E-Mail from Alfred Donovan to PIRC 31 May 2004
ATTENTION OF THE PENSIONS & INVESTMENT RESEARCH CONSULTANTS LTD (PIRC)
Dear Janice
Can you kindly pass this communication on to the appropriate individual at PIRC responsible for dealing with Shell corporate government issues? If you would please take a few minutes of your time to glance through the content, you will appreciate the importance of this communication.
As a Shell shareholder of long-standing I am aware of the campaign efforts by PIRC from about 1997 onwards in regards to improving corporate governance at Shell Transport and Trading Company plc.
Please be advised that it is possible and even likely that PIRC was the subject of covert operations by a sinister organisation hired by Shell to act against NGO’s, including for example Greenpeace and The Body Shop.
I know this because my son and I founded a Shell shareholder pressure group and Shell subsequently admitted in writing (as did their solicitors Kendall Freeman) hiring undercover agents on our case. Even though the undercover activities of one such Shell spy were exposed, Shell was so arrogant that it openly used the threat of other undercover operatives to deliberately intimidate my family and me.
I do not wish to be overdramatic, but I wrote to hundreds of UK MP’s a few days ago partly as a precaution so that if anything happens to me or my family, the Police will know where to commence an investigation.
I wanted our lawmakers to be aware that there is an extremely sinister side to the Royal Dutch Shell Group. None of the recent or current senior management at Shell has been prepared to deal with the question of the sinister activities to which I refer. This is despite all of the claims about trying to restore Shell’s reputation after it was torn to pieces by the lies and cover-ups at the highest levels of management in relation to the oil reserves scandal.
Amazingly, Shell management still seems to believe that it can still getaway with yet more false promises of integrity, transparency and honesty in all Shell’s dealings. Unfortunately its Statement of General Business Principles has been exposed as a worthless sham. Even Richard Wiseman, General Counsel of Shell International Ltd and Legal Director of Shell UK Ltd has admitted in writing that Shell’s code of ethics has no legal standing. Like a bet with a high street betting shop, the pledges are binding in honour only. I would prefer to place my trust with a bookie in preference to Shell.
I would respectfully suggest that PIRC seeks confirmation from Shell that your legitimate and worthy campaign was not the subject of undercover activity by Shell or its agents.
COMMUNICATION SENT TO UK MP’s BETWEEN 26 & 29 MAY 04.
I am an 87 year old partly disabled war pensioner.
I am not one of your constituents but I want to bring to your attention a matter of public concern to everyone interested in the fundamental right of a UK citizen to a fair trial, free of witness intimidation by corporate sponsored undercover agents.
I have supplied the Lord Chancellor with evidence that all of our key witnesses in a legal action against Shell UK Limited were undermined and/or neutralised by undercover investigators some of whom Shell has admitted hiring. In a systematic fashion every one of our witnesses was intimidated. That is fundamentally wrong. The same tactics were used against us. My letter to Lord Falconer is published on my website www.Shell2004.com see: http://shell2004.com/2004%20Documents/lettertolordfalconer20may04.htm
My email address is alfrededonovan@hotmail.com.
It seems that multinational corporations use undercover agents supplied by firms such as Hakluyt because it makes them once removed from direct responsibility for any unpleasant/illegal actions which might subsequently be exposed. In other words, scope for plausible denial with blame being attached to the intelligence firm, rather than the sponsoring client. This may explain the use of so-called “private contractors” in the interrogation of American held prisoners in Iraq. One such private intelligence firm involved, Titan Corporation, is the American equivalent to Hakluyt.
I first wrote to every MP in 1998 warning of a sinister aspect to Shell UK and a corporate culture of cover-up and deceit deeply ingrained at the highest levels of the Royal Dutch Shell Group. Therefore news reports of cover-up, deception and intrigue at Shell regarding the shortfall in oil and gas reserves hold no surprises to me. What I have to tell you involves the same Shell senior management figures named in the recent class action law suits alleging fraud and deceit. (Shell has just downgraded its oil reserves for the fourth time in as many months).
