconsideration in the United States.

It is unclear why Chevron did not contest or seek clarification of the appellate court decision, but its failure to do so could be seen as a disadvantage as the case moves forward both in Ecuador and potentially in other jurisdictions where the rainforest communities might seek enforcement, said Pablo Fajardo, the lawyer for the Ecuadorian communities who brought the lawsuit.

Chevron, which requested that the trial take place in Ecuador, stripped its assets from the country and has announced it will not pay the judgment. ”By not contesting the appellate court decision, Chevron is essentially conceding that it has no problem with the court’s reasoning or logic,” said Fajardo.

“Chevron also is effectively abandoning its argument that it exhausted all legal remedies in the courts of Ecuador before it tries to block any possible enforcement actions,” he added.

Chevron normally “litigates to the hilt” in Ecuador while simultaneously attacking Ecuador’s courts as unfair, a charge vigorously rejected by the plaintiffs based on expert testimony, said Karen Hinton, the U.S. spokesperson for the Ecuadorians.

“Failing to take advantage of every right afforded it by procedural law is a real departure from Chevron’s normal litigation practice in courts around the world,” said Hinton. “It might reflect a new strategy, or it might reflect simple confusion as the company’s legal options narrow.”

The trial court decision, issued in February 2011, found that Chevron deliberately dumped billions of gallons of toxic waste into the Amazon, poisoning waterways that local inhabitants use for drinking water and causing a spike in cancer rates. See here and here. Damages were set at roughly $18 billion.

Chevron operated in Ecuador from 1964 to 1992 under the Texaco brand.

The trial court in Ecuador also repeatedly sanctioned Chevron’s legal team for filing frivolous motions and threatening a judge if he did not rule in favor of the company, leading to a punitive award that constitutes roughly half of the total damages.

In response to the request by the plaintiffs for clarification, the three-judge appellate panel in Ecuador issued a second opinion on January 13 that rejected several Chevron arguments but also made clear that the company could stop enforcement of the judgment if it posts a bond during the pendency of any appeal to the nation’s highest court.

That court, called the National Court of Justice, is similar to the Supreme Court in the U.S. and is located in the capital of Quito.

Chevron must decide by Friday, Jan 20, if it will file a notice of appeal to the higher court, which has the discretion to accept or reject it much like the Supreme Court in the U.S., said Hinton.

The request for the appeal must be made to the intermediate appellate court that affirmed the trial court decision, which then has the discretion to set a bond before sending the case to the National Court of Justice for consideration. Chevron must request the bond as a way to suspend enforcement of the judgment pending further appeal, said Hinton.

A bond is customarily set by the intermediate appellate court at approximately 8% of the amount of the judgment, or in this case approximately $1.6 billion. Chevron reported annual revenues in 2011 of close to $240 billion, with profits expected to be roughly $30 billion based on its latest quarterly earnings report.

The Ecuador appellate court also made the following points in its second ruling on Jan. 13:

**Chevron has 15 business days (tolled from Monday of this week) to eliminate a punitive damages component of the award by issuing a public apology, considered a key component of accountability under international human rights law. Such an apology could effectively cut the $18 billion award in half.

**The appellate court provided detailed guidance as to the nature and scope of the apology that Chevron would need to make. Among other things, the court said Chevron must admit that it used unacceptable waste disposal practices in Ecuador that caused harm to the rainforest and its inhabitants. It also must publish its apology in newspapers in Ecuador and the U.S.

**The appellate court reiterated that its judgment represents the “final and definitive step” under the Ecuadorian legal system to settle the dispute of the parties. An appeal to National Court of Justice is considered “extraordinary” under Ecuador law and will not block a potential enforcement action unless a bond is posted.

The bond in Ecuador is designed to compensate the winning party for any further delays in collecting its judgment — similar to a running interest rate, which is often used by courts in other countries during the pendency of any appeal. If Chevron were to prevail at the National Court of Justice, the bond monies would be returned to the company.

**The appellate panel also said it “rejects… definitively and as unfounded, [Chevron's] affirmation … that the judgment has been based on information foreign to the record, or with secret assistance.”

**The appellate also found that the trial court ruling was “firmly rooted” in the voluminous 220,000-page evidentiary record, which included thousands of chemical sampling results from both Chevron and the plaintiffs that proved extensive contamination at hundreds of former Chevron oil production sites.

In its original judgment affirming the trial court decision, members of the panel were clearly outraged at Chevron’s abuse of the judicial process in Ecuador. The court found that many of Chevron’s legal filings were “abusive” and “clearly designed to obstruct the administration of justice.”

