According to Dr Daniel Ichangi, the Chairman of APSEA said the recent discoveries of oil, coal, titanium and other minerals necessitate the need to have an overriding law.

Currently, the country has separate laws governing various sectors of the natural resources. There is law on forestry, wildlife, water and land.

But the situation, according to Dr Ichangi, the situation does not augur well for the country.

“What is needed is a coordinated management of natural resources,” he said.

Benjamin Washiali, the vice chairman of the parliamentary committee on natural resources said the MPs are aware of the sensitive of the Chapter 5 of the constitution which deals with land and natural resources and plan to engage with each other over the matter.

Dr Ichangi said the APSEA is engaging MPs knowing that the efforts are coming late given that each key sector of the natural resources have their own laws, which at times appear contradictory to one another.

“Kenyans are yet to benefit from the abundant natural resources because of lack of proper laws,” he said.

At the meeting in Mombasa, the APSEA chairman said unless the laws are harmonized, the country may not avoid resource-related conflicts that have bedeviled man African countries.

He attributed resource-based conflicts to poor management formula.

John Kioli, Chairman of the Kenya Climate Change Working Group said it is a good thing for the APSEA to initiate the process at the time before the country comes up with another law governing climate change.

He said his organisation’s presence at the meeting was to offer lessons learned from their efforts to develop the Climate Change Bill but supported the need to have a consolidated law that would govern these cross-cutting issues.

Last week, Dr Wilbur Ottichilo, MP for Emuhaya tabled in the Kenya’s Parliament the Kenya Climate Change Authority Bill. The bill seeks to establish an authority to handle issues on climate change.

The Association of Professional Societies in East Africa (APSEA) is an Association that brings together professional bodies of diverse disciplines.

Currently, the Association has thirty three (33) corporate members in Kenya constituting all major professions in the country including medicine, law, accounting, engineering, geology, architecture, food science, public and corporate administration, veterinary science, planning, procurement, and marketing among many others.

AUTHOR: Henry Neondo
URL: http:// www.africasciencenews.org
E-MAIL: neondohenry [at] yahoo.com

So, this past Wednesday, at the Parish government of Garcia Moreno, where the Japanese Agency for Interactional Cooperation found Junin’s copper, delegates from the national mining company- ENAMI- had a strong run in with Shisela Morales, the president of Garcia Moreno (equivalent of a Municipal mayor). Ms Morales was accompanied by a few elected officials.

The mining officials insist on socializing the mining project directly with the communities. The Garcia Moreno government- which is autonomous- insisted that before it attempts it, ENAMI should turn over essential information about the mining concession and its plans to start advanced exploratory activities during the second semester of 2013. They were also, again, warned about the possibility of its presence provoking social unrest and conflicts. Arrogance won the day, and ENAMI went about visiting communities to set up the unwelcomed meetings in spite of the local government’s wishes.

To underline the discontent the communities feel about the possible return of the mining nightmare, and the indignation with this kind of arrogance, the ENAMI officials were stopped close to Junin and told them they were not wanted, and warned not to return.

CODELCO, the world’s largest copper producer, would actually do all the exploratory work, since ENAMI hardly knows up from down when it comes to mining.

One of the first meetings ENAMI set up was in Apuela, for this Sunday (19th). They hope that in this Parish government, which is about 3 hours away from the mining site and will not be directly impacted, they will be heartly cheered. The same day, ENAMI hopes to meet in the Parish government of Peñaherrera, with the same intended results. I think, they are in for a unpleasant surprise, however. Though there are a few people who are vociferously pro-mining in these two Parish governents, most of the populace reject the divisions, violence and general social chaos that mining brought to Intag with the Canadians.

To help allay some of this fear, ENAMI representatives, who are travelling with a very prestigious publicity firm, is assuring everyone that with them, things will be different: no violence, no paramilitaries, no shooting at defenseless farmers, no judicial set ups, and LOTS OF MONEY for roads, clinics, new high schools, and blablablabla, AD NAUSEUM.

Few people, however, know that there is a very dark history of when governments become directly dependent on rents coming from large scale mining. I am talking about disappearances, extra-judicial killings, criminalization of all opposition, invented lawsuits, and the use of army to quell resistance. In the infamous case of the Bouganville copper mine, in order to keep the money flowing to the coffers of the Papua New Guinea government, the government itself hired paramilitaries to quell the protest against the mining project that ended up with the murder of tens of thousands of islanders. The mine was shut down, and the conflict provoked a low-level civil war, which is still ongoing 30 years later. Papua New Guinea is, by no means, the not place where these kinds of abuses have taken place. On the Indonesian side of island, there have been numerous human rights violations associated with the partly government-owned Grasberg gold and copper mine. The list is rather long. But in summary, when governments own or partly own very productive mines and are heavily dependent on rents from these mines f to pay for its army, police, and other “essential” government services, you can expect gross human rights abuses.

