ian lundin yacht

The Best Yacht Concepts From Around The World

The Stunning Ritz Carlton EVRIMA Yacht

Gliding Across Tokyo’s Sumida River: The Mesmerizing Zipper Boat

CROCUS Yacht: An 48 Meter Beauty by Admiral

• Zuretti Interior Design
• Zuretti Interior
• Zuccon International Project
• Ziyad al Manaseer
• Zaniz Interiors. Kutayba Alghanim
• Yuriy Kosiuk
• Yuri Milner
• Yersin Yacht

• Superyachts

SAVANNAH Yacht – Extravagant $140 Million Superyacht

She can accommodate up to twelve guests and twenty-four crew members and is known for her unusual underwater lounge. SAVANNAH is available for charter for a weekly price of US $1 million per week.

SAVANNAH yacht interior

The SAVANNAH yacht is described as a masterpiece of design, and her interior has several unusual features. Twelve guests find space in her six cabins which were designed by the CG Design.

The master suite even has a private balcony, and many of the cabins were designed with unconventional rounded shapes to give the yacht a unique touch.

She has a hammam, open-concept gym, a spa and indoor glass balconies with large TV walls that can be individually programmed.

However, the most sought-after feature among charter guests is the underwater viewing lounge which can be transformed into a cinema if requested.

It was custom-designed and is unique to SAVANNAH. She also has a basketball court on board and never fails to surprise her guests with luxurious amenities.

Specifications

The SAVANNAH yacht was built by the Dutch shipyard Feadship and delivered to her owner in 2015.

She is 83.5 metres (273.11 ft) long with a 12.5-metre (41 ft) beam and a 3.95-metre (13 ft) draft. Her gross tonnage lies at 2,250 tons, and she sails under the flag of the Cayman Islands.

Her unique hybrid engines allow her to reach a range of 6,500 nautical miles. SAVANNAH’s top speeds lie at 17 knots, although she cruises most comfortably at 14 knots.

She was the first hybrid superyacht delivered by Feadship and remains one of their most elaborate projects.

The SAVANNAH yacht has a beautiful silvery-white exterior with large windows. Guests can enjoy her four decks with a large pool aft.

Her top deck features a spacious jacuzzi with fantastic views. Since SAVANNAH is available for charter, she carries a variety of toys and equipment on board.

Most notable are her three jet skis, two laser sailboats, four seabobs, three kayaks, and four standup paddleboards.

She also has four mountain bikes, inflatables, a trampoline, and towable toys available for the enjoyment of the guests.

SAVANNAH has four tenders, two of which are 9.5 meters (31 ft) long. Like her interior, the exterior of SAVANNAH was designed by the Parisian design office CG Design.

Her owner bought SAVANNAH for a total price of US $140 million in 2015. She generates additional annual running costs of US $10 to 15 million.

Do you have anything to add to this listing?

Love yachts join us., related posts.

VECTOR Yacht – Spectacular 57 Meter Superyacht

SYMPHONY Yacht – Luxuriant $150 Million Superyacht

PALLADIUM Yacht – Impressive $200M Superyacht

RADIANT Yacht – Masterful $300M Superyacht

• Yachts for sale
• Yachts for charter
• Brokerage News

• Take a closer look at the motor yacht of the year
• Yacht Harbour

Latest News

• Manage Account

Lundin legend Lukas passes away

Lukas Lundin, of the Lundin Group, has died at the age of 64 after a two-year struggle with brain cancer.

Lukas oversaw the transformation of Canmex Minerals, from an East African mining company, into Africa Oil. He was also “instrumental” in the inception of Africa Energy in 2015, the company said.

Lukas played a role in the launch of Lundin Energy. He was critical to the combination of the company’s exploration and production assets with Aker BP.

A joint statement from his sons, Harry, Adam, Jack and William, said they “could not have had a better father and mentor”.

“Our family is deeply saddened about Lukas’ passing but takes comfort in the knowledge that his legacy will live on for generations to come. Having worked side-by-side with Lukas for many years, all of us look forward to continuing to build on the successes of the companies within the Lundin Group – with the support of our shareholders and stakeholders, not least the members of the local communities where we operate,” they said.

“The companies in the Lundin Group stand stronger than ever and the Lundin family is united in our commitment to remain long-term shareholders.”

Lukas Lundin retired from chairing Lundin Mining in February.

Adolf Lundin founded the Lundin Group in 1971. He had two sons, Lukas and Ian. Companies in the Lundin Group have a combined capitalisation of around $11 billion.

According to family legend, in 1970, Adolf proposed a division between his sons of the oil business and the mining. Lukas, then aged 12, opted for the mines and Ian, aged 9, went for oil and gas.

Continued vision

Africa Oil president and CEO Keith Hill described Lukas as a “leading force in responsible, sustainable and profitable development of natural resources”.

“His tireless enthusiasm, his endless persistence and his steadfast knowledge that we were performing an invaluable service to the world by working with developing nations to create value through the responsible development  of their resources, should be a model for future generations,” Hill said.

The Africa Oil official pledged to continue Lukas’ vision with the third generation of the Lundin family.

Africa Energy president and CEO Garrett Soden voiced condolences for group chairman William Lundin and his family.

