See http://www.bristol247.com/2012/03/28/roger-james-global-justice-under-threat-from-legal-aid-plans-76114/.

See also briefing at http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/16447.

See http://www.indcatholicnews.com/news.php?viewStory=19827.

First test of UK’s commitment to UN Guiding Principles on Business & Human Rights will be whether it amends Legal Aid bill, says CAFOD

See http://www.business-humanrights.org/Links/Repository/1010927.

See http://www.cafod.org.uk/news/international-news/no-to-legal-aid-bill-2011-07-21.

CAFOD’s senior analyst on the extractives industry, Karen Luyckx said: “Monterrico cannot hide behind gagging orders and out of court settlements. They must not simply buy their way out of this case; they must change the way they operate in future. The truth is that – welcome as it is for the farmers – this settlement does not address the fact that the criminalisation of protest, and threats and violence against activists are on the increase around the world, and that in more and more cases, we are seeing collusion between the police and military authorities and the multinational mining companies. For every case like this, there are dozens more examples of abuse and violence which are going unnoticed and unpunished, and hundreds more communities whose livelihoods hang in the balance. Even in this case, despite the settlement, Monterrico’s mine is still going ahead without adequate
consultation with the community.”

See http://www.indcatholicnews.com/news.php?viewStory=18644.

See http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/14099.

Take action: Tell the UK government: “Don’t water down the Bribery Act”

Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke has signalled that the implementation of the Bribery Act would be put on hold due to lobbying by the business community. Before last year’s general election, hundreds of CAFOD supporters lobbied their MPs to support legislation that would combat bribery by UK companies. This action paid off with the passing of the Bribery Act. However, with Mr Clarke’s announcement, your victory could be in jeopardy. CAFOD is calling for the Act to be put into full force without further delay so that UK business plays its part in ensuring that corruption does not undermine development in the poorest nations.

See http://www.cafod.org.uk/news/campaigns-news/don-t-delay-bribery-act-2011-02-03.

The data gathered at the San Martin gold mine in the Siria Valley area of Honduras revealed dangerously high acidity and metal concentrations in water flowing into a local stream.

The information uncovered by CAFOD was part of an official water monitoring report at the mine but was not disclosed or acted upon by the Honduran Government’s department for mineral resources or Goldcorp.

See http://www.cafod.org.uk/news/goldcorp-pollution-

Goldcorp is a Canadian company but among its major investors are British-based AXA Investment Managers UK Ltd (US$4.3 million), Blackrock Commodities Income Trust plc, and City Natural Resources High Yield Trust PLC, according to the document From Money to Metals (http://moneytometal.org/index.php/From_Money_to_Metals) by mining researcher Roger Moody.)

In the final days of business before the General Election, Parliament has passed new anti-bribery legislation, sending an unequivocal message that bribery by British companies will not be tolerated at home or abroad. Development and anti-corruption agencies including Bond, CAFOD, Global Witness and Tearfund welcome yesterday’s Royal Assent of the Bribery Act as an important step in combating bribery by UK companies. ‘We know from our work in Africa, Asia and Latin America that it is the poorest and most vulnerable people who suffer the most as a result of bribery,’ says Laura Webster, Tearfund Head of Policy. ‘The party which forms the next government must show a high-level commitment to use this legislation to stamp out bribery by UK companies.’  The Act brings UK laws up to date by creating a new offence of bribing a foreign public official and a corporate offence for companies that fail to prevent bribery.

See http://www.cafod.org.uk/news/bribery-act-2010-04-09.

The Catholic agency stresses the need for the publication of the contract and its amendments and calls on AngloGold Ashanti to share it immediately with the local community in DRC.

The contract between the South African company and the DRC government confirms a joint venture to mine one of the largest unexplored goldfields in Africa.

Although reduced from 9,000km2 under its exploration contract to 6,000km2, the mining area is still about 60 times the size of Paris and contains around 3 million ounces of gold.

AngloGold Ashanti has a subsidiary listing on the London Stock Exchange.

See http://www.cafod.org.uk/news/anglogold-2010-03-29.

Vedanta was just one of a number of investments in mining companies which the Church of England still holds.

Both the Church of England and the Methodist Church hold shares in Anglo American, BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto, despite the fact that the Catholic aid agency CAFOD, War on Want, Anglican bishops and the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines, amongst others, have previously condemned the companies for their actions. The combined Church of England shareholding in these three companies was valued at £62 million in the last annual report of the Church Commissioners.

Read more at http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/11192.

New report from CAFOD and South Africa’s Benchmarks Foundation

AngloGold Ashanti is a South African company with a secondary listing on the London Stock Exchange.

