1. “Though oil provides fuel for our cars and warmth for our homes, it undermines
most countries that possess it and, along with natural gas and coal, poisons the
environment”1
1
Peter Maass, Crude World (1st, Random House, 2009) 217
Abstract Innovating justice encompasses several fine details and takes
different routes to come to a solution. Nevertheless, oil has become a growing
actor and theme in controversy surrounding access to justice or a lack thereof.
Oil has, indirectly, been perceived as a means of oppression by scholars and
human rights advocates alike, thus giving “birth” to its detrimental effects on
the environment and those living in oil regimes. The process of seeking and
being granted access to justice is complex and multifaceted. Each component
has a specific role for an individual, group, or a movement, but one thing in
common: a catalyst- oil, in this case. A combination of academic literature,
legal case studies, and contextual studies of Nigeria versus Shell, will act as the
basis of research for this paper.

2. 2
The following paper will introduce and explore a conflict resolution mechanism pertaining to
environmental injustice. Detect, Deal, Deter, is an innovation in it’s early stages geared at
helping people deal with environmental injustice in a three-fold manner- a detection
mechanism, a platform, and crowd funding. Furthermore, we will also explore the key barriers
to justice and how this innovation will help overcome these barriers. Governments, both
corrupt and moral in nature, facilitate the expansion of oil companies into other nations while
morphing what democracy truly entails. Oil dependency dictates where rules can be bent and
when sacrifices are deemed necessary, detached from the cost. The resource curse posits that a
“curse” emanates in countries rich in minerals and extractive commodities, in this case oil, by
eroding democracy, rewarding corruption and intensifying social conflict.2
Globally, oil has wrecked havoc in every corner. Thorough and in depth statistics are difficult
to find, when looking at the global picture. To understand, I have comprised a list of some of
the key affects oil spills have globally: fishing, shrimping And oyster industries are being
destroyed, physical and chemical changes to flora and fauna occur3
, the tourist industry is
diminished4
, water supplies are poisons, oil prices rise, economy of areas affected are
devastated, and much more. The below images illustrate that oil spills are, indeed, a global
issue.
2
Benjamin K. Sovacool,"Cursed by crude: the corporatist resource curse and the baku Tbilisi Ceyhan
pipeline" in Environmental Policy and Governance 21(1): 42-57(2011)
3
Michael Snyder, “8 Long Term Economic and Environmental Effects of the Gulf Oil Spills” (11 May
2010) < http://oilprice.com/The-Environment/Oil-Spills/8-Long-Term-Economic-And-Environmental-
Effects-Of-The-Gulf-Oil-Spill.html> accessed 8 December 2015
4
ibid

3. 3
Image A5
: “The Worst Oil Spills in History”: The total amount of oil spilled since 1967
sums to over 4,500,000 tons. On average, it takes 50 years to clean up an oil spill. These
spills include Exxon Valdez (1989), Gulf War Oil Spill (1991), Mt Haven (1991), Abt
Summer (1991) Deep-water Horizon (2010)
5
ElearningExamples, “The Worst Oil Spills in History” , <http://elearningexamples.com/the-worst-oil-
spills-in-history/> accessed 7 December 2015

4. 4
Image B6
: “The Largest Oil Spills in History, 1991 to present”(2010): This image
accurately shows that every continent has been affected by oil spills, in developed and
developing nations.
Honing in on one nation wrought with oil spill crisis we gain a better understanding of
the environmental injustice in question. Nigeria is the 8th largest oil-producing area of
the world, famous literally for its kleptocracy.7
The oil industry is Nigeria’s most
important economic sector, accounting for over 60 percent of the total government
revenue, thus making oil related litigation also a big part of Nigeria’s legal culture.
According to a Nigerian government statistic, there were upwards of 7,000 oil spills
between 1970 and 2000.8
There are 2000 official major spillage sites, many going back
several decades, with thousands of smaller spills still waiting to be cleared up.9
Though
the rate of oil spills has drastically declined, the effects are still imminent. The Niger
Delta is one of the most polluted regions in the world, with a legacy of millions of barrels
6
ChartsBin statistics collector team 2010, The Largest Oil Spills in History, 1901 to Present,
ChartsBin.com, ,<http://chartsbin.com/view/mgz>.google_ad_section_end> accessed 9 December 2015
7
As defined in Merriam Webster’s Dictionary: where “government exists to increase the personal wealth
and political power of its officials and the ruling class at the expense of the wider population.”
8
Center For Constitutional Rights, “Factsheet: Shell's Environmental Devastation in Nigeria”
http://ccrjustice.org/learn-more/faqs/shell%2526%2523039%3Bs-environmental-devastation-nigeria
accessed 22 November 2015
9
ibid.