“Lukas was a legendary entrepreneur whose track record speaks for itself.  The Africa Energy team is very thankful for the Lundin family’s continued support, and we look forward to working with the third generation as they carry on Lukas’ vision in the natural resources sector.”

Lukas Lundin had a fortune of around $2.5 billion. He was the owner of the Savannah yacht, said to be the world’s largest metallic-painted floating object .

• Africa Energy
• Garrett Soden
• Lukas Lundin
• Lundin Energy
• Lundin Group

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

• OMX: ETX SEK0.00

• About Etrion
• Corporate Information
• Corporate Governance
• About The Lundin Group
• Highlights and Milestones
• Press Releases
• Interview and Articles
• Stock Overview
• Financial Reports
• Annual Reports
• Presentations
• Earnings Call Recordings
• Financial Calendar
• Annual General Meeting
• Analyst Coverage
• Contact Info

The Lundin Group is an internationally recognized group of publicly-traded, natural resource companies founded in 1971 by Adolf H. Lundin and led by sons Lukas H. Lundin and Ian H. Lundin. In business for more than three decades, the Lundins are leaders in identifying superior global investment opportunities in the natural resource sector. With a mandate to maximize shareholder value, the Lundins have produced consistent, long-term results and have earned unprecedented loyalty among their shareholders. The Lundins recognize value and opportunity long before most others and their uninhibited pursuit of highly productive properties has led to the development of several world-class ore deposits as well as oil and gas fields.

Well over $3 billion in financing has been raised to develop Lundin Group projects. The 11 companies operated by the Lundins are actively engaged in the exploration, development and production of oil and gas, gold, copper, cobalt, zinc, lead, silver, nickel, diamonds, uranium, iodine, sulphate and nitrate.

The Lundin Group operates in more than 25 different countries and has been highly commended by local communities and governments for efforts in developing a set of protocols that ensure issues of environmental and cultural concern are addressed as well as economic benefits and employment opportunities.

Joint venture partners have included some of the largest companies in the world including Gulf Oil, ARCO, Anschutz Overseas, Elf Hydrocarbures, Enterprise Oil, Petronas Carigali, Petro Vietnam, Barrick Gold Corporation, WMC Limited, Ampolex (Mobil), Boliden AB, Rio Algom, Bhpbilliton, Phelps Dodge, North Limited, Rio Tinto, BP, Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., Jogmec, the Washington Group, Freeport McMoRan and Gazprombank.

The Lundin Group is headquartered in Vancouver, Canada. For more information, click here .

Lundin Group Brochure

• Terms of Use

07 Jul Ian’s Birthday Gifts

We are so grateful to the Lundin family for holding a fundraiser to support the mountain gorillas of Bwindi Impenetrable National Park in honor of Ian Lundin’s 60th birthday on 12th September 2020. I met Virginia and Ian Lundin in 2017 through Speke Holiday Safaris where they stayed at Clouds Lodge in the Nkuringo sector. It was wonderful  to take the Lundins to see the endangered mountain gorillas and share our work at Conservation Through Public Health, where we are keeping gorillas healthy and their habitats secure by improving the health of gorillas, and the health and livelihoods of local communities who they share their fragile habitat with.

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted many lives including the local communities who are hungry and desperate, owing to the absence of tourism, and sadly the gorillas have also been affected. Tragically, Rafiki, the lead silverback of Nkuringo gorilla group was killed by a poacher who speared him when setting snares for duiker and bushpigs to feed his family. The donations from  Ian’s birthday gifts will be used to improve gorilla monitoring through disease surveillance and camera traps, and the well being of local communities through providing them with fast growing crops, reducing their need to enter the gorillas’ forest habitat and  putting them at risk from human disease and injuries. We would like to thank Ian and Virginia very much for all this great support.

Our trip to Uganda in 2017 and the amazing experience spending time with the mountain gorillas with Dr. Gladys was probably one of the most touching and fulfilling experiences of our lives- these gentle giants who live on leaves, roots and bark are not-so-distant relatives of ours and we have a moral duty to protect them from extinction - we urge all of you to visit the gorillas at least once in your life - you will not regret it.

No comments.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Advertise With Us
• Case Studies
• Subscribe To Newsletter
• Decarbonisation
• Gas & LNG
• Middle East & North Africa
• North America
• South America
• Thought Leadership
• Video Interviews
• About dmg energy
• Energy events
• Connections
• Gastech 2024 News
• Energy Connects Quarterly Review

Oil Billionaire Ian Lundin Risks Jail Sentence as Historic Trial on Sudan War Crimes Begins

By Bloomberg

Sep 05, 2023

Ian Lundin, chairman of Lundin Petroleum AB, left, and Alex Schneiter, chief executive officer of Lundin Petroleum AB, pose for a photograph ahead of an interview in Stockholm, Sweden, on Thursday, Nov. 29, 2018. Photographer: Mikael Sjoberg/Bloomberg

(Bloomberg) -- The oil billionaire ex-owner of Lundin Oil AB will this week appear in Sweden’s biggest ever criminal prosecution over his alleged involvement in atrocities in Sudan to help further the company’s business in the war-torn region. 