Inhabitants from dozens of rainforest communities filed the class action case in 1993 in U.S. federal court. Chevron had the trial shifted to Ecuador after heaping praise on that country’s judicial system.

Once the evidence in the subsequent trial started to point to Chevron’s guilt, the company shifted gears and tried repeatedly to attack the courts it had previously praised. In the meantime, several courts have sanctioned Chevron’s lead outside firm in the U.S., Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, for engaging in ethical violations on behalf of Chevron’s campaign to evade the Ecuador judgment.

The article Chevron Refusing to Contest Ecuador Appellate Court appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The National Press Club president expressed outrage recently about the president of Ecuador’s systematic and relentless attacks on the press. Angry over a piece that was critical of him, the Ecuadorian president, Rafael Correa, has won court rulings– under questionable circumstances– that could result in the shuttering of one of Latin America’s most esteemed newspapers and the imprisonment of its journalists.

The case of the paper, El Universo, is just one of several examples of Correa attacking press freedom. Under Correa, defamation suits against reporters have multiplied, and state ownership of media organizations has grown, according to independent monitoring groups. National Press Club President Mark Hamrick, a broadcast journalist with the Associated Press, expressed hope that justice would be served in Ecuador and press freedom protected.

“President Correa has been condemned by human-rights and press-freedom groups for his mistreatment of reporters,” Hamrick said. “It is past time for this type of harassment and intimidation to stop in Ecuador and anywhere else where reporters face jail–or worse–for merely doing their jobs.” The Washington Post, in a Jan. 12 editorial, called Correa’s campaign against reporters “the most comprehensive and ruthless assault on free media underway in the Western Hemisphere.”

In July, three directors of El Universo were sentenced to three years in jail, and the paper fined $40 million(enough to shut it down) as a result of a defamation suit brought by Correa. But computer forensics later showed that the president’s attorney had, in fact, written the court’s decision, an independent inquiry found.

Three subsequent rulings have upheld the original one, a fact that raises question about the autonomy ofEcuador’s judiciary, according to non-governmental groups.  Another court decision in the case is due any day now.

“The El Universo story is, unfortunately, not unique,” Hamrick said. “The evidence seems clear that the press is under siege in Ecuador. Correa needs to know that concerned people are watching.”

The article National Press Club Condemns President Correa appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

While indigenous groups in Ecuador’s Amazon face possible death and grave illness from Chevron’s “Rainforest Chernobyl” disaster, several prominent U.S. law firms and their well-known partners are billing the oil giant hundreds of millions of dollars to forestall a clean-up that could save thousands of lives, according to court documents.

Chevron’s lead outside law firm in the U.S., Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, has 60 lawyers working extensively on the case, a recent court filing revealed. The filing also showed that Chevron has paid almost 500 attorneys and paralegals from 39 different law firms since the celebrated case was filed in U.S. federal court in 1993.

The litigation was shifted to Ecuador at Chevron’s request in 2002, with a subsequent eight-year trial resulting in an $18 billion judgment against the oil giant for causing what experts believe could be the world’s worst oil-related contamination.

The Ecuador litigation represents the first time that indigenous groups have successfully sued a large oil company for harm caused to their health and ancestral lands, said Karen Hinton, the U.S. spokesperson for the Ecuadorians.  Evidence from independent health evaluations concluded that more than 9,000 rainforest dwellers face the risk of contracting cancer absent a rapid cleanup of the damage.

In all, Gibson Dunn was billing Chevron an estimated $250 million per year in 2010 and 2011 as the company launched lawsuits against the plaintiffs in 16 different federal courts, helped to litigate an international arbitration action against Ecuador’s government, filed a fraud case against the Ecuadorians and their lawyers in U.S. federal court, and supervised Chevron’s battery of local lawyers in Ecuador as they faced multiple setbacks that culminated in the adverse judgment against Chevron, said Hinton.

“Chevron’s environmental destruction in Ecuador is the best thing that ever happened to the bottom line of Gibson Dunn,” said Hinton, who noted the firm reported a 20% increase in per-partner profits in 2010 during a downturn in the economy as dozens of its lawyers worked full-bore on the Ecuador matter.

“Clearly, Gibson Dunn and several other firms are profiting from rainforest destruction,” Hinton added. “These lawyers have proven that fighting to deny the human rights of indigenous groups can be a very profitable business model.”

Gibson Dunn clearly has sold Chevron on its willingness to engage in questionable tactics and push the ethical envelope, said Hinton.  The firm boasts that it engages in “recuse operations” for clients in trouble and that if the law is in the way it is willing to maneuver around it to achieve client objectives. Several judges have sanctioned Gibson Dunn lawyers for trying to intimidate witnesses and for filing frivolous lawsuits on behalf of Chevron, and one well-known partner has been accused of trying to mislead the Congress about the case.