5. 5
spilt but not cleaned up since oil was found in the region in 1956.10
Shell has been
directly linked to this environmental catastrophe, as one of the largest foreign oil
corporations in Nigeria. In 1998, alone, Shell was involved in over 500 pending court
cases.
The oil that leaked into the Niger Delta culminates to an amount doubling the recent BP
oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. The region is more severely polluted than was
anticipated, according to a UN report.11
In 2008, four Nigerian farmers- Alali Efanga,
Chief Fidelis A. Oguru, Eric Dooh and Friday Akpan – joined by environmental
group Friends of the Earth(Milieudefensie), brought suit against Royal Dutch Shell (RDS)
at The Hague Civil Court in The Netherlands. The suit sought reparation for destruction
of their land and livelihood in the Niger Delta Region, occurring between 2004 and
2007.12
In August 2011, the publication of the ‘’Environmental Assessment of Ogoniland13
’’ was
put forth by the United Nations. The report proved that Shell did not adequately clean up
pollution they had caused in Ogoniland, where the Goi village was located. These spills
were among a minority of a greater environmental problem. Millions of poverty-ridden
people of Nigeria suffer from these spills. Ironically, only ten percent of Shell’s oil
production takes place in these areas, but 50 percent of all recorded Shell leaks take place
in Nigeria.1415
This pollution has resulted in poor living conditions, livelihood, and
depleted access to clean drinking water. Only a small percentage, like these farmers, is
able to get access to justice. Even then, justice is not guaranteed and by the time they start
the proceedings they have depleted their whole life fortune. This got me thinking…how
can I come up with a plan to help these people? How can I help them cope?
Access to Justice Barriers
Before we delve into the specifics of civil dispute resolution we must understand the
barriers to justice and the circumstances many people find themselves in. Access to
justice is pivotal to the establishment and maintenance of social order and rule of law.
Justice enables people to have their own voices heard and exercise their natural and legal
10
The Guardian, “Nigerian Community Fights Shell in UK Court Over Oil Spills,”(29 April 2014)
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/29/nigerian-community-shell-uk-court-oil-spills
accessed 23 November 2015
11
UNEP, August 2011 http://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/OEA/UNEP_OEA.pdf accessed 22
November 2015
12
Milieudefensie, “Four Victimized Nigerian Farmers,”https://milieudefensie.nl/english/shell/oil-
leaks/courtcase/plaintiffs accessed 22 November 2015
13
(In 2011, the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) released a 14 month study in a report
called UNEP Ogoniland Oil Assessment Reveals Extent of Environmental Contamination and Threats to
Human Health, UNEP for short) UNEP, “UNEP Ogoniland Oil Assessment Reveals Extent of
Environmental Contamination and Threats to Human Health” (August 4, 2011)
http://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/OEA/UNEP_OEA.pdf accessed 24 November 2015
14
Amnesty International, “Bad Information Oil Spill Investigation in the Niger
Delta,”http://amnesty.org.pl/uploads/media/Niger_report.pdf accessed 23 November 2015
15
For further exploration into the litigation process refer to: Tanya Kelm, “ Nigeria v. Shell the Litigation
Process” , 2014.

