Until 1990, Texaco controlled 90 percent of these oil operations. This harm to the environment simultaneously impacts Ecuador's indigenous groups. The Jota plaintiffs claim that Texaco's oil operations in Ecuador also have had an impact in Peru. The Center for Economic and Social Rights, an NGO based in New York, has found that oil-related contamination flowed into Peru via the rivers common to the two countries. Oil development, on the other hand, is vital to Ecuador's economic stability.
Oil revenues account for approximately half of the government's total revenue.
As a result of this economic benefit, the government has been willing to overlook environmental damage. This conflict in priorities is the focus of the Aguirzda litigation. In ruling on Texaco's motion to dismiss the claims alleging violation of the Alien Tort Claims Act, District Judge Broderick indicated the possibility that the Alien Tort Claims Act may grant the court jurisdiction over this case. Under the Alien Tort Claims Act, plaintiffs must establish misuse of hazardous waste of significant magnitude to amount to a violation of international law. Precedent must be followed, however, in establishing a violation.