Ian H. Lundin, former chairman and controlling owner of Lundin Oil, and Alex Schneiter, its ex-chief executive officer, are accused by Swedish prosecutors of complicity in war crimes in Sudan between 1999 and 2003. The trial at the Stockholm district court follows an almost 13-year investigation and is scheduled to last two-and-a-half years. 

Both Lundin and Schneiter deny all the allegations.

“No other trial has been close to being as time-consuming,” Thomas Bodstrom, a lawyer representing a group of Sudanese in the prosecution, said in an email. The two men risk jail terms if found guilty. 

The company, which sold its oil and gas business in 2022 and changed its name to Orrön Energy AB, is separately facing a confiscation order of 2.4 billion Swedish kronor ($218 million) over the allegations.

The case will probe Lundin’s presence in an area of South Sudan known as Block 5A, where Sudanese armed forces led military operations to take control of the area and ease the way for Lundin Oil’s exploration, the prosecutors argued. 

They started the investigation in 2010 after a report from the European Coalition on Oil in Sudan found that 12,000 people died and 160,000 were forcibly displaced in Block 5A between 1997 and 2003.

“People were abused, raped and murdered. The rivers were poisoned, killing cattle and causing famine,” Bodstrom said. “The prosecutors have strong evidence that Lundin Oil, through its actions, shares the responsibility.”

According to the prosecution, the military systematically attacked civilians, through bombardments from transport planes, shooting civilians from helicopter gunships, abducting and plundering civilians and burning entire villages.

“The prosecution has no chance for success because the charges are based on allegations that are not supported by the investigation,” Torgny Wetterberg, Ian Lundin’s lawyer, said. “It’s a mystery why the prosecution is pursuing this case.” 

In a 2018 interview with Bloomberg, Lundin and Schneiter denied the accusations, saying neither they, nor anyone else at the company had knowledge of any crimes committed. They said the company’s presence helped the local population in an area haunted by a decade of battles among armed groups.

“We are facing Sweden’s longest trial ever. If you need that much time to show that you have a case, you don’t have a case,” Per E Samuelson, Schneiter’s lawyer said in an email. “There is no connection between any action Alexander Schneiter has taken and any combats in Sudan.”

©2023 Bloomberg L.P.

By Rafaela Lindeberg

Related articles

Oil Snaps Three-Day Drop as Report Points to US Stockpile Draw

Oil Holds Drop as Traders Track Chinese Demand, US Stockpiles

Woodside Looks to Build ‘Dream Team of LNG’ at Acquired US Plant

Eni signed exclusivity agreement with KKR for the potential sale of a minority stake in Enilive

Woodside's quarterly revenues exceed $3 billion backed by strategic milestones

Oil Rises as Biden Quits US Race, Blazes Threaten Canadian Wells

Keeping the energy industry connected.

Subscribe to our newsletter and get the best of Energy Connects directly to your inbox each week.

By subscribing, you agree to the processing of your personal data by dmg events as described in the Privacy Policy.

More oil news

Kamala Harris Seen as Tougher Oil Industry Opponent Than Biden

PetroChina joins Oil and Gas Decarbonisation Charter

Galp reports 16% rise in Q2 2024 net profit amid higher oil prices and lower production costs

Nigeria’s Dangote Refinery Targets Output of 550,000 Barrels a Day

Oil Falls With Broader Commodity Weakness Amidst Listless Trade

Occidental Planning to Sell Bonds in Up to Five Parts

Bolivia’s YPFB to invest $400 million in new hydrocarbon exploration and development

Cleaner Jets Needed by 2035 to Reach Net-Zero Goal, Study Finds

QatarEnergy acquires 20% stake in Suriname offshore block in partnership with Chevron

Aramco announces completion of $6 billion bond issuance

Top stories.

TC Energy Nears Sale of Gas Pipeline Stake to Indigenous Groups

GE Vernova Now Must Explain Broken Wind Turbine to Investors

SunPower Plunges After Halting Installs and Shipments

AI Boom to Slow Pace of US Emissions Reduction, Report Says

TotalEnergies to sell UK West of Shetland assets to the Prax Group

Trafigura and Frontier Group of Companies acquire Mountain Creek Power Plant in Texas

SLB's Karim Badawi appointed as Egypt's new Minister of Petroleum and Mineral Resources

AIQ and Halliburton’s Landmark announce Global iEnergy agreement for RoboWell solution

Blastr Green Steel selects Primetals Technologies for ultra-low CO₂ steel plant in Finland

Elsewhere on Energy Connects

EnBW to invest €1 billion in national hydrogen core network in Germany

Australia finalises offshore exploration permits to support gas supply and economic transition

The energy trilemma clock is ticking

UNDP: energy sector needs profound re-engineering for a just transition

Watch/Listen

Why data centres and AI could shake up the global LNG market

ABB helping shape a sustainable energy future

AI and virtual twins can unlock endless potential for the industry

Why energy executives expect the world to hit net zero by 2060

Partner content

Navigating the trading seas: exploring the significance of benchmarks.

