• No investor should ever have to wonder whether his or her investments or retirement savings are indirectly subsidizing a terrorist haven or genocidal state.
    - SEC Chairman Christopher Cox, SEC press release on June 25, 2007
  • A campaign of targeted divestment played a key role in ending apartheid in South Africa. Sanctions such as they are will not end the killings in Darfur, but a concerted effort to choke al-Bashir's regime where it hurts -- in its funding sources -- will help thwart him as well. It also signals to the world this is an outrage that won't be ignored.
    - Chicago Sun Times, editorial on April 1, 2007
  • I ask everyone, if you seriously believe that the genocide in Darfur must end, start by seeing what you can do personally. Every American should ask if their investments are going to support the Government of Sudan. Every mutual fund director should ask the same thing.
    - Senator Dick Durbin, in the Congressional Record of the Senate on March 1, 2007
  • There are two oil companies, Sinopec and PetroChina, pouring billions of dollars into Khartoum, most of which is used in attack helicopters, bomb ships, munitions factories, training and arming the Janjaweed (Arab militia in Darfur). The government of Sudan has refused to admit the peacekeepers that the United Nations has been begging them to admit, but China continues business as usual. I had some of my pension money in Fidelity, but Fidelity has huge holdings in both Sinopec and PetroChina. So I wrote them a letter saying why I was withdrawing my retirement fundfrom Fidelity.
    - Mia Farrow, quoted in PR inside article on January 12, 2007
  • Each one of us can make a difference in Darfur, and it’s important that we as individuals do everything we can while calling on the rest of the world to do their part, especially when so many lives are at stake.
    - Senator Sam Brownback, Sudan divestment announcement, November 29, 2006
  • There is no question that the government of Sudan orchestrated and continues to direct the genocide in Darfur. Bold action is now warranted. The United Nations has passed numerous resolutions in an effort to stop the genocide, yet the Sudanese government continues to act with impunity... It is time for the American people to speak for themselves... American pension funds should not support a genocidal government. Targeted divestment from companies doing business in Sudan will speak volumes as an indictment by the American people of the disgraceful actions of the Sudanese government... We need to send a signal to the government in Khartoum that America and the West will not stand silent in the face of genocide.
    - Senators Sam Brownback and Dick Durbin, letter to state Governors, November 21, 2006
  • Yale’s decision to divest from these oil companies, which are actively conducting operations in Sudan, is based on the finding that more than half of the Sudanese government’s revenue is derived from oil. As the source of such revenue, the companies are presumed to be committing “grave social injury” by providing substantial assistance to the perpetrators of genocide. Yale has attempted to engage in dialogue with the companies regarding their business activities in Sudan and has asked whether any actions on their part have advanced efforts to end the genocide in Darfur or aid the victims. The Yale Corporation took its divestment action after those attempts generated inadequate responses from the companies. The Yale Corporation’s policy on ethical investments calls for divestment in an entity that it concludes is committing grave social injury when the prospect of changing that behavior through engagement or dialogue would be nil.
    - Yale University, February 15, 2006
  • The Committee, with the assistance of staff, has researched and reviewed the potential divestment of investments in multinational companies with direct business interests in Sudan that directly support the activities of the Sudanese government. In this situation, divestment is an appropriate response because a number of multinational companies, largely in the oil, energy and telecommunications industries, provide the government of Sudan with substantial financial resources and the infrastructure to continue the sponsorship of genocidal actions in Darfur.
    - Amherst College statement on divestment from Sudan, January 14, 2006
  • Divestment is not a step that Harvard takes lightly, but I believe there is a compelling case for action in these special circumstances, in light of the terrible situation still unfolding in Darfur and the leading role played by PetroChina's parent company in the Sudanese oil industry, which is so important to the Sudanese regime.
    - Lawrence Summers, President of Harvard University, April 4, 2005
  • There are exceptional cases in which the strong presumption against divestment may be overcome ... Although trustees have a legal and moral obligation to enhance and conserve the university's resources, there are rare occasions when the very nature of a company's business makes it inappropriate for a university to invest in the enterprise.
    - Harvard University statement on divestment from PetroChina, April 4, 2005
  • This decision reflects deep concerns about the grievous crisis that persists in the Darfur region of Sudan and about the extensive role of PetroChina's closely affiliated parent company, China National Petroleum Corporation, as a leading partner of the Sudanese government in the production of oil in Sudan. Oil is a critical source of revenue and an asset of paramount strategic importance to the Sudanese government, which has been found to be complicit in what the U.S. Congress and U.S. State Department have termed "genocide" in Darfur ... Although Harvard maintains a strong presumption against the divestment of stock for reasons unrelated to investment purposes, we believe that the case for divestment in this instance is persuasive.
    - Harvard University statement on divestment from PetroChina, April 4, 2005