6. 6
rights. These rights derive from the constitution, statutes, common law or international
instruments. Access to justice requires that we share information and enable good legal
practices. With that, we recognize several barriers to justice, (especially present in
developing nations).
Societal Cultural Barriers
Poverty is both a cause and consequence of subpar access to justice. Reduced financial
and human resource allocations to justice institutions produce failures in the justice
system. 16
This further disallows people to overcome their economic shortcomings,
denying them the potential to enforce economic and social rights. There is several ways
poverty hinders access to justice: awareness of rights, physical access to counsels or a
court system, economic potential to access legal representation and judicial tools/
services. 17
Importantly, people do not recognize their legal identity, nor do they know
how to do so. This is especially true in rural or remote areas.
Discrimination (migrants, women, indigenous people) is an obstacle that can affect all
facets of access to justice- awareness and access. Discrimination can affect certain groups
more than others. Ethnic and racial minorities, as well as indigenous peoples experience
both formal legal discrimination and informal stigmatization. Groups that are most likely
to experience discriminations are least likely to know their rights and existing remedies.
Empowerment to combat discrimination can have long-term economic benefits.18
Literacy and education--low literacy levels and education deplete access to economic
resources and the capacity to understand and enforce rights.
Institutional barriers
Resourcing justice systems—specifically courts and administration limit access to
justice. This comes in several forms:
(a) Insufficient and unequal geographical distribution of justice institutions19
,
(b) Failure to function correctly20
,
(c) Lack of or inadequate trained judiciary,
(d) Corrupt or biased judiciary21
.
16
M Anderson, “Access to Justice and Legal Process: Making Legal Institutions Responsive to Poor People
in LDCs” (Institute of Development Studies Working Paper 178, 2003)
www.ids.ac.uk/files.dmfile/Wp178.pdf accessed 29 November 2015
17
Julinda Beqiraj and Lawrence McNamara, “International Access to Justice: Barriers and Solutions”,
(Bingham Center for the Rule of Law Report , October 2014)
18
ibid.
19
ibid.
20
*** In Nigeria, Brekete Family Radio talk show uses a public complaint forum on people’s court model(
See ibid[16])
21
***The executive in Nigeria has a substantial influence on judiciary through appointment processes and
control in funding

7. 7
Legal assistance and representation
i. Free and low cost legal assistance is key22
, but often difficult to
access.
ii. When the state itself is facing economic turmoil, the government
may limit resources committed to legal assistance. Further, free
legal assistance is less available for civil disputes.
iii. Fairness, openness, enforcement and compliance are ideals sought
after for representation, but often lacking in developing regimes.
Social Meets Institutional
Power imbalance largely corresponds to the imbalance between companies and the
government-interests. This also relates to the trifecta imbalance between citizens, the
government and the companies. There is a financial imbalance between affluent oil
companies and the poor villager or communities. Intimidation tactics are often employed
by public bodies or corrupt lawyers. That being said, due to the landownership structure
in Nigeria, it is easier for people to group together. Communities or families, not
individuals, traditionally hold the land in Nigeria. Thus, family heads or village leaders
can file the disputes.
Distrust of the justice system creates both an environment of hopelessness and
helplessness. People do not have faith in their legal system or it’s potential to provide a
remedy to their problem. Further, people may not be informed of the possibility to find
relief. In Nigeria, the justice system is known to be plagued with corruption and greed.
Corruption undermines the entire reliability of the system. Thus, corruption is worthy of
its own category. Nigeria scores high in the Corruption Perception Index (In 2014 Score:
27; Rank: 136/17523
) and scores low in the Human Development Index (In 2013-HDI
Rank: 156, HDI Score: 0.504)24
, implying that because the incidence of corruption is
high, investment in citizens’ welfare is low. Nigeria is considered to be one of the poorest
countries in the world, because it has some of the poorest human development indicators.
Corruption takes many forms, in Nigeria specifically: inflation of public expenditure,
bribery and extortion, fraud, embezzlement, diversion of local government funding, crude
oil theft/bunkering, power sector reforms, and pension fund scandals,25
to name a few.
22
Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights(ICCPR) obliges states to privide
free legal assistance in criminal proceedings for those who do not have the means to provide it for
themselves.
23
Transparency International, “ Corruption Perceptions Index 2014 Results
http://www.transparency.org/cpi2014/results#myAnchor1 accessed 8 December 2015
24
UN Human Rights Development Report 2014, “Human Development Report”
http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr14-report-en-1.pdf accessed 8 December 2015
25
ActionAidNigeria, “ Corruption and Poverty in Nigera A Report”,
http://www.actionaid.org/sites/files/actionaid/pc_report_content.pdf accessed 8 December 2014