Back to the Future(s): the best commodities benchmarks are still physically settled

Ebara Elliott Energy offers a range of products for a sustainable energy economy

Essar outlines how its CBM contribution is bolstering for India’s energy landscape

Asia needs a pragmatic pathway to decarbonisation

OPEC's output cut extension: analysing the global impact

Setting the pace in decarbonising steel production

BCG on making energy demand more efficient and sustainable

JERA’s decarbonisation roadmap to forge a clean-energy future

CSIS: long-term LNG demand to reshape global export capacity growth

More women in energy vital to the industry’s success

India’s energy sector presents lucrative opportunities for global companies

Oil India charts the course to ambitious energy growth

Maritime sector is stepping up to the challenges of decarbonisation

Positioning petrochemicals market in the emerging circular economy

Explore energy connects.

• dmg energy events

Stay Updated

©2023 Energy Connects. All Rights Reserved

Back To Top

Trial Starts in Sweden of 2 Oil Executives Accused of Complicity in War Crimes in Sudan

Two executives of a Swedish oil exploration and production company have gone on trial in Stockholm for securing the company’s operations in Sudan through their alleged complicity in war crimes 20 years ago

Jonas Ekströmer

Ian Lundin speaks to journalists in the Stockholm district court in Stockholm, Tuesday Sept. 5, 2023. The trial started Tuesday in Stockholm of two executives of a Swedish oil exploration and production company, accused of complicity in the military’s war crimes in Sudan 20 years ago by securing the company’s oil operations in the African nation. Ian Lundin, former chairman of Lundin Oil, and Alex Schneiter, its former CEO, are accused of complicity in grave war crimes in Sudan from 1999 to 2003. (Jonas Ekströmer/TT News Agency via AP)

STOCKHOLM (AP) — Two executives of a Swedish oil exploration and production company went on trial Tuesday in Stockholm for securing the company's operations in Sudan through their alleged complicity in war crimes in 20 years ago.

Swedish prosecutors claim that former Lundin Oil chairman Ian Lundin and the company's former CEO, Alex Schneiter supported the Sudanese government of former dictator Omar al-Bashir, who was toppled in an April 2019 popular uprising.

The two executives are accused of involvement in the Sudanese government's military campaign to clear an area in southern Sudan for oil production. The campaign "entailed the Sudanese military and regime-allied militia systematically attacking civilians or at least carrying out systematic attacks in violation of the principles of distinction and proportionality," the prosecutors said.

Lundin told reporters at the Stockholm District Court that the accusations were “completely false.”

“We look forward to defending ourselves in court,” he said.

The trial is expected to run until early 2026.

A 1983-2005 civil war between the Muslim-dominated north and Christian south tore Sudan apart. A separate conflict in Darfur, the war-scarred region of western Sudan, began in 2003. Thousands of people were killed and nearly 200,000 displaced.

South Sudan gained independence from Sudan in 2011 to become the world’s youngest nation.

Swedish prosecutors said the Sudanese government conducted offensive military operations in the Block 5A oil field and its vicinity in southern Sudan between May 1999 and March 2003 to gain control of areas for oil prospecting and to create the necessary conditions for oil extraction, the prosecution said.

During the military operations, severe violations of international humanitarian law were committed, it said.

In a statement, the prosecution said Lundin and Schneiter “participated in the conclusion" of an agreement involving a right to search for and extract oil in a larger area in southern Sudan "in exchange for the payment of fees and a share in future profits."

Lundin was the operator of a consortium of companies exploring Block 5A, including Malaysia’s Petronas Carigali Overseas, OMV (Sudan) Exploration GmbH of Austria, and the Sudanese state-owned oil company Sudapet Ltd.

The prosecution wants the executives barred from conducting business activities for 10 years and the Swedish company fined 3 million kronor ($272,250). They also want 1.4 billion kronor ($127 million) confiscated from Lundin Oil because of economic benefits that were achieved from the alleged crimes.

In Sweden, the maximum penalty for complicity in war crimes is a life prison sentence, which generally means a minimum of 20 to 25 years. Prosecutors typically request the punishment they want for a conviction at the end of trials.

Copyright 2023 The  Associated Press . All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Photos You Should See - July 2024

Tags: Associated Press , business , politics , courts , war crimes , world news

America 2024

Subscribe to our daily newsletter to get investing advice, rankings and stock market news.

See a newsletter example .

You May Also Like

The 10 worst presidents.

U.S. News Staff Feb. 23, 2024

The Best Cartoons on Donald Trump

July 23, 2024, at 3:49 p.m.

Joe Biden Behind The Scenes

July 21, 2024

The Harris Campaign Begins

Laura Mannweiler July 23, 2024

Cheatle Resigns After Trump Shooting

Harris Secures Support for Nomination

Aneeta Mathur-Ashton July 23, 2024

Home Sales Tank as Prices Hit New High

Tim Smart July 23, 2024

A GOP Pivot. Or Not So Much?

Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder July 22, 2024

Who Will Harris Choose to Be Her VP?

Alan Kronenberg July 22, 2024

Secret Service Director Irks Congress

Laura Mannweiler July 22, 2024

The Lundin Group

Founded by Adolf H. Lundin over 50 years ago, the Lundin Group of Companies comprises separate, individually managed public companies focused on the minerals, metals, renewables and energy sectors. Our expertise ranges from early exploration to development and production. 

While each company is separate and individually managed: the Lundin family is majority or major shareholder through its family trust; a Lundin Group company’s board of directors or advisors to the board will comprise a Lundin family member and may also include representative(s) of their choice; a Lundin family member may also occupy an executive position; and Lundin Group companies can leverage advisors and expertise of individuals within the group’s network. Lundin Group companies can also partner with the award-leading Lundin Foundation to optimize their ESG performance and sustainable development initiatives.

