When commodity traders get caught
CloseSocfin's maze in Cameroon
Companies and/or individuals involved: Socapalm (Cameroon), Socfin (Luxembourg), Bolloré Group (France)
Charges: Land grabbing and other human rights violations (violence)
Swiss lawyers used: N/A
Countries affected: Cameroon, France, Luxembourg, Belgium, Switzerland
Proceedings: France
Outcome: Pending
In France, a procedural fine of EUR 142,000 has already been imposed on Socfin for failure to cooperate with the French judicial authorities
Asset recovery: Pending
The case
This is a case that illustrates the limits of legal provisions, as well as the difficulties faced by local communities in holding the multinationals operating on their land to account. In Cameroon, the company Socapalm, which stands for Cameroonian Society of Palm Groves, has been at loggerheads with the villagers of Mbonjo (west of the country) for years. According to the population, exploitation of Socapalm’s oil palms, close to where they live, prevents them from accessing their land and visiting graves and pollutes their water supply. French businessman Vincent Bolloré, who controls 40% of the parent company Société Financière des Caoutchoucs (Socfin), has been accused by the press and civil society of seeking to intimidate dissenting voices by imposing gag procedures.
The French association Sherpa, which specializes in defending victims of economic crimes, has been supporting 145 of these villagers in their legal proceedings for more than 15 years. In 2010, Sherpa filed a complaint with three National Contact Points (NCPs) of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). It was aimed at the violence committed by the company Africa Security, commissioned by Socapalm, and the Cameroonian State, as well as the numerous social, environmental and land issues caused by the company’s activities. In 2013, the French NCP acknowledged breaches of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. After several months of mediation, the Bolloré Group and Sherpa agreed to implement an action plan in Cameroon to remedy this situation. This plan was not pursued, with the Bolloré Group deflecting the blame onto its partner Socfin, and the complaint was transferred to the Belgian NCP, which closed the case in 2017 without issuing a decision.
Faced with the multinational’s refusal to respect the commitments it made in 2013 to the local communities and the staff on Socapalm’s plantations, Sherpa – accompanied by a group of Cameroonian and international NGOs including the Swiss NGO Bread for All (now HEKS) – filed a lawsuit with the French courts in 2019. Vincent Bolloré argued that the agreement was confidential and could not be presented in a court. After his argument was rejected in two instances, the case was again brought before the Court of Nanterre.
At the same time, the 145 Cameroonians filed a lawsuit against Vincent Bolloré in 2021 before a French court. In December 2022, the grievances of Mbonjo’s inhabitants were partially admitted by the French judicial authorities, which ruled that Socapalm’s activities were “likely to infringe on the fundamental rights” of the plaintiffs, “in particular their right to a healthy environment”. The decision on the merits of the case has not yet been issued.
But the plaintiffs still had more problems ahead anyway. Socfin then refused to produce documents showing its links with Socapalm, which would impose a “duty of due diligence” on the French industrial giant Bolloré with regard to the activities of the Cameroonian entity.
The structure of Socfin – which is headquartered in Luxembourg – and the links with its various subsidiaries, especially in Switzerland, are particularly complex. All operational activities are grouped together in Switzerland. The group has three entities in Fribourg: Sogescol, Socfinco and Sodimex. They are tasked with marketing raw materials, providing technical assistance to plantations or supplying them with agricultural equipment. According to HEKS, these Swiss companies have “a decisive influence on the company that operates the plantation, with Sogescol even exercising de facto control since it acts as an exclusive trading partner”.
As Socfin failed to produce the documents requested by the French judicial authorities, a judge ordered it, in September 2023, to pay the plaintiffs a procedural fine of EUR 142,000. The legal battle continues.