A federal judge in Oregon fined Chevron after a team of Gibson Dunn lawyers had harassed the executive director of a respected environmental organization that had filed a brief in support of the Ecuadorians.

Gibson Dunn also uses cookie cutter lawsuits, Hinton said, where defenders of human rights victims and their supporters are always accused of “fraud” for trying to hold wrongdoers like Chevron accountable for their misconduct.

“The basic Gibson Dunn template is to attack victims to distract from the evidence,” said Hinton.  “When that doesn’t work, the firm resorts to outright intimidation to silence any lawyer or advocate who stands up to the firm.”

Gibson Dunn’s approach also has created numerous problems for Chevron in Ecuador, the fifth-largest oil producing nation in South America.  Chevron’s legal team in Ecuador is said to be furious with the Gibson Dunn lawyers for losing the case because of their arrogant treatment of Ecuadorian judges, said Hinton.

Chevron lawyers in Ecuador working closely on the case with Gibson Dunn’s “rescue” team have been sanctioned repeatedly for filing frivolous motions (once filing a motion eighteen times in 30 minutes), threatening the presiding judge with jail time if he didn’t rule in Chevron’s favor, and paying a Chevron contractor to secretly videotape a judge to try to entrap him in a trumped-up bribe scandal.

The Ecuador court imposed a large punitive damages award on Chevron in large part for its abuse of the judicial process in Ecuador, according to the judgment.

In the meantime, the case has become a financial bonanza for several other large law firms who represent Chevron. The list of 39 law firms disclosed by the company in a U.S. court action also includes the prominent criminal defense firm of Arguedas, Cassman & Headley; Jones Day; King & Spalding; Akin, Gump, Strauss; Hauer & Feld; Holland & Knight; Jones Day; Steptoe & Johnson; and Williams & Connolly.

The all-star cast of attorneys who have worked on some aspect of the case for Chevron include Theodore Olson of Gibson Dunn, a former Solicitor General of the United States; Brendan Sullivan of Williams & Connolly, who reportedly represented a Chevron executive who faced potential criminal liability in Ecuador; Greg Craig of Skadden Arps, President Clinton’s impeachment lawyer who Chevron reportedly hired to explore settlement;

Mickey Kantor of Mayer Brown, the former U.S. Trade Representative under Clinton who spearheaded a Chevron effort to cut trade preferences for Ecuador; David Boies , whose firm helps the oil giant fight discovery actions in the U.S. designed to expose its corruption in Ecuador; and Alan Vinegrad , a former U.S. Attorney who represented a Chevron lawyer indicted on criminal charges of fraud for lying to Ecuador’s government about the results of a sham remediation.

Chevron also has used six public relations firms to push talking points denying the company caused any environmental damage in Ecuador, even though the judgment is undergirded by extensive scientific evidence and the allegations have been confirmed by numerous independent news accounts.

After an eight-year trial, the Ecuador trial court in 2011 found the oil giant systematically discharged billions of gallons of toxic waste into the rainforest, decimating indigenous groups and causing an array of oil-related health problems. An Ecuador appellate court affirmed the judgment in early January, potentially opening up Chevron to standard collection actions against its assets in jurisdictions around the world unless its posts a bond in Ecuador.

Chevron stripped its assets from Ecuador and has vowed never to pay for a cleanup, even though reports indicate it contacted the plaintiffs recently in an attempt to explore settlement possibilities. Ultimately, one must wonder how much Chevron shareholders are getting in return for these expensive legal services, she said.

In the last three years, since Gibson Dunn’s “rescue” operation was launched, Chevron was hit with the $18 billion judgment, the largest ever for an environmental case; the judgment was confirmed by a three-judge panel; multiple courts sanctioned the company for its unethical litigation tactics; and a U.S. appellate court in New York prevented Chevron from seeking a worldwide injunction to block enforcement of the judgment.

The article Chevron Pays Steep Fees To Prevent Clean-up of Ecuador Pollution Crisis appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Members of the appellate panel in Ecuador that affirmed the $18 billion judgment against Chevron for contaminating the Amazon rainforest were clearly outraged at the oil giant’s abuse of the judicial process even as it denied a request by the rainforest communities to increase the amount of damages, a reading of an unofficial translation of the decision reveals.

The judges also found ample scientific basis to uphold the damages award — including devastating evidence provided the court by Chevron’s own team of technical experts that proved levels of pollution hundreds of times higher than permitted by law. But citing a lack of evidence, the panel also rejected efforts by the indigenous communities to seek additional damages for the loss of their ancestral lands and for the spreading of oil on the dirt roads of the region.