The meeting for Junin is set for this coming Monday (20th). At the time of this writing, communities are meeting to determine how to best confront the new threat.

AUTHOR: Carlos Zorrilla
URL: http://decoin.org
E-MAIL: toisan06 [at] gmail.com

Another aspect of this agreement that stands out is Codelco’s willingness to distort the truth so openly. I am referring to the part in the agreement where it says that Codelco started the process of obtaining the environmental license, and the socialization of the project. The truth is that so far, there has not been any socialization by Codelco within the Llurimagua concession. Another worrisome aspect is them mentioning that they hope to start the advanced phase of exploration, which is much more impacting that the initial exploration (heavier equipment, deeper holes, more drilling). By Ecuadorian law, before advance exploration can take place, the companies have to conclude the initial phase of exploration. And for both, you need comprehensive Environmental Impact Studies.

One can surmise a number of things from this very short extract:

a) Truthfulness is not an issue for either Codelco nor the Ecua government.

b) Ecuador’s government will not demand that Codelco does any kind of legitimate Environmental Impact Assessment. The mid 2013 start date for advanced exploration does not leave enough time to do a proper EIA in such a biodiverse and wet forest area, containing so many species of animals facing extinction.

c) It looks like either the government will exonerate Codelco from doing a initial Environmental Impact Assessment, or they will accept the very poor initial EIA done for another mining site (Paraiso). This EIA was done by another concession owner, it was done for a concession about 10% the size of the new concession; encompassed different altitudes, had considerably less micro watersheds, different types of forests, and different social and cultural settings than the Llurimagua concession. For example, the Paraiso concession hardly had any primary cloud forests, and only had within in, 5 micro watersheds. By contrast, the Llurimagua concession- if as it appears on an official map- encompasses two of ex- Ascendant Copper concessions, which would make it nearly 10,000 hectares; has dozens, and perhaps over one hundred micro, small and medium watersheds, and has more communities within in and adjacent to it than the Paraiso concession. This is an area also rich in pre-Incan archeology sites. Keep in mind that the Paraiso EIA was so badly done, that it was an embarrassment. And this the document that Codelco will probably use in order to forgo doing the EIA for initial exploratory work.

d) Conclusion: The Ecuadorian government will not be looking out for the well being of Intag’s communities or the environment, nor too worried about enforcing it’s own progressive Constitution, or basic laws protecting human rights.

August 4th is the date set for the State owned mining company to meet with some communities in the Junin area. So, keep tuned

The extract follows

MINING

(The parts agreed to) in the field of mining, to further strengthen the cooperation and exchange of knowledge and experience. This, under the Interagency Cooperation Agreement on Mining Matters, signed on September 2008 and its amending protocol signed on August 2010

They agreed to further the facilitation of the Cooperation Agreement for Mineral Exploration agreed between the then Ministry of Mines and Petroleum of Ecuador and CODELCO, signed on June 5, 2009 which was ratified, as stated in the Convention itself, with the National Mining Company (ENAMI EP), with the signing of the Agreement for Mineral Exploration by CODELCO ENAMI EP on November 28, 2011 for the duration of four years, renewable in equal and successive periods if the parties so decide.

In the framework of said agreements, CODELCO has undertaken prospecting and exploratory activities in approximately 20 prospects, and of which only one was selected (the Llurimagua prospect) for advanced exploration, and four for followup exploration.

During 2012 the process to obtain the Environmental License and socialization with the authorities and communities began, so as to proceed with exploration work with drilling in the Llurimagua prospect, approximately, during the second semester of 2013.

The complete Agreement is available here> http://www.scribd.com/doc/101334073

AUTHOR: Carlos Zorrilla
URL: http://decoin.org
E-MAIL: toisan06 [at] gmail.com

You were with us for the first exciting season of Mining Paradise in the 1990’s, when Bishimetals, a Mitsubishi subsidiary, spent years exploring for copper in Intag’s Toisan Cordillera, thanks to one of those wonderful “international development project”, paid by the Japanese taxpayers. The project sought to help poor Ecuadorians by looking for and developing copper mines.  Japan, to date, depends 100% on copper imports, so that the real reason for the international aid was exposed during the opening episodes.  As you recall, the season ended rather abruptly in 1997 when the communities in Intag decided that mining was not the kind of development they wanted, and burned the Bishimetals mining camp to the ground. No one was really surprised, since the Environmental Impact Study, done  for a very small mine, called for widespread environmental devastation and social upheaval, including massive deforestation, impact to dozens of endangered animal species, rivers contaminated with heavy metals, relocation of four communities and increase in crime.