Shell internal emails reveal a conspiracy to mislead investors including numerous pension funds. The deception involved the top management at Shell some of whom still remain in their highly paid jobs. There is even talk of sending a £1m payoff cheque to Sir Philip Watts, the recently sacked Group Chairman. Presumably to secure his cooperation in the pending multibillion dollar law suits. It is all reminiscent of the Mad Hatters Tea Party.
I am a long term Shell shareholder. In 1998 I also wrote to every Shell Transport director bringing to their attention sinister undercover activity against my family in relation to a lawsuit my son had brought against Shell. I recently discovered to my horror that I was in fact communicating directly with the then spymasters of “Hakluyt”, a shadowy organisation closely linked with MI6, specialising in undercover operations for corporate clients, including Shell. I understand that many MP’s believe that Hakluyt is the commercial arm of MI6.
Directors/shareholders in Shell Transport were simultaneously directors/shareholders in Hakluyt. In fact Shell directors including a former Royal Dutch/Shell Group Chairman were at the helm of Hakluyt as its President and Chairman. Shell has admitted using Hakluyt in widespread undercover activities against its perceived enemies (Sunday Times article 17/6/01).
How could Shell promise in its “Statement of General Business Principles” transparency, integrity and honesty in all its dealings and yet be part and parcel of a sinister spying organisation whose stock in trade is deception and trickery? There is a huge credibility gap between these two extremes. Even Shell’s Code of Ethics is not what it seems. Shell Legal Director Richard Wiseman has confirmed in writing that Shell’s promises of integrity have no legal standing. Like a bet with a bookmaker they are binding in honour only. They are intended to create an image of a highly principled multinational but in reality are worthless; a sham.
My family, our witnesses and our solicitor were besieged and intimidated by undercover agents in the run up to the High Court trial. Burglaries occurred at the residences of a key witness, my son’s solicitor, and at our own house. Our privileged documents were examined. Shell Legal Director Richard Wiseman admitted in writing the activities of one undercover agent who was caught red-handed illegally checking our mail during an intelligence gathering mission. Kendall Freeman, the solicitors acting for Shell made the same written admission but warned us in a letter that other agents were also being used against us. This was also meant to intimidate us.
In addition to the covert operations against us and various NGO’s including Greenpeace and Body Shop, Shell simultaneously set up and paid for a private army of 1400 Police spies supporting the then murderous regime in Nigeria ( Mail on Sunday article 4 April 04)
The preparation and prosecution of my sons High Court Trial against Shell was completely undermined by the “no holds barred” tactics used against us. One key witness, a former Shell manager of long standing was too frightened to give evidence. The Police carried out enquiries but Shell obviously did not disclose its shameful expertise via Hakluyt in using the very tactics being investigated; tactics which in a UK setting, amounted to a criminal conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.
This is why I have written to the Lord Chancellor seeking a police investigation. I have also sought assurances about the impartiality of the trial judge who has declined to answer a straightforward question about a possible professional/personal connection with the son of Shell’s Group Chairman at the time of the trial, Sir Mark Moody-Stuart. The judge is a man of the very highest integrity but I see no reason why he and others involved refuse to answer a legitimate question. I would be grateful if you could support my request to Lord Falconer for an investigation.
Please visit shell2004.com to read my sworn Affidavit concerning these matters. You will also find the world’s most comprehensive news portal website covering the Royal Dutch/Shell Group (on which my correspondence with Shell is being published).
Yours sincerely
Alfred Donovan
cc Malcolm Brinded Group MD Royal Dutch Shell Group
Jeroen van der Veer, Group Chairman, Royal Dutch Shell Group
Richard Wiseman, General Counsel Shell International Limited
Chip Cummins, Oil & Gasoline Reporter, The Wall Street Journal
Georgina Davies, BBC TV
Click here for ShellNews.net HOME PAGE