Chevron has a right to appeal to Ecuador’s National Court of Justice (NCJ) in Quito, but might first be required to post a bond, said Pablo Fajardo, the lead lawyer for the plaintiffs. The right to appeal to the NCJ — the nation’s highest judicial authority — will not kick in until the appellate panel has a chance to respond to requests by the parties for clarification, which must be submitted by the end of this week.

The case was heard in Ecuador at the request of Chevron, which fought for almost a decade to shift the venue away from the U.S. federal court where it was originally filed in 1993.

“This decision confirms what we have been saying for years,” said Pablo Fajardo, the lead Ecuadorian lawyer. ”Chevron is guilty of extraordinary greed and criminal misconduct that has created a humanitarian crisis in Ecuador that puts thousands of people at risk.

“Whether people live or die depends largely on whether Chevron meets its responsibility to remediate a problem it created,” Fajardo added. ”Chevron broke the rainforest. It now must fix it.”

In a 16-page single-spaced decision, the three Ecuador judges noted that Chevron had “staged incidents that encumbered the process of the trial” and that it dumped 20,000 pages of largely redundant evidence on the appellate court to delay consideration of the case. The plaintiffs have long accused Chevron of trying to undermine the trial by filing frivolous motions and trying to intimidate judges.

Among the key findings by the panel, which reviewed the voluminous trial record of 220,000 pages for 11 months:

In response to Chevron’s complaints that it was “denied justice” in Ecuador, the appellate court noted on the second page of its decision that the only filings from the oil giant that were denied were those that were “abusive” and “clearly designed to obstruct the administration of justice.” For example, Chevron once filed 18 similar motions in the trial court in a 30-minute period, and tried to have the judge removed when he did not rule on them fast enough.

The court found that Chevron’s requests for proof that it needed to defend itself — including the tedious task of conducting 36 judicial inspections of the company’s former well sites — were “processed without exception.” It found that “hundreds of thousands of documents submitted by Chevron bloated the trial record with everything it considered relevant.”

Referencing Article 283 of Ecuador’s civil code, and citing a long list of examples of Chevron’s malfeasance during the trial, the appellate panel upheld a decision that Chevron should pay the costs of the plaintiffs due to the “flagrant bad faith it exhibited in the case.”

The panel wrote:  “Chevron was condemned to pay trial costs for manifest bad faith… so much so that now suffice it to say that the procedural conduct of the defendant, few times seen in the annals of the administration of justice in Ecuador, were abusive to the point that… the Court will not even dedicate any more writings to this portion of the decision.”

The panel also criticized Chevron for continuing to challenge the jurisdiction of Ecuador’s courts, even though the oil giant voluntarily agreed to litigate the case in Ecuador to induce a U.S. federal judge to shift the venue to the South American country.

“From the [initial hearing] up to the present appeal, it can be said that … Chevron has failed to recognize the authority, jurisdiction, and competence of Ecuadorian courts,” the panel wrote on page 15 of its decision.

The court also noted on page 11 of its decision that laboratory results confirmed that pollution existed at former Chevron well sites hundreds of times higher than permissible norms in Ecuador, which themselves are considered relatively lax by international standards.

The panel also noted many of the scientific results that proved the case against Chevron were submitted to the court by Chevron’s own technical experts.

Pierre-Jean Durieu / Shutterstock.com

The article Ecuador Appellate Judges Fuming at Chevron’s Abuses appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Chevron has lost yet another legal round over its increasingly furious effort to evade paying an $18 billion judgment in Ecuador for causing environmental damage in the Amazon rainforest, according to a decision released by a U.S. federal judge.

Just days after an appellate panel in Ecuador, U.S. federal judge, Lewis A. Kaplan, denied the company’s motion to attach the assets of the Ecuadorian plaintiffs.

The decision also comes just weeks after Chevron was exposed for trying to bribe Ecuador’s government to quash the case by making a “donation” to an environmental project, and reports surfaced that the company tried to corrupt the court process in Ecuador by using a secret lab.

Kaplan also denied a request by Chevron for a restraining order preventing the Ecuadorians and their lawyers from selling any portion of the claims, so they could finance the litigation. The Ecuadorians had argued that Chevron’s motion was nothing more than an attempt to dry up support for their 18-year case, thereby denying them legal counsel and the ability to enforce the Ecuador judgment.