Over the years, the Lundin Group has earned a reputation for executing and delivering projects to the highest standards and to the satisfaction of all stakeholders. Click here to read our 2023 Highlights.

Lundin Group Companies

OTCQB - BBSRF

bluestoneresources.ca

View Profile

faradaycopper.com

Chile, Argentina

Nasdaq First North Growth Market – FIL

filocorp.com

fireweedmetals.com

Canada, Malaysia, France

Nasdaq Stockholm – IPCO

international-petroleum.com

Nasdaq Stockholm – LUC

lucaradiamond.com

Nasdaq Stockholm – LUG

lundingold.com

Sweden, Portugal, USA, Chile, Brazil

Nasdag Stockholm - LUMI

lundinmining.com

Côte d’Ivoire

montagegold.com

ngexminerals.com

Norway, Finland and Sweden

Nasdaq Stockholm - ORRON

Nasdaq First North Growth Market – SNM

shamaranpetroleum.com

lundinfoundation.org

Our Founder,

Adolf H. Lundin with his sons Lukas H. Lundin (left) and Ian H. Lundin (right).

Adolf H. Lundin created the template for the Lundin Group of Companies as miners, oilers and natural resource explorers. He was relentless in his pursuit of new finds and passionate about the need to supply raw materials to a growing world economy. Adolf was a “rock” star in the true sense of the word in the resource industry. His worldwide followers adored him and happily called themselves “Lundinies.” 

His legacy looms large and his values remain intact in the hands of his sons and grandsons. Success measured as much, if not more so, in respect for all. He truly was a caring, giving individual who believed that sharing wealth was mandatory – while meeting the resource needs of a rapidly growing world and all stakeholders.

But above all we honour Adolf.

Lundin Group Today and Beyond

With an entrepreneurial and adventurous outlook on business and life, Lukas H. Lundin and Ian H. Lundin followed in their father's footsteps. Innovative, people-oriented leaders, they have been responsible for the Lundin Group's extraordinary growth. The Lundin Group continues to build futures based on the principles established by visionary founder, Adolf H. Lundin.

The Lundin Group is now lead by Lukas Lundin's sons Adam Lundin, Jack Lundin, Will Lundin and Harry Lundin who represent the third generation along with several other family members.

Adam Lundin

Chair, lundin mining corporation.

Jack Lundin

President and chief executive officer of lundin mining corporation.

Jack Lundin was appointed President in 2022 and took over the role of CEO in December 2023. He has extensive experience in the natural resource industry....

William Lundin

President and chief executive officer of international petroleum.

Harry Lundin

Director of international petroleum.

What sets Lundin Group companies apart from many others in the resource industry is our belief that long-term growth is best achieved through shared community values. Our primary goal is always to build lasting relationships with our employees, the immediate community and all levels of government. When we invest, we do so for the long term. With a firm recognition of our environmental responsibility.

BUILT ON EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT

SHAREHOLDER RETURN ON INVESTMENT- PAST PROJECTS HAVE GENERATED MORE THAN $15 BILLION OF VALUE

• 1995 1,757% International Musto
• 1999 1,091% Argentina Gold
• 2001 139% Lundin Oil
• 2004 850% Lundin Mining (EuroZinc)
• 2006 609% International Uranium
• 2006 352% Valkyries Pet.
• 2007 558% Tenke Mining
• 2008 961% Tanganyika Oil
• 2010 1,041% Red Back Mining
• 2022 449% Josemaria
• 2022 15,600% Lundin Energy

The Lundin’s unique natural resource development strategy has consistently proven to enhance long-term stakeholder value. It will continue to do so as we move forward. Together.

How we do it

Investing in long-term management.

The Lundin Group of Companies has a unique management structure that encourages local community growth supported by over 50 years of experience in resource development.

People managers who have proven their worth as loyal, hardworking and caring individuals lead each Lundin company. Each manager fully subscribes to the overall entrepreneurial management style and strategic direction of the Lundin family and are committed to succeed for the sake of all involved.

Senior management turnover is rare, largely because our selection process is careful and considered, and provides and supports the opportunity to make their business a success. This gives the Lundin Group an unbeatable human resources track record.

Progressive, responsible and entrepreneurial. That’s the Lundin Group’s way to manage futures.

Building Successful Partnerships

The Lundin Group of Companies has worked with some of the most successful resource development companies in the world.

Relationships are built according to the location and task at hand with a goal of synergistic growth – based on collective experience.

• Ampolex (Mobil)
• Anschutz Overseas
• Barrick Gold
• Bhpbilliton
• Det norske oljeselskap
• Elf Hydrocarbures
• Enterprise Oil
• Freeport-McMoRan
• Gazprombank
• Marathon Oil
• Metallica Mining
• North Limited
• Nuclear Fuel Services
• Pan Pacific Copper
• Petro Vietnam
• Petronas Carigali
• Phelps Dodge
• Washington Group
• WMC Limited

Responsible Mineral and Energy Development

The Lundin Group is committed to addressing the challenge of sustainability - delivering value to its shareholders while simultaneously providing economic and social benefits to impacted communities and minimizing its environmental footprint.