The next few seasons featured the work of organizations coming up with sustainable economic and social alternatives to the mining holocaust, including shade-grown coffee and community tourism, both Decoin initiatives.  It also featured a couple of episodes of DECOIN and AACRI challenging, Prodeminca, a World Bank project, whose sole objective was to open up Ecuador to large-scale mining.

The next season featured the Intag community’s response to the new actor, Copper Mesa (name changed from Ascendant Copper), and included many episodes featuring the illegal and violent strategies used by the company to try and break the opposition to mining.  You will recall one of the more memorable episodes of the community taking prisoners 56 ex-military dressed as security guards, who the company insisted were “agricultural consultants”.  A couple of episodes included the story of the police raid on Carlos’ farm at 6am in the morning to try to arrest him based on made up charges, and the lone police leaving a gun and a suspicious substance in his home to generate new criminal charges.

This action-packed season, which included the burning down of Copper Mesa’s mining camp in Chalguyacu Bajo, false arrest of Intag leaders, an attempt by the company’s mercenaries to violently try to access its concessions via the communities of Barcelona and Cerro Pelado, plus the training of some Intag residents in paramilitary skills outside Quito by the company’s subcontractors, concluded when the company went broke as a result of being kicked off the Toronto Stock Exchange in 2010.  Prior to that ending, the company and the Toronto Stock Exchange were sued by three Intag residents,  in a ground-breaking lawsuit which had much to do with the subsequent delisting from the Exchange, and bankrupting the company.

On the last episode, we warned that it was a matter of time before some other foolish people and/or company would try to resume where these two had utterly failed.  Thus, the official start of the new season of Mining Paradise, includes the first steps by ENAMI, the state-owned Ecuadorian mining company, which is currently trying to establish a base camp in Villadorita- relatively close to JUNIN (the rumors were true).  Its plans, according to a slip by one of the employees, is to “go into Junin” next year (after the elections).  

It does goes to show that there is no end to the stupidity that the false promise (read greed)  of mining wealth produces in individuals, corporations and governments.  Just to give an example of what Im referring to:  The wealth of Intag’s ecosystem services amounts to no less than $447 millon PER YEAR, in perpetuity, as reported in the Earth Economic’s An Ecological Study of Ecuador’s Intag Region(http://www.eartheconomics.org/FileLibrary/file/Reports/Latin%20America/Final%20Intag%20Report_lo_res.pdf) ((We hope to deliver the report to many of Ecuador’s decision makers later this month)

On the other hand, Mining will, in the process of creating a few year’s worth of economic wealth, destroy the foundations of Intag’s ecosystems, contaminate rivers for centuries, plus wreak social havoc in the communities.   Yet, here we are again facing the same sh..,, just now from a different bull (a much bigger, much more dangerous bull)

ENAMI, by the way, is not alone. Since it has no clue of how to explore for minerals, much less have the intellectual capacity or experience of opening a large-scale mine, they teamed up with CODELCO, the world’s largest producer of copper.  CODELCO, however, as is the case with most large company that is afraid of dirtying its hands and earning a bad reputation on one of its first overseas ventures, will probably sit on the sidelines as the government, with all its might and nearsightedness, tries to “pacify” the natives.

What carrots and sticks the government will use in its native-pacification program, and whether, as previously, it will involve gross human rights violations and how the Intag communities react to the pacification, remains to be seen, but it will be featured in the next episodes of this new season.  We can only hope intelligence spontaneously erupts among in the government circles making decisions affecting Intag’s future (Im pessimistic it will occur any other way), and they choose to leave us alone.  We want to avoid the violence affecting countries like Peru, where recently another four activist died in protests against a gold mine, which hasn’t even been built).

In this case, Im sure you will not be disappointed if this new season comes to an abrupt, and happy, ending!!

Stay tuned, there’s a lot more to this story.

AUTHOR: Carlos Zorrilla
URL: http://decoin.org
E-MAIL: toisan06 [at] gmail.com

Vast areas near the occupied Dead Sea are closed off by Israel as “military area” (Who Profits, October 2010)

WhoProfits, a research project of the Coalition of Women for Peace, has documented corporate plunder of natural resources in the occupied West Bank. For example, Israeli cosmetics firm Ahava’s extraction of mud from the occupied Palestinian Dead Sea and HeidelbergCement and Cemex’s role in operating quarries in the West Bank. HeidelbergCement and Cemex headquarters are based in Germany and Mexico, respectively.

Last September, the Open Society Institute published the updated “Corporate War Crimes, Prosecuting the Pillage of Natural Resources,” a manual written by law professor James G. Stewart. The manual is useful for lawyers, rights organizations and Palestine solidarity activists to explore options to hold business representatives to account for their role in the plunder of Palestinian natural resources.