“This decision is another rebuke for Chevron, and it comes on the heels of a devastating defeat in the appellate court of Ecuador,” said Karen Hinton, the U.S. spokesperson for the 30,000 Ecuadorians who have accused the oil giant of dumping billions of gallons of toxic waste into their ancestral lands.

Chevron had argued to Kaplan that the Ecuador judgment was based on “fraud” and, therefore, was not entitled to be enforced, even in countries outside the U.S.  Chevron stripped its assets from Ecuador and has said it will not comply with the judgment.

Lawyers for the rainforest communities had argued that Chevron’s motion had no legal basis and that the judgment in Ecuador is based on a wide body of scientific evidence. The company caused one of the worst environmental disasters in history, decimating five indigenous groups and causing an outbreak of cancer.

The communities also argued that Chevron had the ability to block any enforcement actions by the Ecuadorians by simply posting a bond while it appeals to Ecuador’s highest court. Chevron reported profits of roughly $30 billion in 2011 and total assets of more than $204 billion.

“The relief Chevron seeks is improper and unprecedented,” argued Craig Smyser, a U.S. lawyer for the Ecuadorians, in a letter to Judge Kaplan. Smyser noted that the remedy sought by Chevron had never been granted in U.S. history under similar facts.

“Chevron’s latest histrionics and hysteria justify neither a temporary restraining order, nor an order of attachment,” Smyser said in his letter, which was submitted before Kaplan issued his decision.

Chevron faces another problem — its lead outside law firm in the Ecuador matter, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, has come under increasing attack for orchestrating a string of legal setbacks that imperil the interests of company shareholders, according to a recent blog in the Huffington Post.

The blog noted that since Gibson Dunn entered the matter two years ago, Chevron has been hit with an $18 billion judgment at the trial court in Ecuador, lost the appellate decision in Ecuador, and was reversed by a U.S. federal appeals court last September in its unprecedented effort to seek a worldwide injunction to block enforcement of the Ecuador judgment.

Gibson Dunn also faces mounting ethical questions about its sharp-edged litigation practices in the Ecuador matter, which recently led a federal court to sanction and fine Chevron after finding that a Gibson Dunn lawyer harassed a witness in the Ecuador matter.

In Ecuador, the trial court imposed a punitive damages award to the plaintiffs after finding Chevron’s lawyers tried to delay and undermine the proceedings by threatening a judge with jail time if he did not rule in the company’s favor.

The article In $18 Billion Ecuador Legal Case, Chevron Receives More Disappointment appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

A new document reveals that Chevron officials ordered the destruction of key documents as part of a broad scheme to hide the extent of the company’s pollution in Ecuador’s Amazon, says Amazon Defense Coalition.

A company memorandum from Ecuador dated July 1972 ordered that all reports related to oil spills “are to be removed from the Field and Division offices and destroyed.” From 1964 to 1990, Chevron operated a large concession in Ecuador’s Amazon region that included an extensive network of pipelines, wells and separation stations.

Chevron operated in Ecuador under the Texaco brand.  In February, an Ecuador court found Chevron liable for dumping billions of gallons of toxic waste into the Amazon, decimating indigenous groups and causing a spike in cancer rates.

Damages in the case, which is under appeal in Ecuador, were set at $18 billion.  The extent and environmental impact of the disaster dwarfs the size of the BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico, according to experts.

The memo ordering the destruction of documents was written by R.C. Shields, at the time the director of production in Latin America for Texaco and Chairman of the company’s Ecuador subsidiary.  The memo directs Chevron personnel to report only oil spills that are “major events” which are defined as those that “attract the attention of press and/or regulatory authorities.”

The directive also orders that no reports are to be kept on a “routine basis.”

The Shields memo emerged via discovery in U.S. federal court.

Texaco reportedly caused hundreds of oil spills in Ecuador, many of which were “remediated” by setting them on fire, according to the book Amazon Crude, which was published in 1989 and which documented Texaco’s substandard operational practices. The company also has admitted to pouring sludge from the waste pits along dirt roads.

The Shields memo ordering the destruction of documents infuriated members of the legal team representing 30,000 Amazon residents who are suing the oil giant.

“This memo is a vivid illustration of the culture of deceit that characterizes Chevron’s destruction ofEcuador’s Amazon over a period of decades,” said Pablo Fajardo, the lead Ecuadorian lawyer.  “Deception remains the operating principle for Chevron in Ecuador even today as the company continues to flout its legal obligations to remediate toxic pollution that threatens thousands of innocent lives.”

Karen Hinton, the U.S. spokesperson for the Ecuadorians, said the memo was part of a “pattern of corrupt activities” by the company that include a fraudulent remediation in the 1990s, the fabrication of scientific evidence,  attempted entrapment of a trial judge and threats to put judges in jail if they didn’t rule in the company’s favor.