Commitments include:

• Prioritizing the health and safety of employees and proximate communities
• Meeting and, where possible, exceeding all regulatory requirements for environmental performance
• Supporting and protecting internationally recognized human rights
• Actively engaging and maintaining dialogue with a broad range of stakeholders in a spirit of transparency and good faith
• Maximizing employment and business opportunities for locally impacted communities
• Maintaining the highest standards of corporate governance and ethics
• The Lundin Foundation www.lundinfoundation.org .

The Lundin Foundation is a registered Canadian non-profit supported by the Lundin Group of Companies. Founded by Lukas Lundin in 2006, the Foundation elevates developmental practices across the Lundin Group, ensuring resource operations mobilize local economic opportunities and benefit surrounding communities.

Working with the Lundin Group of companies worldwide, the Lundin Foundation supports its partners in developing strategic community investments and improving their Environmental and Social Governance (ESG) performance.

Group Total Market Cap

* July 2022 - Lundin Energy acquired by BP Aker

CORPORATE OFFICE Suite 2800, Four Bentall Centre, 1055 Dunsmuir Street, Vancouver, BC, V7X 1L2 Tel: +1 (604) 689-7842

STOCKHOLM ADDRESS Hovslagargatan 5, 3rd floor, SE-111 48 Stockholm, Sweden Tel: +46-8-4405450

©2024The Lundin Group | Site by Adnet

• Latin America
• Defenders’ Database
• Defenders’ Days
• Emergency Fund
• Natalia Project
• Core International Crimes
• Civil Rights Defender of the Year Award
• About Civil Rights Defenders
• Annual Reports
• Anti-Corruption and Complaints
• Code of Conduct
• Impact Report
• Fundraising Policy
• Policy on Equity, Investment of Cash and Cash Equivalents
• Privacy Policies
• Contact – Departments
• Board of Directors

Join Our Team

• Publications
• Corporate Partnerships
• Memorial or Celebratory Donation

Report 12: Part Two of Ian Lundin’s Defense’s opening presentation  

• Trial Reports
• 18 December 2023 20:24

During this week’s proceedings, Ian Lundin’s defence focused extensively on elucidating the international community’s stance on oil extraction in Sudan and detailing the diverse armed groups operating in the region. Additionally, they continued outlining their perspective on the nature of the conflict. If you missed last week’s report, you could find a recap of the defence’s viewpoint on the conflict in Sudan and the Lundin company’s limited operations in Block 5A. 

The International Community’s Approach to Oil Extraction in Sudan

The defence presented different reports to depict the international community’s approach to oil production in Sudan during the years 1997-2003. Ian Lundin’s defense attorney Thomas Tendorf, noted that the criminal case concerned an allegation that the government of Sudan used indiscriminate violence against civilians in order for the Lundin company to continue operating in the region. Tendorf stated, “We are not in a tribunal of opinion but a criminal court. This is important because we will come across opinions and not facts in the case.” The defence described how there were different opinions regarding oil production in developing countries, but no one was necessarily right or wrong. Some argued that oil companies should not operate in countries where there was an ongoing conflict. Others, however, believed that oil production could be desirable in a developing country in order to encourage and implement peace talks.  To support this optimistic perspective, the defence referred to a statement from the UN Security Council from 2001 on the lifting of the United States’ unilateral sanctions against Sudan which noted that the oil production and the oil companies’ operations had resulted in improvements in Sudan and could enable peace in the country.  

The defence argued that the international community was overall positive toward oil production during the time period covered by the indictment. They further claimed that no criticism was directed at all from the international communities towards the oil companies active in Sudan and that no demands were made for them to wind down their operations. The defence also noted that no investigations were started regarding alleged violations of international law within the framework of the oil operations carried out in the south of Sudan. The defence argued that NGO criticisms of the oil industry s were known and assessed by the international community and asserted that these reports, while acknowledged, did not dissuade the international community from criticising Sudan’s broader democratic and human rights issues. The defence thus claimed that the criticism from the international community was not connected to the oil industry as the prosecution had presented. The defence also noted that the UN Security Council could have intervened by imposing sanctions as it had in other parts of the world. Although the UN had imposed sanctions on Sudan in 1996, they did not apply to the oil operations in the country. The defence believed that this indicated that the UN had its eyes on the situation in Sudan but did not consider it necessary to impose sanctions regarding issues related to oil production.  

The defence further argued that the European Union’s approach to oil operations in southern Sudan did not deviate from the UN’s. During the period covered by the indictment, several fact-finding missions were carried out in which EU ambassadors visited Sudan, including a fact-finding mission in May 2001, where the EU ambassadors visited Block 5A to assess the situation in light of the criticisms made by NGOs. The defence pointed out that this visit resulted in a report from the EU ambassador stating that the oil companies deserved praise for having improved the situation for people living in the area. The defence read a 2010 email from the former lead prosecutor, Magnus Elving, in which Elving referred to this statement and noted that the report was positive towards the oil company’s operations. The defence added that it was hard to imagine that this could happen at the same time that serious crimes were taking place. 