Natural resources in the West Bank are owned by the Palestinian people

Sovereignty over natural resources and the right to self-determination are closely tied. The Palestinian people unquestionably have the right to self-determination. The League of Nations already affirmed this right in 1917 and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) did so in its 2004 authoritative legal opinion on Israel’s wall built on occupied Palestinian land. The ICJ also found that “Israel is bound to comply with its obligation to respect the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and its obligations under international humanitarian law and international human rights law.”

The UN General Assembly declared that sovereignty over natural wealth and resources is a “basic constituent of the right to self-determination” by adopting Resolution 1803 in 1962. The UN Security Council affirmed peoples’ rights to natural resources on several occasions.

By granting companies permits to extract natural resources in the occupied Palestinian territories for the benefit of Israel and the companies, Israel disregards its international obligations. Moreover, Ahava, HeidelbergCement and Cemex have conscientiously requested Israel army’s civic administration – the occupying power – for permission, instead of the owners – the Palestinians.

Ahava, HeidelbergCement and Cemex extract Palestinian natural resources

WhoProfits has documented the extraction of Palestinian natural resources by Israeli cosmetics firm Ahava and multinational building materials industries HeidelbergCement and Cemex.

Ahava operates an excavation site on the shores of the occupied Dead Sea to extract mud for its products. In a letter of 26 April 2011, the Israeli army’s civic administration informedWho Profits that it had granted Ahava a license for operating a site for collecting mud from the occupied area of the Dead Sea for commercial uses. Ahava received the license in 2004 and has been operating the excavation site ever since. The company is selling its products containing stolen Dead Sea minerals in Ahava flagship stores in Germany, Hungary, the Philippines, Korea and Singapore.

The multinational building materials industries HeidelbergCement and Cemex from Germany and Mexico, respectively, are involved in the operation of quarries in the occupied West Bank.

HeidelbergCement’s subsidiary Hanson Israel operates the Nahal Raba quarry in the West Bank near the green line — Israel’s internationally-recognized boundary with the occupied West Bank — and Kfar Qasim, a Palestinian village in Israel.

Cemex owns fifty percent of Yatir Quarry through its subsidiary ReadyMix Industries. The Yatir quarry lies next to the Israeli settlement of Teneh Omarim in the south Hebron hills of the West Bank.

In May 2011, The Electronic Intifada documented the transportation of construction material from Yatir and Nahal Raba quarries in the occupied West Bank into Israel.

International law prohibits plundering of natural resources

In his manual, Stewart writes that the laws of war protect property against pillage during armed conflict. In the Hague Regulations of 1907, two provisions stipulate that “the pillage of a town or place, even when taken by assault, is prohibited,” and that “pillage is formally forbidden.” According to an interpretation by Julius Stone, “wasteful or negligent destruction of the capital value, whether by excessive cutting or mining or other abusive exploitation” by the occupying state in the territory it occupies is “contrary to the rules of good husbandry,” Stone is recognized internationally for his expertise in international law. In addition, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 reaffirmed that “pillage is prohibited.” 

ICJ sets important precedent in case of illegal occupation of Namibia by apartheid South Africa

The South African apartheid regime illegally occupied Namibia for decades. The ICJ set an important precedent in its 1971 Advisory Opinion on South Africa’s presence in Namibia. Stewart refers to the Namibia Opinion in his manual by quoting the Court’s conclusion, “[O]fficial acts performed by the Government of South Africa on behalf of or concerning Namibia after the termination of the Mandate are illegal and invalid, this invalidity cannot be extended to those acts, such as, for instance, the registration of births, deaths and marriages, the effects of which can be ignored only to the detriment of the inhabitants of the Territory.” Therefore, attempts by the apartheid South African regime to grant title in Namibian natural resources were “illegal and invalid,” because the expropriation of natural resources is not analogous with registering births, deaths, and marriages.

Moreover, one of the judges on the case explicitly confirmed this interpretation in a separate opinion by adding that “other States should not regard as valid any acts and transactions of the authorities in Namibia relating to public property, concessions, etc.” The UN Security Council and United Nations Council for Namibia, later confirmed this view.

Palestinian natural resources exploited for the benefit of Israel and companies

Stewart presents in his manual also the argument that non-renewable resources can be exploited by an occupying army, provided that the money from these sales is spent exclusively on the humanitarian needs of the local population.

However, this is certainly not the case with Heidelberg Cement and Cemex. The Israeli daily Haaretz reported that Israel’s state comptroller revealed in its annual report for 2005, that although any royalties from the quarries should be used for the benefit of the Palestinian population, they were paid into the Israeli state treasury instead (“Digging up the dirt,” 3 September 2010).

