Bayelsa Monarch, Community Appeal Dismissal Of Shell Divestment Suit

 Bayelsa monarch and Ekpetiama community challenge dismissal of their suit against Shell’s divestment of onshore oil assets.

The paramount ruler of Ekpetiama Kingdom, in Yenagoa Local Government Area of Bayelsa State, King Bubaraye Dakolo, and his community have appealed the dismissal of their suit challenging the divestment of the onshore oil assets of Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC).

The appeal, filed before the Court of Appeal, followed the July 17, 2026 judgement of the Federal High Court in Yenagoa, which upheld preliminary objections by the defendants and dismissed the case without hearing the substantive environmental and human rights claims.

The suit was instituted by Dakolo, on behalf of himself and the people of Ekpetiama Kingdom.

The case challenged Shell’s divestment of its onshore oil business to Renaissance Africa Energy Limited. It argued that multinational oil companies should not be permitted to transfer petroleum assets while longstanding environmental liabilities remained unresolved and polluted sites remained unremediated.

It also questioned whether Nigeria’s petroleum and environmental regulators fulfilled their statutory obligations before approving the transaction, and whether the divestment complied with constitutional provisions, environmental laws, and Nigeria’s regional and international human rights obligations.

Lead counsel to the plaintiff, Chuck Uguru, who filed the appeal in Yenagoa, is asking the appellate court to determine whether the Federal High Court was right to dismiss the suit at the preliminary objection stage without hearing evidence on the substantive environmental and human rights issues.

Among the grounds of appeal, the appellant argued that the trial court wrongly treated the grievance procedure under the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) as mandatory, even though the dispute concerned environmental pollution, petroleum asset divestment, constitutional rights, environmental remediation and compensation, rather than Host Community Trust disputes governed by Chapter 3 of the Act.

The appeal further contended that the lower court erred in holding that the suit was statute-barred under the Public Officers Protection Act, despite allegations of continuing environmental damage, ongoing regulatory failures, and unlawful conduct.

It also argued that the trial court failed to recognise continuing environmental harm and fresh causes of action arising from Shell’s recent divestment, wrongly held that the plaintiff lacked the legal standing to institute the action, found that the suit disclosed no reasonable cause of action despite allegations of environmental pollution and regulatory failures, and improperly resolved disputed factual issues at the preliminary objection stage instead of allowing the matter to proceed to trial.

Speaking after filing the appeal, Uguru said the plaintiffs were dissatisfied that the case was terminated without an opportunity to present evidence.

He stated, “We are aggrieved, naturally, by the ruling of the trial court and that is why we have come here today to kick-start our constitutional right of appeal.

“We have today filed an appeal against the ruling of the learned trial judge and our appeal is that we have paraded eight potent grounds of appeal. So the next theatre for this legal engagement is the penultimate Court of Appeal.”

Resource Justice Manager of Social Action, Dr. Prince Edegbuo, said the appeal demonstrated the community’s rejection of the Federal High Court’s decision.

Edegbuo said, “It shows that we are moving on with this case. We intend to knock it out from the grounds of technicalities and all that. We intend to make Nigerians understand that this is an environmental matter, this is a human rights matter, this is a livelihood matter.

“If people’s environment and livelihood, their lifestyle, even their culture was badly damaged for over 50 years, and Shell decides to divest without clean-up, who is going to pay for the clean-up?”