Documents related to this affair
- Mongabay: ‘If they take our lands, we’ll be dead’: Cameroon village battles palm oil giant (26th June 2020)
- Versailles Court of Appeal: Socapalm (1st December 2022)
Timeline
Date | Event | Source |
1909 | Socfin Group is set up, with its origins going back to the Belgian colonial empire in Congo. The group is currently actively in the development and management of oil palm and rubber plantations. It operates in eight countries in Central and West Africa and in two countries in Southeast Asia. The Bolloré Group is a shareholder in Socfin and its founder, tycoon Vincent Bolloré, sits on the board of directors. | Socfin |
2000 | Socfin acquires Socapalm. Active since the 1970s, this former state-owned company operates an oil palm plantation in Mbonjo, Cameroon. Now privatized, it launches expansion projects, which are criticized for the deplorable working conditions and the way it treats the local population, which leads to disputes over land rights. Socapalm accounts for nearly half of Cameroon’s palm oil production. | Socfin |
7th December 2010-3rd June 2013 | Sherpa, which supports the 145 residents of Mbonjo, files a complaint with the OECD’s National Contact Point (NCP) in France, Belgium and Luxembourg concerning the activities of Socapalm, Socfin’s Cameroonian subsidiary. After long months of mediation, the Bolloré Group and Sherpa agree in June 2013 to implement an action plan in Cameroon to remedy the cohabitation issues raised by the oil palm operations in Mbonjo. | OECD Watch |
December 2014 | The Bolloré Group announces that it will have the action plan enforced, offloading its responsibilities to Socfin. Local communities are mobilized, but the vast majority of their demands remain unanswered. | The Guardian |
March 2017 | A “law on the duty of due diligence” is adopted in France. This mechanism stipulates that companies with more than 5,000 employees in France or 10,000 worldwide have the obligation to prevent social, environmental and governance risks related to their activities. This duty can also be extended to the risks of their subsidiaries and business partners (suppliers and subcontractors). | Ministère de l’Économie FR |
27th May 2019 | A coalition of ten Cameroonian and international NGOs – including Bread for All (now HEKS), coordinated by the association Sherpa, files a lawsuit against the Bolloré Group. This lawsuit, based on the complaint filed with the OECD, aims to enforce the commitments made in 2013. HEKS is dismissed by the court and will not be a civil party in these proceedings. | Bread for all. |
25th March 2021 | The argument of Vincent Bolloré, who maintained that the 2013 agreement was confidential and could not be presented in a court is dismissed at first instance. | Sherpa |
30th November 2021 | Meanwhile, the 145 Cameroonians sue the Bolloré Group in a French court, alleging that Socapalm’s operation prevents villagers from accessing their land and burial sites and pollutes their water sources. | France 24 |
9th June 2022 | The Court of Appeal again rejects Vincent Bolloré’s argument about confidentiality. The case is sent back to the Nanterre Court, where it is still pending. | Sherpa |
1st December 2022 | The Versailles Court of Appeals recognizes that Socapalm’s actions were “susceptible to infringe on the fundamental rights” of the 145 plaintiffs, “in particular their right to a healthy environment”. The Court asks Socfin to produce documents to explain the corporate links with Socapalm. | Farmland Grab |
29th September 2023 | A milestone victory for the 145 plaintiffs in their fight to have Vincent Bolloré held liable: the Nanterre Court imposes a fine of EUR 142,000 on Socfin for failing to produce the documents on its shareholders. | RFI International |
13th March 2024 | It was necessary for the plaintiffs to seize the trademark of Socfin’s Luxembourg holding company for the company to pay its fine and provide the documents requested by the court. The plaintiffs’ lawyer says he is convinced that he can “demonstrate that Bolloré has control over Socfin”. | Farmland Grab |
Legislative loopholes
- Land grabbing in remote areas where opportunities to access the local justice system are limited
- Complex corporate structures hindering access to justice for affected communities
- Non-binding procedures, such as OECD complaints, have little impact and do not legally require respect for human rights by multinationals
- No specific supervisory authority in the commodities sector and no appropriate due diligence obligations for traders