See http://www.cafod.org.uk/content/download/106612/1178506/version/1/file/DRC_reportEN.pdf or  http://www.bench-marks.org.za/research/DRC_reportEN.pdf.

In 2008, it pulled out of the Gag Island project in West Papua. See: http://www.minesandcommunities.org/article.php?a=8921.

The following year, the company also sold a major nickel refinery in Australia. See: http://www.minesandcommunities.org/article.php?a=9384.

Then, last month, BHP Billiton withdrew from a controversial nickel joint venture in the Philippines.
See http://www.minesandcommunities.org/article.php?a=9778.

BHP Billiton quits Philippines mine after CAFOD campaign

BHP Billiton has pulled out of a nickel mining project in the Philippines following a campaign by CAFOD. BHP Billiton’s 40 percent stake in the US$22.7 billion project was sold to local joint-venture partner AMCOR (Asiaticus Management Corp), UCA News reports. “It looks like (AMCOR) will proceed with the nickel mine,” said CAFOD’s extractives policy analyst, Sonya Maldar. CAFOD is continuing its call for a new consent process before work starts on the mine at Macambol in Davao Oriental province. “Given the serious flaws in the official consent process, AMCOR and any future partners in the project cannot use this to push ahead with mining in the area,” Maldar said. “There must be a new consent process that is genuinely free and fair.”

Read more at http://www.cathnewsasia.com/2010/01/12/bhp-quits-philippines-mine-after-caritas-campaign/.

For background on the exchange between CAFOD and Goldcorp, see http://londonminingnetwork.org/2009/12/cafod-and-development-and-peace-canada-discover-evidence-of-severe-water-contamination-at-goldcorp-mine/.

CAFOD’s Rejoinder to Goldcorp’s Response to CAFOD Press Release: “CAFOD and Development and Peace Canada Discover Evidence of Severe Water Contamination at Goldcorp Mine,” 2 December 2009

CAFOD rejects Goldcorp’s claims that CAFOD’s allegations are “patent falsehoods and distortions”. CAFOD says: “Our press release was published following a thorough investigation of the San Martin Mine Closure Plan and its implementation by distinguished experts in this field. CAFOD, Development and Peace and our Honduran partner Caritas Tegucigalpa have attempted to raise concerns about acid mine drainage at the San Martin mine with Goldcorp on numerous occasions…for several years. We remain fully committed to a constructive dialogue with the company. However, this should not replace being open about the findings of our research or sharing this information publicly…The fact that Goldcorp had introduced remediation measures in the first place is tacit acknowledgement and recognition of a pre-existing problem of acid mine drainage at the San Martin mine…CAFOD’s press release did not dispute the fact that the mine closure plan was approved by SERNA [Honduran Ministry of Environment]…”

See the full rejoinder at  http://www.cafod.org.uk/content/download/106040/1172470/version/3/file/CAFOD+rejoinder+to+Goldcorp+1001.pdf.

Other Goldcorp news

Goldcorp makes deal with New Gold to grab 70% of El Morro – Chile
Vancouver-based Goldcorp (TSX: G, NYSE: GG) has entered into a binding agreement with New Gold (TSX: NGD) for the latter to exercise its right of first refusal on a 70% stake in the El Morro copper project in Chile held by Xstrata Copper, a branch of multinational group Xstrata (LSE: XTA), and then pass the share on to Goldcorp. “In El Morro, Goldcorp has identified an ideal project with which to re-enter one of the best mining jurisdictions in South America,” CEO Chuck Jeannes said in a statement.

See http://www.bnamericas.com/news/mining/Goldcorp_makes_deal_with_New_Gold_to_grab_70*_of_El_Morro/169106293.

Barrick sues to break up Goldcorp-New Gold deal
Barrick Gold is suing to halt Goldcorp’s planned acquisition from New Gold of a 70 percent stake in the El Morro copper-gold project in Chile, which Barrick is also trying to acquire. Barrick agreed in October to buy the El Morro stake from its owner, Anglo-Swiss miner Xstrata, for $465 million. However, that bid was scuttled when New Gold, the minority stakeholder in El Morro, claimed right of first refusal to Xstrata’s stake and structuring a deal with Goldcorp.

See http://www.miningweekly.com/article/barrick-sues-new-gold-over-el-morro-stake-sale-2010-01-13.