“Chevron acted like the Mafia in Ecuador,” she added.  “This repugnant memo is just a small piece of the company’s scheme to defraud Ecuador’s government and its people.”
Image Courtesy of  Clara / Shutterstock.com

The article Key Documents Destroyed to Hide Ecuador’s Amazon Pollution appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The past week, the first Campus Party was conducted in Quito, Ecuador in the Cemexpo expo center. The event lasted five days starting the 19th of October and lasting until the 23rd, there were more than 2000 people in attendance. Known as the major technology, leisure, and digital culture event of the world, Campus Party has gathered a lot of success and popularity among the people.

In previous years, the event has been carried out in several countries such as: Spain, Mexico, Colombia and Brazil. The origin of this event comes way back in 1997, starting  in Mollina, Malaga.

The main mission and values of the event is to focus on a general and informative character, which reunites diverse platforms and collectives of the informatics world, in order to encourage the exchange of ideas and knowledge. Public and private institutions formed part of the event’s audience.

The areas of focuses are: innovation, creativity, science and digital leisure. Which highlight the main principle that is based on the human factor and says: Internet is not a computer network, Internet is a people network”. Being the first time that the event happened in Quito, it was well received with the participation of two thousand participants.

Conferences, workshops and competitions were carried out. It counted with the presence of International and National experts such as Neil Harbisson, Eduardo Arcos and Andreu Vea. The velocity in which the participants could surf on the internet was something to behold.

Movistar’s representative Dagmar Thiel, explains that among the total 3GB that were available to perform different tasks and exercises only 1.8 GB were utilized, which means that the participants did not encounter any limitations in regards of surfing and sharing contents.

The closure of the event lead to the awards of the contestants who faced several challenges created and planned by different companies. The majority of the challenges focused on awakening the creativity of technology fans, in order to obtain solutions to problems that are being faced daily.

The following are some of the winners of the different contests:

The first Challenge was named 2020 Quito, which consisted in generating a Facebook Page, try to gather as many followers as possible and find answers to the question: How do you project Quito to look within 9 years? The winner, Israel Mena (24) created a Facebook page named “The future Quito”, and within one week he was able to gathered 1300 followers.

Another challenge consisted on finding a way of transmitting values of the city, and how do we want the city to become and look like. Fernando de Sucre won the contest by creating a jingle which emphasized the city’s values, and to do so he used technology to create and mix the different components of the song such as sounds, melody and lyrics.

Juan Regalado, a student of the National Polytechnic School won the Iron Geek Award. It consisted of an application to filter information in social networks. He won a flight to the upcoming Campus Party in Brazil and a three month internship in Movistar.

Many companies sponsored and supported the event such as: Movistar, Quito Metropolitan District, Ecuador’s Central Bank, Microsoft, Raptor, Sharp, Direct TV, Telefónica, and many other.

Besides offering lectures and activities, it is important to note that about 2,000 people were baptized digitally. Therefore, children, parents and students who had never had access to a computer, were trained and approached to the digital world

Video: 

http://blog.campus-party.com.ec/resumen-final-cpquito-2011

Image Courtesy of    http://www.facebook.com/CampusParty

The article Campus Party Arrives in Quito, Ecuador appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Otavalo is one of the most important markets in South America. It is located in the city of Otavalo in the Imbabura Province of Ecuador. The town shows colonial architectures, with narrowed streets. The people known as the “Otavaleños” have conserved their traditions with perseverance, exposing their culture and beliefs proudly.

The town encloses approximately 50,000 inhabitants and it is located on a precious site, by being a city enclosed and surrounded by mountains and volcanoes, such as the Imbabura 4,630m, Cotacachi 4,995m, and the Mojanda volcanoes.

The inhabitants are mainly indigenous, followed by mestizos and a small percentage of afro-ecuadorian. The indigenous people are mainly dedicated to the production and commerce of textile crafts, meanwhile the others focus on different activities such as stores, transport, tourist services etc.

In the market you will find colors, textures and handcrafts. Hammocks, shigras, ponchos, sweaters, hats, necklaces, tablecloths, earrings, bags and many other crafts are the center of attention for tourists as well for native people that come to the market in order to buy these amazing products at great prices. The indigenous crafts give great recognition to otavalos at an international and national level. The products of ancestral origins are a strong factor for the local economic sector since the products are made for markets abroad.

One of the great things to notice is the clothes for women. The vestment consists on white embroidered blouses, with flared lace sleeves, followed by a black skirt with a cream or white underskirts. The women’s long black hair is tied back with a colorful ribbon that matches the band of their waists. Their necks are also decorated with beautiful necklaces made of strings of gold. Men wear much simpler clothing, just using white trousers and dark blue ponchos.