In the case of Ahava, part of the profit will directly flow into the settlements of Mitzpeh Shalem and Kalia. The kibbutzes in these illegal settlements in the West Bank own 37% and 7,5% of Ahava, respectively.

Israel accelerates exploitation of Palestinian quarries after it occupied the West Bank

Stepping up the extraction of natural resources in war zones or conflict areas is a characteristic of the war crime of pillage. Until the early 1970s only two Palestinian quarries had existed in the area, according to Haaretz. The Israeli daily reports that Israel’s stone and gravel quarries in the West Bank came into operation in the early 1970s.

Israel’s plundering drew the attention of the UN General Assembly in 2010, expressing “its concern at the exploitation by Israel of the natural resources of the Occupied Palestinian Territory,” and called upon Israel “not to exploit, cause loss or depletion of or endanger the natural resources in the OPT.” It also recognized the right of the Palestinian people to claim restitution as a result of any exploitation, loss or depletion of, or danger to, their natural resources.

Business representatives can be held to account for plundering

Criminal courts are capable of prosecuting business representatives for pillage perpetrated during the course of commercial activities in a conflict zone, writes Stewart in his manual. After the Second World War, the Nuremberg Tribunal ruled that “[i]nternational law… binds every citizen just as does ordinary municipal law.” The Tribunal concluded that crimes against international law “are committed by men, not by abstract entities,” to ensure that the corporate structure did not shield business representatives from individual criminal liability. It contributed to broad consensus that the laws of war bind individuals.

Stewart argues that perpetrating, aiding, and abetting or instigating pillage of natural resources renders individual business representatives guilty of a war crime. He mentions that for example Germany, home country of HeidelbergCement, the 2002 Code of Crimes against International Law states that “Whoever in connection with an international armed conflict or with an armed conflict not of an international character pillages or, unless this is imperatively demanded by the necessities of the armed conflict, otherwise extensively destroys, appropriates or seizes property of the adverse party contrary to international law, such property being in the power of the perpetrator’s party, shall be punished with imprisonment from one to ten years.”

The boycott, divestment and sanctions movement has exposed the complicity of a number of multinational corporations in the Israeli occupation, alerting investors to the incompatibility with corporate social responsibility. In addition, Ahava has been targeted by the movement with protests and a boycott and protests.

The manual “Corporate War Crimes, Prosecuting the Pillage of Natural Resources” provides an additional tool. It can be used by lawyers, rights organizations and Palestine solidarity activists to explore options to hold business representatives to account for their role in the plunder of Palestinian natural resources.

First published at The Electronic Intifada.

AUTHOR: Adri Nieuwhof
URL: http://www.samora.org
E-MAIL: a.nieuwhof [at] samora.org

llow oil camp, Uganda. Image by Conservation Concepts on Flickr (CC BY 2.0)

In recent years, major reserves of oil have been discovered at various locations across Africa. If this ‘black gold’ represents an opportunity for economic growth, the fear that the windfall may not benefit the local populations – and maybe even become a curse – is shared by Sub-Saharan African citizens and experts alike.

In 2009, Modern Ghana’s Nana Adjoa Hackman suggested a possible solution:

It is common practice for oil and gas producing countries to negotiate local content agreements with interested IOCs [International Oil Companies] in an attempt to secure for the country a higher share of the value from oil and gas projects. This trend has surfaced as a result of the realization of the poor economic performance of many resource rich countries despite their vast wealth.

Taking the example of Ghana, he explains:

As part of measures being undertaken to put in place the framework for Ghana’s oil and gas production, a Bill entitled the Ghana Petroleum Regulatory Authority (GPRA) Bill was released in October 2008. (…) Sections 100 to 105 inclusive of the Bill deal with the promotion of local content, specifically, the involvement of the state oil company, provision of goods and services by local entrepreneurs, as well as the employment and training of citizens of Ghana.

The adoption of the local content policy framework in Ghana followed in 2010, however it is still pending parliamentary endorsement. The latter is now more urgent than ever, as finding employment is a preoccupation for an increasing number of Ghanaian citizens.

Commenting on an article entitled ‘Youth Angry-Over Elusive Jobs In Oil Industry‘, Christiane Badgley writes:

Oil brings in huge amounts of money, of course, and along with that come expectations of many, well-paid jobs. The problem is that the industry – at least as it exists in Ghana now – doesn’t generate much work. (…) We’ll have to wait for details on how the government intends to increase local content and participation, which is easier said than done. Training, education, quotas, regulation, penalties, taxation, incentives – the government has multiple options for addressing the question.

In Uganda, the same move towards the adoption of a local content policy is being made, as explained on the In2EastAfrica website:

Uganda wants a strong local content in the nascent oil and gas industry for its citizens to gain skilled manpower and a competitive supply edge. This is in an attempt to ensure revenues trickles down, averting the resource curse.

