Pluspetrol failed to respect Indigenous rights and the environment in Peru

Indigenous communities’ long fight for justice and remediation

In March 2020, four Indigenous federations – FEDIQUEP, FECONACOR, OPIKAFPE, and ACODECOSPAT – representing 101 Indigenous communities in northern Peru, filed a complaint with the Dutch NCP. They accused Pluspetrol of causing large-scale contamination during its 15 years of operating in Lot 1AB (now Lot 192) in the Peruvian Amazon. The company dumped toxic wastewater, neglected infrastructure, and left behind over three thousand(opens in new window) polluted sites. 

Although Pluspetrol ceased operations in the Lot 1AB in 2015, it has refused to clean up environmental damage or provide a remedy. The pollution has poisoned rivers and soil with heavy metals such as cadmium and lead, destroying biodiversity and threatening the health and livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples. 

Robinson Sandi, president of OPIKAFPE: “Pluspetrol left without cleaning up anything. Instead of remediating, they contaminated our land even more. The OECD’s recognition that Pluspetrol is responsible gives us hope that justice will finally be done.”

Aurelio Piñola, president of FECONACOR: “Many of us are still contaminated with heavy metals in our blood. I will keep fighting until Pluspetrol takes responsibility and our territory is remediated.”

Despite the Dutch NCP offering mediation in 2021, Pluspetrol refused to participate, showing a continued unwillingness to act in good faith.

NCP condemns Pluspetrol’s conduct

The NCP’s final statement finds that Pluspetrol acted in breach of the OECD Guidelines(opens in new window) across multiple critical areas. The NCP found that the company failed to engage meaningfully with impacted Indigenous communities, noting that Pluspetrol failed to foster a relationship of mutual trust with communities by concluding agreements that included disadvantageous elements for the communities.

On environmental protection, the NCP determined that Pluspetrol knowingly used outdated equipment, failed to apply good practice standards from the outset of its operations, and could have foreseen that dumping wastewater and neglecting pipelines would cause further pollution. The NCP also concluded that by failing to prevent and remedy this damage, Pluspetrol has not acted fully in line with the remedy expectations of the OECD Guidelines and did not do enough to respect the right to health of local communities who depend on a clean environment for their survival.

Furthermore, the NCP notes that the fact that the enterprise provides no publicly available information on taxation is not in line with what is expected under the OECD Guidelines. The company’s opaque international structure has allowed it to avoid accountability and evade taxes. This is the first NCP case filed against a so-called “letterbox” company, therefore setting an important precedent.

Lastly, the NCP called on the OECD to develop guidelines for companies in the extractive sector when they acquire concessions where ongoing damage to the environment and violations of human rights already exist. This guidance should set clear standards for corporate responsibilities regarding due diligence and remediation in such contexts. 

Joseph Wilde-Ramsing, advocacy director at SOMO: “For the first time, the Dutch NCP has recognised that companies cannot hide behind Dutch letterbox structures to avoid responsibility for human rights and environmental harm. This case sets an important international precedent.”

Implications in the Netherlands and beyond

The NCP’s findings carry concrete consequences for Pluspetrol’s future operations. Under Dutch government policy, the company should now be excluded from trade promotion and free trade agreements, export credit, and public procurement contracts. 

The case also exposes how the Netherlands’ lax corporate transparency enables company abuses. Pluspetrol, though Argentine-owned, operated via a Dutch letterbox structure, with part of its corporate structure registered in the Cayman Islands and Luxembourg. The statement increases pressure on the Dutch government to curb harmful letterbox constructions, strengthen corporate transparency rules, and enforce the OECD Guidelines more effectively. 

The complaint also highlights the importance of companies to ensure they disengage responsibly. Under the OECD Guidelines, companies must conduct due diligence over any decision to disengage, including ensuring any impacts caused during operations or as a result of the decision to disengage are remediated. In this case, Pluspetrol remains responsible for cleaning up its environmental pollution and providing compensation to those impacted. 

A signal for systemic change

For the Indigenous federations, the ruling is a long-sought validation of their experiences. It provides an official, public record of Pluspetrol’s harmful conduct and strengthens future advocacy, legal, and media efforts in the pursuit of justice. 

A delegation of indigenous leaders was in the Netherlands from 2–5 September to present their demands and speak directly to Dutch policymakers and media. We also held an event on Friday, 5 September at Pakhuis de Zwijger, Amsterdam, for a public debate with Dutch MPs and a delegation from Peru. A recording is available here(opens in new window) . To learn more about the complaint, visit the case page here.