The native language of the Otavaleños is Quechua, commonly known as the primary mother-tongue of the Inca empire. It does not have any similarity with the Spanish language, although some words from Quechua have been introduced and incorporated into the Spanish language, such as Ñaña (sister), Taita (father), achachay (expression to denote a feeling of cold), and chacra (farm).

Music has been a primordial sector in Otavalo. Since the town is also recognized as being the wedge for artists and compositors of Ecuadorian music, it has served as musical contribution with indigenous folkloric groups, with national and international trajectory.

There are many forms of transportation for getting to this town, the easiest way being by bus. From Quito, there is the possiblility to take the interprovincial buses, known as the Transportes Otavalo and  Los Lagos, which arrives directly to the city of Otavalo.

rebvt / Shutterstock.com

The article Otavalo, An Incredible Indigenous Market in Ecuador appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Last night, Quito welcomed the Spanish Singer Enrique Iglesias, who started his tour “Euphoria”.

The concert began Yesterday 30^th of June, at 20:00 P.M local time, in the Capital of Ecuador, Quito at the Rumiñahui Coliseum.

The Romanian DJ Edward Maya, winner of a Billboard opened the concert. Spicing up the atmosphere with some electronic dance music.

Enrique entered the stage and his words of wisdom for his audience were: “Quito…Tonight I’m fuc%&$ you”.

The singer performed an amazing show, accompanied with incredible music, dances and even some kisses. He sang the new songs from his recent album Euphoria. Which is the number 9th album that he recorded. The album was released on July 5th of 2010, and it features many artists such as:  Akon, Usher, Juan Luis Guerra, Pitbull, Nicole Scherzinger, Wisin and Yandel and Ludacris.

He brought on stage a lucky girl from the audience. But the things begin to turn a bit hot when he started singing to her the song, “Hero”. To heat things a little bit, and give the audience something to talk about. He begin to sing to the girl in a sensually manner, and kissed her on the mouth.

There have been already previous concerts, where he has already kissed a fan. But every time he makes sure his shows keep rising the degrees and makes things CALIENTES!

The tickets cost $35  (General) $75 (V.I.P) and $130 (Blackbox)

The tour will keep going until the end of October.

The upcoming concerts throughout South and Central America are:

• La Paz, Bolivia: July 2, 2011
• Santa Cruz, Bolivia, July 5, 2011
• 3.Caracas, Venezuela, July 7, 2011
• 4.Tegucigalpa, Honduras, July 9, 2011

Then the Artist will head up to Australia:

• 5. July 23, Sydney Aus
• 6. July 25 Brisbane, Aus
• 7. July 27 Melbourne, Aus
• 8. July 28, Melbourne, Victoria, Aus

And to end things up he will head to U.S.A, where in most of the concerts Pitbull will be the special guest.

• Starting September 22nd in Boston
• September 23, Philadelphia, pa
• September 24, Newark, NJ
• September 27, Washington, DC
• September 29 Toronto
• September 30 Detroit
• October 1 Chicago
• October 3 Kansas City
• October 6, Los Angeles
• October 7, San Jose
• October 8, Las Vegas
• October 12, Houston
• October 13, San Antonio
• October 15 El Paso
• October 16 Laredo
• October 18, Dallas
• October 20 Atlanta
• October 21 Orlando

The last day of the tour, will be the 22nd of October in Miami Florida.

The article Enrique Iglesias Hits the Stage in Quito with his Tour Euphoria appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

“This art is fun to look at. While it’s outsider art and folk art, it’s urban, rather than tractors and chickens” (Kathy Silvestri)

The urban art is one of the arts that struggles the most to be discovered since it is difficult for the artists to expose their art on the streets. But now, many of them have gathered together in an event, which has given them the opportunity to exposed, paint in any way and form they can, without any limitations.The adobe walls of a house located in the Historical Old Town of Cuenca, in Ecuador, has become the surface needed for 50 artists coming from diverse parts of the world such as Colombia, Chile, United States and Ecuador to expose their art, by painting the walls with graffiti’s.

The idea at first emerged with the purpose to promote and incentive the citizens to get to know a way of expressing, and communication throughout every color, symbol, and trace, said the Cuencan artist Qué Zhinín. The big house located in the Padre Aguirre street, had been rented by him and some friends, to utilize it as a type of laboratory, and work place to expose their graffiti art. In his case, he painted a scorpion with fuchsia and black colors, leaving the interpretation of it to the people’s imagination.