Indeed, avoiding the oil curse is important for Uganda, particularly if it helps to prevent the emergence of other Joseph Kony- like characters. Petroleum was, after all, discovered in the north-west, near the border with the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the epicenter of the 30 year long conflict led by the Lord’s Resistance Army chief. A local content policy would hopefully create employment for local populations and distract them from the path of war.

In Kenya case, where oil was found earlier this year, Local Development Network of Africa asks on Twitter:

@ledna: How far have discussion on #Ghana “local content” for the oil and gas sector gone? #Kenya (new found oil) could learn from that

Günther Schulze, professor of economics at the University of Freiburg, Germany, adds another perspective on the World Bank blog:

The biggest -but most important- challenge is to build and maintain good institutions. (…) transparency will be the most powerful lever for accountability. If Kenyans know exactly how much oil is being produced, how much royalties oil companies pay this would already be a major step in the right direction. (…) Kenya’s strong civil society and creative industries, especially in ICT, can play a strong role in monitoring the oil revenue flows and proposing solutions on how to spend the money well. Then the resource curse can be turned into a blessing.

This post and its translations to Spanish, Arabic and French were commissioned by International Security Network (ISN) as part of a partnership to seek out citizen voices on international relations and security issues worldwide.

Visit the ISN blog and see more related stories.

First published at Global Voices Online.

AUTHOR: Julie Owono
URL: http://bantupolitics.blogspot.com/

A plea for high-school transportation funds

The Calm Before the Storm?

It got real quiet after CODELCO took its drills out of the Paraiso area. First rumors that circulated were that the drill results were disappointing and that was that. Then, more recently, Codelco workers have been saying that the results are quite positive and that they’ll be coming back soon to continue the drilling program,, this time drilling deeper and more bore holes with much bigger equipment. It’s possible that they’ll wait till the start of the dry season, which should start in about a month and a half in the Magdalena area, but my guess is that they’ll return this month.

Manduriacos Communities Unite.
In response to the ongoing CODELCO threat that is supported by irresponsible functionaries that approve ludicrous environmental impact studies with made up facts about the communtieis and the environment, in March the communities in the Manduriacos area formed an organization to represent them. The organization includes all the communities within the immediate area of influence of the Codelco illegal mining project, plus Cielo Verde and Rio Verde. The position of the community leaders on mining is clear: CODELCO is illegally in their area and must go. The name of the organizations is UNION DE COMUNIDADES DE MANDURIACOS. If you are interested in supporting them, let us know.

CODELCO can’t possibly be serious.
It developed that Codelco was officially asked for information about its shennanigans here in Intag by a Chilean NGO, and they responded with a hilarious letter that went on and on about how they weren’t obligated to be transparent because Chilena law number so and so exempted them from full transparency. But the funniest part was when THE COMPANY, and keep in mind that this is the world’s largest copper producer and has quite the envious reputation- on being challenged that its operation in the Intag-Manduriacos area was in violation of the Cotacachi Ecological Ordinance- claimed that the Ordinance was annulled by the Ministry of Non-Renewable Resources. Needless to say the claim is ridiculous because, even if it was true that the Ministry told them so, Codelco lawyers should have known that the Ministry has no such mandate, something they would have found out on reading the first couple of pages of Ecuador’s Mining Law. Cotacachi’s Ecological Ordinance is valid until it is declared null and void by the Constitutional Court. And that hasn’t happened.

In the meantime, DECOIN will keep working with local governments, organizations and communities leaders and will use the courts to try to stop this gross abuse of power, and outrageous injustice. It’s not very comforting to know that the judicial branch is completely dependent on an executive Branch that is dead set on allowing mining, legalities be damned.

A Request for High-School Transportation Funds
Every year we get petitions from parents groups of high-school kids that ask for financial support to make it a little bit easier on their pocketbook to pay for transportation costs to send their kids to the different High-Schools in the area.

The Ecuadorian government- self-proclaimed revolutionary- chooses not to fund public school transportation, and for the hundreds of kids and parents just in Intag that don’t live in one of three populated centers with high schools, their only option is to hire trucks to get their kids to school. One of those requesting support is the parents of four communities in the JUNIN area: Chalguyacu Alto and Bajo, Junin, and Magnolia. In all 40 kids travel over an hour to attend the Garcia Moreno High School. The estimated cost this year is $5000.00 (five thousand) for the school year- which starts this Monday April 16th. There are other groups in similar situations that have also requested assistance; some expected to pay $3000.00 per year; some $2000. The parents are looking for donations to cover 50% of the costs. Please let us know if you can help.