The defence also addressed Sweden’s approach to oil extraction in Sudan. They referred to a Swedish parliamentary debate from the 3 rd of April 2001 where the Swedish politician Bernt Ekholm stated that the extraction of oil in developing countries could be stopped, but that prospecting for oil did not have the same negative effects and could, therefore, continue. Here, the defence sought to stress that Sudan Limited was prospecting for oil but was not an oil producer. They described the Swedish government as being aware of international concerns about Sudan and of the NGO criticism of the Swedish oil operations there, especially since Lundin Oil was a Swedish company. The Swedish government’s position was debated in parliamentary hearings on April 3, 2001, and May 2, 2001, where Anna Lindh, the minister for foreign affairs, expressed her position on the issue as follows: “The day the UN says that it would be good if the companies stopped oil extraction, I will support that proposal.” The defence observed, “She would not have expressed herself in that way if the NGO reports highlighted during the trial were to be believed.”

The Nature of the Conflict  

The defence spent a long time describing their view of the nature of the conflict. They explained that the southern parts of Sudan consisted mainly of the Dinka and Nuer ethnic groups and referred to a February 2002 report by UN Volunteer that identified 56 ethnic groups and 600 different ethnic subgroups. The defence claimed that “Whatever numbers you will find, it is always mainly about two groups, Nuer and Dinka, who have been in conflict with each other for a long time.” To support this argument, the defence referred to a book called “The Nuer” by E.E. Evans-Pritchard, stating that they would read different chapters from the book describing Evans-Pritchard’s experience during his time living with the Nuer people. When the defense presented this book, they did not mention when it had been published, which caused the prosecutor Henrik Attorps, to interject, “I just have a short question: when is the book from?” The defence responded that it was from 1940. They then continued to refer to different chapters from the book, saying that it depicted long-standing disputes between the Dinka and Nuer, but also disputes within the Nuer people. The defense read aloud Evans-Pritchard’s descriptions: “Within a tribe, also fighting frequently results from disputes about cattle between its section and between individuals of the same section, even in the same village.” Navigating through different chapters of the book, the defence highlighted disputes not only between the Dinka and Nuer but also within the Nuer community itself. Citing a passage that underscored internal tribal conflicts, they argued that historical records depicted a lack of peaceful coexistence between these ethnic groups. The defence further bolstered its stance by referencing UN reports, pointing out the SPLA’s split into Dinka and Nuer factions in the 1990s. Quoting a UN special rapporteur from February 1994, they argued that the conflict escalated following this factional split, reinforcing their assertion that hostilities between the Dinka and Nuer were both prolonged and severe. The defence stated, “With this, we want to show that there have been conflicts between these two groups for a long time and of a serious nature.” 

Turning to a 2002 report from UNICEF, the defence contended that the report did not align with the prosecution’s assertion of a criminal act. Stressing the importance of defining the conflict’s nature, the defence argued that the prosecution’s claim of a specific armed conflict, which they described as the North and South conflict, necessitated scrutiny. They insisted that alleged violence against civilians should be contextualised within the framework and could not be attributed to the many other conflicts unfolding in Sudan during the same period. The defence claimed that long before 1997, and during and after the period covered by the indictment, there were conflicts between Nuer and Dinka that were separate from the North-South conflict.   

The defence also stated that the prosecution’s presentations did not give any clear answers on where the alleged attacks by the Sudanese regime had occurred. The defence claimed that there were sporadic reports of attacks, with some occurring in the southern parts of Sudan and others in the northern parts. What emerged from the investigation, the defence claimed, was that the intensity of the fighting in the north and south had varied during the indictment period. The defence referred to reports detailing several ceasefires between the GOS and the SPLMA in order to argue that the alleged military attack by the GOS presented by the prosecution would have taken place during periods of ceasefires between the government and the SPLMA. The defence supported this argument by displaying on the courtroom screens an image of a calendar with red markings indicating that the alleged attacks overlapped with ceasefires of various kinds. The defence concluded this chapter of its presentation by stating that there had been ceasefires for a very long time in the area and that there was not a correlation between the claims made in the prosecution’s allegations.  

The defence also wanted to respond to the accusations made by the prosecution that the GOS had used a divide-and-rule strategy. The defence argued that there had been fighting independent of other armed conflicts in Sudan and that the government had not used a divide-and-rule strategy. The defence asserted that the prosecution had claimed that the Khartoum Peace Agreement was a part of the divide-and-rule strategy to take control of the area. The defence argued that the investigation did not support the claim that the Sudanese government took control of areas in southern Sudan as the prosecution stated. To take such control of Block 5A would have required large military groups, for which the defence argued the government did not have resources. They claimed that the only control established by the Khartoum Peace Agreement was that it established peace between various groups in the area and the government, which was the very purpose of the agreement. The defence also referred to different reports to show that the GOS tried to mediate between different warring parties to bring peace to the area. An internal security report from 1999 described how “The army and the security attempted to persuade Peter Gadet to stand his forces down.” It was further noted that they spoke with rebel commander Tito Biel to make him not attack Peter Gadet and that the Vice President of Sudan, Riek Machar, held peace talks, which were expected to last for several weeks. A subsequent report from October 2001 stated that “The peace existing between the various factions has continued and is supported by the government authorities and the army.” The defence then referred to several reports that described how the government held peace talks and tried to mediate between the different groups. The defence concluded by stating that “All these examples directly contradict that the government would have encouraged fighting in Block 5A. On the contrary, it shows that they tried to counter this and make peace between the different groups.” 