Among the invited artist, the exposition counts with an American artist whose nickname is Tanna. For her the urban art is her life, and she finds and relates that in Cuenca many things are occurring in the same manner than in her country. “The authorities, do not allow us to paint in the city”, she said. For her the exposition acts like an open door, for the artists to show their art.An Ecuadorian artist from Quito, known as S2, found out about this opportunity to expose the art throughout Internet, and therefore he traveled to Cuenca in order to expose his unique way of painting known as Stencil, which consists inn working with templates.

Overall, the exposition has brought interest to the people and the neighbors. One of the neighbors form the Padre Aguirre street named Ricardo Tapia, commented: “This proposal gives life to the neighborhood, and it is important that this kind of cultural manifestations are generation, since they contribute to the educate people in a fun and artistic way”. Nevertheless, this exposition also counted with paper art creations. The cuencan artist known as Mango exposed the origami figures, with earring and candelabrum forms.

Finishing the last strokes of the silhouette of a skinny woman, the Cuencan Artist Kross, said that: “Through the graffiti’s, the feelings are evoked. It is necessary to have a collectivity support, because it is a creativity exposure. The components of the colonial house, such as pillars, roofs, walls, doors, and windows were converted in art proposals, exposing different techniques and desiring to reach and communicate with the people.

The article Urban Artists Exposing Their Art in Cuenca, Ecuador appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

On Tuesday, the fifth of April, the Ecuadorian Government announced the expulsion of the United States ambassador Heather Hodges. The government expressed that the ambassador was not an unwelcome person. This action was taken by consequence of a confidential diplomatic leak, from Wikileaks, and was published by the newspaper El Pais. The leak contained information about the corruption present in Ecuador, mainly in the Police ground.

In a press conference, the foreign minister Ricardo Patiño said: “ We have asked that she abandons the country as soon as she can. Regarding the relationship with United States, he also claimed: “ There is no way, that we would intend to affect the relationship with United States”. In response United States has classified the issue as “unjustified”.

Mr. Patiño called Mrs. Hodges to her office, in order to ask some explanations about the diplomatic leak that was exposed in the media. The ambassador in response, said that the documents had been stolen, and that neither her nor her Government would make any comments about it. The minister explained that once said that she was not a welcome person in the country, it is directed to a functionary who did a leak of this nature and then she resign to give any other explanation about the them”.

Mr. Patiño, also assured that Ecuador would not proceed to contact its ambassador in Washington, because its reaction has is not linked at all towards the American Government, but it’s linked against the leaks that had been signed by the ambassador.”

The leaked material had been released in 2009. Whereas the United States embassy in Quito affirmed that “ the corruption is generalized in the rows of the Ecuadorian Police”. The leaked document exposed the information about a policeman named Jaime Hurtado Vaca, whom resigned his charge on May of the same year. The document contained information about how the referred policeman had utilized his status by being the main authority in his congregation. He recurred to extortionate, accumulated money, facilitated the traffic of people and protected other corrupted agents as well.

Also, the document exposed “ that some of the functionaries of the United States embassy thought that the President Rafael Correa, was conscious about the corrupt activities. Some observers concerned about the issue, believed that Correa took advantage of this situation in order to have a Chief policeman whom could be easily manipulated”.

Mr. Patiño affirmed: “It is absolutely unacceptable, our Government cannot accept this kind of information that has been released by the ambassador of United States in our country.”

On the other hand, the president of Ecuador, Rafael Correa, had accused United States of spying the country’s policeman. In an interview that was retransmitted by more than ten radio stations, he affirmed that the relationship among both countries “were the best”, he remarked that it was a “pity” about how this things can be done, spying the police, and trying to involucrate the President of the Republic in corruption cases. He classified Mrs. Hodges as “ bad functionary” that he “had never liked” to his executive. And added, that “ he wished that this doesn’t damage the relationship among United States and Ecuador, because if it does, what a shame, but here we will make the sovereignty of the country be respected”.

Grasping also the other side point of view, a spokesman from the Whitehouse declared, “ The ambassador Hodges is one of our most experimented and talented diplomatic. The State department considers her expulsion as unjustified and we are deeply sorry that the Ecuadorian Government proceeded to do so ”.

The American ambassador from her side said that the decision of Correa’s executive has left her “ tremendously sad”.” I hope I can have another opportunity, maybe, to answer questions”. She added that she did not count with enough time to prepare an adequate response regarding the question about the leaking material from Wikileaks, and that before she make any declarations about the issue, she has to consult Washington.

The article Ecuador Banished U.S.A Ambassador due to The Exposure of Leaked Material appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.