8. 8
Costs of Accessing Justice26
The monetary costs of justice, as quoted, “are relatively easy to quantify and measure”.
Intangible costs, however, are proven to be more difficult to assess and give value to.
Legal and court fees are inevitable costs of litigation and personal claims. Out-of-pocket
expenses are variable, often depending on your geographical location in relation to
lawyers, courts etc. Other intangible costs include emotional and physical stress,
relationship strain, and psychological issues resulting from the claim as well as the
process itself.
What is the starting point?
An effective civil dispute mechanism should involve all parties in the process, outline
how to achieve the goal or negotiation, distribute value, organize options, as well as how
to organize compliance with the outcome.27
It should build on existing communication
channels, make it attractive for both the plaintiff and defendant, offer a safe environment,
have a good probability of solution, be cost and time efficient28
. These are just a few
parameters, which ought to be explored during the innovation and implementation of a
civil dispute resolution mechanism.
Vision of the Process
Over the course of my studies I have discovered that a revolutionary change is necessary
and that in order for victims to gain access to justice the entire structure needs to be
“shaken and stirred”. There are several holes in current conflict resolution and we will
discuss only a few of what I have deemed key barriers to accessing justice, especially in
relation to those living in underdeveloped nations. Increased computerization of court
procedures and data storing improves transparency as well as access to decisions, verdicts
and updates.
26
Towards basic justice care for everyone: challenges and promising approaches, HiiL Trend Report 2012,
available at: http://www.hiil.org/publication/basic-justice-care
27
Adapted from: Maurits Barendrech, “In Search of Microjustice: Five Basic Elements of a Dispute
System” (Tilburg University Legal Studies Working Paper No. 002/2009, January 29 2009) Available at
SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1334644 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1334644
28
ibid

9. 9
An app is contingent upon pipeline pressure and detects irregularities. This device
incorporates both elements of corporate responsibility and evidence to bolster an
environmental injustice upon. Evidence and fact-finding are both weak areas in mass
claims, which proves to be detrimental to the cases made by victims of environmental
injustice. A once weak area of mass claims is strengthened; prevention and detection are
revolutionized. Taking it one step further, similar to the technique used to predict
volcanic eruptions, GPS coordinates correspond to pipeline sensors, and a satellite
orbiting earth detects the leak itself. Big oil companies can cut costs on logging man-
hours detecting the leak itself, while satisfying NGOs, workers and victims alike.
The key is that weak components of dispute resolution claims are strengthened and all
parties can benefit. The source of the leak can be detected, dealt with, and deter further
leaks or even potential claims from arising. Such devices can be implemented in any type
of pressure chamber with different compositions and can be adjusted accordingly.
Though the situation may seem bleak, especially in developing countries like Nigeria,
this offers a clear alternative for saving them from future leaks and aiding in claims. That
being said, I wanted to innovate something that contributes to many steps in a conflict
resolution, and is not limited to fulfilling just this one step, as vital as it may be.

10. 10
People suffering from the same injustice are connected via a platform. Several platforms
exist, but they never seem to get the whole picture. They are lacking key components or
tend to be too complex to navigate. The idea is that the platform should be informative,
user-friendly, and thorough. The user should feel like their needs are being met, as well
as feel less vulnerable throughout the process.
A database of professionals provides an outlet for help: legal, social, psychological.
Legal help only caters to one need and thus I would like to also include social and
psychological aids. Legal action can take place on a victim’s behalf, coming from an
unstable, corrupt, or underdeveloped legal system. Furthermore, people can also upload
evidence or documents into the app itself. In Nigeria, Pledge 51 developed a free mobile
phone app that provides access to Nigeria’s amended constitution, a legal directory and
discussion forums.29
Apps like this are in high demand. We are taking legal disputes to
technological grounds.
In Western Nigeria (Osun State) the Public Defender and Center for Citizen Rights (PD
CR) provides free legal representation for women, children, and the poor. It also uses
radio and television programs to educate the public about their rights. Over 400 people
have accessed the PD CR office.30
Litigation is costly and this office consists of only 6
lawyers. In a state of 4 million people that is certainly small. Ventures such as these give
hope and validity to this innovation. If just 6 lawyers can reach 400 people, imagine what
an entire network could do!
29
Independent Newspapers Ltd, “ Pledge 51 Wins ISPON Awards”, (Daily Independent, March 19 2012)
http://dailyindependentnig.com/2013/03/19/pledge-51-wins-ispon-awards/ accessed 9 December 2015
30
ibid[16]