AUTHOR: Carlos Zorrilla
URL: http://decoin.org
E-MAIL: toisan06 [at] gmail.com

The tribunal based in Hamburg, Germany, upheld Bangladesh’s claim to an exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles in the Bay of Bengal, and to a substantial share of the outer continental shelf beyond, thus ending its maritime boundary dispute with Myanmar. Bangladesh will come out with fresh demarcation of its offshore gas blocks in the Bay of Bengal, state-owned Petrobangla’s Chairman Hussain Monsur said Thursday.

The government asked Petrobangla to prepare a new map with the gas blocks properly demarcated in keeping with the international ruling, Monsur said. Days after the victory at a U.N. court in Bangladesh’s maritime boundary claims the Bangladesh Navy has made its first patrol across the settled boundary in the Bay of Bengal.

In 2008, Bangladesh floated its offshore block bidding for oil and gas exploration and a U.S. company ConocoPhillips signed a Production Sharing Contract (PSC) for two blocks — DS 10 and 11. Of these, a part of block 10 is claimed by India and a part of block 11 by Myanmar. Bangladesh was unable to ink a PSC with U.K’s Tullow for shallow water gas block SS-08-05 because of the dispute with India. Tullow secured the block in a competitive bidding round for offshore blocks in February 2008. Bangladesh’s winning its maritime boundary claim over Burma implies that the country will now have a larger deep sea oil and gas exploration area in the eastern Bay of Bengal.

AUTHOR: Saleem Samad
URL: http://bangladeshwatchdog.blogspot.com
E-MAIL: saleemsamad [at] hotmail.com

In spite of the childish claim by government officials (including President Correa) that the march was a total failure; in spite of countless obstacles the marchers had to overcome to reach Quito, including police checks and constant rains since the start of the March two weeks ago, as well as ridiculous accusations of intent to destabilize the government, thousands of marchers opposed to the Correa regime’s policies arrived safely in Quito, and were joined by countless thousands of Quito residents who enthusiastically supported the marchers.

In the late afternoon hours of the 22nd, the marchers presented a 19-point petition to the National Assembly for the government to act to resolve the issues that sparked the march (see below). Mining, as you can see, continues to be a main factor in the march. However, it is not at all likely that Correa will change course regarding mining. Earlier in the day, he again- and vociferously- defended mining in front of his supporters, claiming, that mining will not contaminate water resources.

The strength of the march took Ecuador by surprise. Correa on the 8th of March said that if the marchers came with 500, he and his followers would be 50,000. Seems he got the numbers backwards, though thousands did come to cheer the president, but many were paid bureaucrats who were pressured into showing their spontaneous support for the president.

Given the dangerous polarization created by Correa’s style of government, the chances of a major confrontation between the two groups were very high, but it was confined to only one incident near the National Assembly where four police were hurt.

Even if the government makes light of the 19-points presented in the petition (which is highly likely) the outcome of the march will not be felt for a while yet. One thing the march did was to bring together the many groups that are opposed to not only Correa’s policies, but his style of government, which is seen by many to be autocratic, arrogant, confrontational, exceptionally intolerant, at times racist, and polarizing. His abuse of power used to intimidate the press and to insult his opponents in public, also were instrumental in getting people out in the streets.

One very notable success of the march is that it gave the country the opportunity to see just how widespread the opposition is to this regime. I have no doubt that many eyes were opened. Importantly, the march also brought out into the open the scale of the opposition to large-scale mining in Ecuador. In this context, it is very revealing what happened in Cuenca, the third most populated city in Ecuador in the south of the country. Cuenca’s drinking water is threatened by a gold mining project and the anti-mining sentiment runs high. This is also where the regime did not spend very much taxpayer money to mobilize its followers and, as a consequence, the result was that the anti-mining protesters outnumbered the government supporters by a much wider margin.

How will the government process the rejection to its government and 19 points, and what will the opposition do now that the march ended?

One thing is clear: the opposition was empowered by the march. Before it begun on the 8th of March, the leaders said that on the 22nd would only be the beginning, and that it was essential to consolidate and orient the opposition to Correa after the 22nd. Today it knows the opposition is much larger, stronger and more unified than even they suspected. The support it received from the citizens of Quito let it realize that it has the backing of a large segment of the general public. Thus, it is very likely that the opposition will play a key role in creating a political platform to challenge Correa in the next elections, which are due in about a year.

Correa’s actions on the day of the march gives us some leads as to how the government will process the march. On a speech before his followers he downplayed the importance of the march and insisted on defaming the marchers by accusing them of being manipulated by groups interested in overthrowing the government. As in previous charges of this sort, no proofs were presented. He also defended mining by claiming it would not contaminate water resources. In other words, stay the course, never mind the iceberg ahead!

Regardless of the outcome of the march, what is certain is that the polarization affecting Ecuadorian society ever since Correa came into power will grow. The outcome of that polarization does not bode well for the country.

