Sabitlenmiş Tweet
This may come as a huge surprise to many, but is exactly what it is!
We have issued formal Letters Before Claim to @bp_plc , @bp_America BP,
@Shell Shell,
@BBC the BBC,
and @10DowningStreet UK government departments regarding historic conduct connected to the Biafran war (1967–1970).
Several recipients have acknowledged receipt and requested time to respond. Others have disputed corporate succession.
For transparency, we anticipate certain legal positions will be raised.
As follows:
1. On limitation:
We expect arguments that these matters are “time-barred.”
English and comparative law recognise that where facts were concealed, only later declassified, or where harm was foreseeable and systemic, limitation is not automatic.
These issues are determined on evidence, not assumption.
2. On “act of state”:
Our claims do not seek to adjudicate Nigerian sovereignty or wartime decisions.
They concern UK-based corporate and institutional conduct, commercial benefit, knowledge, and facilitation — matters squarely within the competence of UK courts.
3. On duty of care:
Modern English law recognises that corporations and institutions may owe duties where they exercised influence, derived benefit, and had knowledge of foreseeable harm — including in historic overseas contexts.
These are fact-specific questions, not policy abstractions.
4. On corporate succession:
Corporate restructuring does not automatically extinguish liability where continuity of enterprise, assets, benefit, and representation exist.
This is a settled area of law and will be addressed on the facts.
5. We are proceeding lawfully, calmly, and transparently.
Our next steps will be guided by defendants’ substantive responses and the evidence — not public relations or delay.
Accountability is a legal process. We are prepared to follow it wherever jurisdiction allows. This matter will be pursued on its legal merits.
END.
English