11. 11
The cost of professional expertise, namely in the form of legal counsel and court fees, can
be financed by crowd funds. These crowd funds can also maintain and sustain clean up
processes. Containment and recovery has been used as a method of response: using
booms and skimmers, or in-situ burning, with dispersants as an alternative method.
Shoreline clean up acts as an intermediate response. Cleaning up the spill over a body of
water can be very expensive, so often they opt for cleaning the shoreline alone. One thing
acting against the effectiveness of this clean up is the need for storage.31
GIS (Geographical Information Systems) can also prove to be an effective means of
identifying and mitigating spills. To make these tasks feasible more funding must be
provided by the stakeholders of the oil industry. Nongovernmental organizations will
keep fighting the damaging effects of oil, but have proven to be overburdened. This
process is set up in such a way that people can both contribute and benefit from the
system, relieving the victims of bearing the burden alone.
In a UK a consortium of law and development NGOs has put a proposal to the UK
Department for International Development (DFID) to establish and fund a program from
2014/1532
, which will foster support and facilitate international pro bono work by judges
and lawyers in DFID priority countries. This is certainly also a revolutionary step in the
right direction.
Interestingly, legitimate agencies do exist that assess claims for compensation that come
about as a result of oil spills. ITOPF is one such agency geared at ocean spills. They
31
Ian C. White and Jenifer M. Baker, The Sea Empress oil spill in context ( International conference on
the sea empress oil spill, 1998)
32
ibid[16]

12. 12
assess the reasonableness of clean-up costs and the merit of claims for damage. This
investigation and assessment often requires a specialist in the area and the economic
affects of said affected area. Agencies like ITOPF encourage a more cooperative
approach to the assessment of pollution damage. This also facilitates and expedites a
more amicable settlement for all parties involved. Government and industry often also
receive advice on contingency plans. 33
From an economic standpoint, transaction costs would be cut for all parties affected, the
common man the corporation. At this juncture in time allocating cost is variable. Due
to the nature of the of the innovation itself, various degrees of investment could lead to
it’s successful implementation. A little bit goes a long way. Largely, costs will be
procured in the innovation and application of the app itself. The platform does not depend
on monetary means, but rather on social capital. Crowd funds and social networking
propel a cost saving model, and advertisement embedded within the platform allows oil
stakeholders or even their subsidies to benefit and invest in a future.
***
Summary of Detect, Deal, Deter Process…
Essentially, the procedure should go as follows: a detection mechanism works
simultaneously with the other 2 components of the innovation. A person suffering from
environmental injustice can both report the injustice as well as come in contact with other
victims via a platform. This platform also offers an outlet for advice in the forum and list
of professionals. Documents and proof of claim can be uploaded via the platform and
assessed by legal professionals to substantiate the claim, also preventing frivolous
accusations from occurring, so as to protect all parties involved.
Further, there are several means of remedy, including but not limited to: mass claims, fast
track solutions, or personal claims. A further means of specificity could categorize claims
within the database based on different criteria that can be explored at a later time. Some
examples of criteria could include the region in which the injustice happened, type of
claim, or possible means of compensation. The next component speaks to the deterrence
and retribution of a claim. Means of settlement can include arbitration, mediation, court
settlement or 3rd
party settlement.
Upon receiving a verdict, this verdict should remain within the system as well as have
people benefit from updates so as to promote transparency. Aftercare can come in the
form of clean up and compensation schemes. The route that you follow is case specific,
but essentially the platform can filter you through the process in a user-friendly manner.
Crowd funding speaks for itself in that it can go towards both maintaining and improving
33
ITOPF, “Contingency Planning Advice”, http://www.itopf.com/in-action/key-services/contingency-
planning-advice/ accessed 8 December 2015

13. 13
the procedure itself, as well as cover costs victims would usually not have access to. You
should note that I have created this framework in such a way that it can be adapted and
used as a model for other injustices.
***
My conflict resolution was inspired by ongoing pollution and depletion of people’s
livelihood in developing nations; specifically reflecting upon oil spills in Bodo, Nigeria,
but can be used in any area affected by environmental injustice. It can be used to target
one issue in a detailed manner, but also has potential to give rise to aiding more people
with a vast array of environmental disputes in a timely and cost effective manner.
This innovation is a new approach, which could implement systematic and procedural
change in an adaptable manner. It encompasses the key components needed to create a
successful civil dispute resolution mechanism, as well as builds upon the shortcomings of
previously existing means of dispute resolution. Starting up the initiative will prove to be
the most trying part of the innovation, because of the fact that it relies on networking,
professional input, and is comprised of several complex processes. That is not to say that
it is not possible.
People will surely approach this innovation with caution, but it has carefully been
constructed in such a way that all parties to an injustice can benefit and invest. The
greatest things in life need to be worked for and it is time for us to make change,
investing in our future. My innovation has fierce potential to produce exponentially better
results for end-users, as well as improve access to justice in general. Of course, this plan
acts as the framework and its allure lies in its multifaceted potential. This unique and
modern concept depends on networking as a form of justice. Easy as 1, 2, 3: Detect,
Deal, Deter.