The defence also wanted to respond to the prosecution’s allegation that the GOS control over the area of Block 5A and their attacks against civilians enabled Sudan Limited’s operation in the area. The defence argued that the government’s operations in response to the armed groups destroyed the opportunities for Sudan Limited to operate in Block 5A. They thus concluded that it was the government’s fighting of the armed groups that resulted in the oil operation not being able to be carried out as planned. The defence stated that the attacks that involved the military were due to them being subjected to ambushes and attacks by armed rebel groups. The defence thus claimed that the Sudanese military was exposed to attacks, which was different from them conducting offensive military operations as described by the prosecution. The defense argued that if this had been a strategy used by the government, it was, in any case, not one that created better conditions for the company to conduct its business.      

The defence noted that what could be deduced from the investigation was that fighting became more violent. They provided different explanations for why the fighting may have worsened: the increased availability of weapons in the area, the armed conflicts in the neighbouring countries, and competition for natural resources such as pastures and water were cited as reasons. Furthermore, the defence emphasised that the security reports described power struggles between the different leaders of militia groups, which could have led to more fighting. Alcohol use amongst the groups was also stated to have been a cause of the increased conflicts, which the defence argued should not be underestimated. The defence thus claimed that there were several reasons for the increased conflicts in the area and that it was not clear in the investigation that the oil operations would have affected the conflicts to a greater degree.      

The Different Armed Groups in the Area

The defence then continued to describe the different armed groups that were operating in the region. The defence stated that there was no investigation in the case into what the armed groups looked like and how organised they were. It was noted that within the groups, there had been a large number of individuals, some of whom acted independently while others were in groups, but there was no evidence that showed exactly how the different groups operated. The defence referred to internal security reports that described the various armed groups as inexperienced and disorganised. While the prosecution had alleged that some of the armed groups were allied with the Sudanese regime, the defence claimed that it was not clear from the prosecution’s presentation what regime allied actually meant and that there was no actual evidence of closer cooperation between the Sudanese military and the armed groups. They thus claimed that when a certain armed group had been named as regime allied, it did not necessarily mean that they were acting in concert with or on behalf of the Sudanese government’s military. The defence stated that, to the contrary, it had been shown in the investigation that neither the government nor the Sudanese military had any control over the armed groups.   

The defence described the SPLMA as having an aid organisation called Sudan Relief and Rehabilitation Agency (SRRA), which operated in the areas controlled by that group. They argued that the NGOs working there needed to cooperate with the SPLMA to gain access to those areas and to provide aid. The SPLMA had reportedly issued an ultimatum to the NGOs that wanted to operate in the region to agree to their terms in a Memorandum of Understanding and threatened that they would not be able to ensure the NGOs security if they did not agree to the terms. The defence asserted that this resulted in criticism from, among others, the EU Commission, which issued a statement on the 29 th of February 2000 condemning “the explicit threat made by the SPLMA to the safety of humanitarian agencies who do not sign the Memorandum of Understanding between NGOs and the Sudan Relief and Rehabilitation Agency (SRRA) before March 1 st . Such a threat is completely unacceptable.” The defence claimed that some organisations did not agree to the SPLMA’s terms and thus had to leave the area, while other organisations did comply.    

The defence explained that the SPLMA’s conditions stated that organisations were not allowed to decide for themselves how aid would be provided or distributed without the SPLMA’s approval. The organisations, therefore, could not act neutrally in providing aid based on the principle of greatest need. The defence emphasised that it was under these circumstances that aid organisations conducted their activities in the area. They stated that it was a well-known fact that the aid organisation SRRA was not neutral and that it was problematic that the only information that NGOs received came from SRRA. The defence asserted that NGOs received information regarding the number of internally displaced persons, where the people fled from, and why, from SRRA. The defence thus emphasised that this information was not from a neutral aid organisation. The defence concluded this chapter of its presentation by stating that it was important to keep this in mind when reading different reports from organisations describing the conflict in the area.   

Next report 

In the next report, we will continue to cover the defence’s presentation and, among other things, detail their description of the different armed groups fighting in the area. We will further report on the defence’s description of the attacks that occurred in the area, which are referred to in different internal security reports.  

Report 24: The first plaintiff takes the stand

• 8 July 2024

After nearly ten months of PowerPoint presentations from the various parties involved in the historic Lundin Oil trial, the time finally came for the plaintiffs to be heard in court – to share their s...

Report 23: The prosecution’s supplementary statement of facts

• 5 July 2024

Following the company’s defense, the prosecution had the opportunity to provide supplementary comments on the defense presentations and further explain the allegations against Ian Lundin, Alexander Sc...

Report 22: Orrön Energy’s defense presentation

Ian Lundin and Alexandre Schneiter’s defense teams have now both presented their respective cases to the Court. During weeks 15-17, there were no physical hearings in the courtroom. Instead, evidence ...

Head Office

Civil Rights Defenders Östgötagatan 90 SE-116 64 Stockholm Sweden

Contact [email protected] +46 (0)8 545 277 30

The telephone exchange is closed for summer 15 July – 12 August. To get in touch with us during this time, contact our departments .

Get Involved

• Open Positions
• Internships