These 19 points that presented to legislators are:

1. We demand full respect for the Constitution and the repeal of unconstitutional laws and regulations.
2. No to large-scale mining. Repeal of the mining law as unconstitutional, and the signing of the contract with the mining company ECSA, on March 5.
3. Not to the extension of the petroleum fronteir. Respect the right to self-determination of indigenous peoples.
4. Suspension of operations in bloque 31.**
5. No mega hydroelectric works that generate social and environmental impacts.
6. Approval of the Water Act for the “good life” (Sumak Kawsay) that includes respect for, and guarantee the right to water.
7. Approval of the Lands and Territories Act providing for an agricultural model that ensures food security.
8. No to the signing of the free trade agreement with the European Union.
9. Effective protection against taxes of popular and campesino economies.
10. Recognition of community transport, reform of the Land Transport Traffic and Road Safety law. Strengthening of the IESS and require the State to pay back the debt that it has with this entity, as well as equip hospitals.
11. Respect for labor rights; respect the guarantee of job security and union rights.
12. Respect and guarantee of the right to education.
13. Repeal of the Unified General Baccalaureate and the National System of Equalization and Admission.
14. Respect for sexual and reproductive rights. Equality between women and men.
15. Real democratization of information and respect for the professional practice of journalism.
16. No criminalization of the social protest, elimination of the court cases against leaders.
17. Fulfill the right to prior consultation of Ecuador’s communities.
18. Respect for the judicial functions of the administration of indigenous justice, and respect for community governments. Respect for the autonomy of (indigenous) nations and nationalities.
19. No verbal aggression against (indigenous) nations, nationalities and social organizations

*Ecsa is the chinese-owned mining company ready to open up the country’s first open-pit mine in the south of the country

**Bloque 31 refers to a petroleum extraction site within the Yasuni Park.

RECOMMENDED SITES:
- http://www.conaie.org/
- http://marchaporlavida.net/

AUTHOR: Carlos Zorrilla
URL: http://decoin.org
E-MAIL: toisan06 [at] gmail.com

17 Reasons mining will be a disaster in Ecuador
The day before yesterday (March 7th), a few news organizations published a preliminary report by the equivalent of Ecuador’s Comptroller General’s office which had been studying possible illegalities and irregularities surrounding two mining concessions in the Cordillera del Condor, including Chinese-owned Mirador (copper mining). The Comptroller General found 17 significant illegalities and irregularities, some of which clearly should have stopped the mining project dead in its tract. This included, finding the concession was partly in a legally protected forests, that there were hundreds of rivers and streams within the mining areas studied- something that violated the 2008 Mining Mandate and should have led to the annulment of the concession, and 15 other gross violations of the Constitution, the mining law. Three days before the study was made public, and being fully informed of the study’s findings and its implications, Correa´s government signed the contract with ECUACORRIENTE to authorize it to start the construction of the open-pit copper mine.

Meanwhile, functionaries like the Minister of the Environment, publicly stated that the only problem with this open- pit mining is that it will permanently remove primary vegetation, and that will be controlled like any other project. She also claims that there were no “fuentes de agua”, or water sources (such as rivers and streams), within the 9000 hectares of concessioned land! Not so incredibly, the Minister of the Environment gave Ecuacorriente the environmental license a few says before the signing of the contract…..

Why? It’s pretty straight forward really: Correa’s government needs money to cover budget deficit and to continue his populist caudilloist form of government. Correa burned a few bridges with International Financial Institutions a few years back, so there’s few places to borrow nearly 9 billion bucks so far. The Chinese need copper (they consume 40% of the world’s supply) and could give the slightest hoot about human rights, mining without permission in native indigenous lands, razing primary forests or contaminating rivers for centuries. End of story.

One particularly interesting aspect of the contract is that the Chinese will give Correa 100 million dollars in advance of royalty obligations, well before the project begins. The money will be used to coopt local governments and communities by bringing roads, clinics, internet and all the normal trappings of a failed model of development. This, as far as I know, is the first mining contract with this modality; and if it catches on, it will probably become the modus operandi for mining companies to neutralize opposition to their projects. Needless to say, it’ll make mining a lot more attractive to corrupt and even non-corrupt governments, as it means a whole lot of cash early in the extractive show.

So, why does this make mining disastrous in places like Ecuador? Well, this is an old tale really, but it’s all about corruption, and of putting gross short-term interest ahead of people’s and nature rights, ahead of cultural and biological diversity, ahead of clean rivers and endangered species, and ahead of the health of citizens and peaceful communities. And, if things like the Constitution and the law get in the way, well…….

The preceding has been a intro into MINING 101!!!

AUTHOR: Carlos Zorrilla
URL: http://decoin.org
E-MAIL: toisan06 [at] gmail.com