Pleading Chevron’s case

Re “Chevron’s legal fireworks,” Editorial, Sept. 5

When a company comes into possession of evidence suggesting a crime, it is expected to turn over that evidence to law enforcement officials.

Chevron did this when it obtained and verified videos of political party operatives and the sitting judge discussing the ongoing trial against Chevron in Ecuador, and did so publicly to ensure transparency.

The evidence on the videotapes is difficult to dispute. Were such conduct to occur in the U.S., The Times would respond with outrage, and justifiably so. But for some reason, your editorial condemns Chevron for advising authorities of this corruption.

The judge has correctly agreed to step aside from our case, but this still leaves unanswered the troubling interference by President Rafael Correa’s political party and administration in the courts in Ecuador.

We are not alone in raising these issues, as the U.S. State Department, the World Bank and legions of Ecuadorean jurists all have reported that the Ecuadorean judiciary suffers from political and financial corruption. In this environment, Chevron cannot get a fair hearing.

Don Campbell San Ramon, Calif.

The writer is Chevron’s manager of external communications.