Goldcorp exceeds output guidance for 2009 at 2.4Moz
Vancouver-based Goldcorp (TSX: G, NYSE: GG) produced 2.4 Moz of gold last year, a record for the company and more than its 2.3Moz guidance. Output in Q4 totaled 601,000oz, Goldcorp said in a statement Monday. The company added it expects cash costs to have averaged US$290/oz last year after taking into account byproducts and US$390/oz on a co-product basis, both above its previous guidance. Goldcorp, one of the world’s biggest gold miners, finished the year with US$865mn in cash. The company is active in Argentina, Guatemala and Mexico as well as Honduras.

http://www.bnamericas.com/news/mining/Goldcorp_exceeds_output_guidance_for_2009_at_2,4Moz/169555623

London Mining Network and a number of its member groups and associates made submissions to this inquiry.

Volume 1 of the Committee’s report includes conclusions and recommendations. The cross-party Committee of both Houses of Parliament is very critical of what it sees as the UK Government’s lack of commitment to improving the human rights record of UK companies operating overseas, and the incoherence of Government policy on the matter. See http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200910/jtselect/jtrights/5/5i.pdf.

Most of the oral and written evidence submitted to the Committee is included in Volume 2 of the report
(see http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200910/jtselect/jtrights/5/5ii.pdf) though there are some omissions.

For materials related to the inquiry, including some of the individual submissions made to the Committee, see also http://www.business-humanrights.org/Documents/UKJointCommittee.

For comments on the Committee’s report, see http://www.business-humanrights.org/Documents/UKJointCommitteereport.

The role of London-listed mining companies, and mining companies raising finance in London, in human rights abuses around the world is clear from the amount of material on such companies that was submitted to the Joint Committee’s inquiry. Twenty of the eighty-seven published submissions and one of the two unpublished submissions deal wholly or partly with human rights abuses allegedly linked to mining companies with a London connection. Three of the remaining published submissions are responses by mining companies to the serious allegations made against them.

The Committee’s report notes (Volume 1, page 94, section 7): ‘Our terms of reference do not permit us to conduct a full investigation into any specific allegations against individuals and companies. However, in the light of the seriousness of many of these claims, we are persuaded that further action is necessary and we hope that our conclusions and recommendations will contribute to advancing the debate in the UK, both among parliamentarians and the wider public.’

Committee Chair, Andrew Dismore MP, said: “UK multinationals may present a compliant face at home but show quite a different approach when operating elsewhere and some have a woeful record abroad. We were most concerned about the range and seriousness of allegations both in the press and in the evidence we received, including against 18 British companies which are household names.”

In a press release dated 15 December 2009, the Committee called on the UK Government ‘to develop a strategy that clearly sets out the human rights standards which UK businesses are expected to meet. The objective should be an international agreement on business and human rights.’ The Committee called on the UK Government to continue supporting UN Special Representative Professor John Ruggie in his work on business and human rights, and noted that few UK firms meet the ‘due diligence’ standards he recommends.

The press release continued: ‘The Committee notes that the UK’s current strategy gives undue priority to voluntary initiatives, without clear guidance. Business compliance with the voluntary OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises is monitored by “National Contact Points” or NCPs. The Committee says the UK’s NCP “still falls far short” of being an effective remedial body. The Committee considers that the UK Government should clarify its policy on business and human rights both at home and overseas.’

London Mining Network draws readers’ attention particularly to the following submissions included in Volume 2 of the report.

• Holly Hill Trust, page Ev 110; deals with Rio Tinto in Ecuador; makes a number of general comments about Rio Tinto’s behaviour which are borne out in the written submissions by Dr Mika Peck and the Colombia Solidarity Campaign and also by the comments of Rio Tinto Representative Sir Brian Fall when giving oral evidence to the Joint Committee: see Volume 2 of the report, pages Ev 27-51
• Dr Mika Peck, page Ev 119; deals with Rio Tinto in Ecuador
• Colombia Solidarity Campaign, page Ev 121; deals with Rio Tinto in Colombia and the right of Indigenous Peoples to Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) under the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
• Vigeo, page Ev 124; deals with Anglo American and Rio Tinto and mentions also BHP Billiton
• World Development Movement, page Ev 135; deals with UK Government support for mining companies and with GCM Resources in Bangladesh
• Action Aid UK, page Ev 137; deals with Vedanta in India
• Survival International, page Ev 161; deals with Vedanta in India, Gem Diamonds in Botswana, and FPIC
• War on Want, page Ev 164; deals with Anglo American and UK Government support for mining companies
• Forest Peoples Programme and Middlesex University Business School Law Department, page Ev 174; deals with FPIC
• Working Group on Mining in the Philippines, page Ev 179; deals with BHP Billiton, Crew, Rio Tinto and Xstrata
• London Mining Network, page Ev 182; deals with Anglo American, BHP Billiton, GCM Resources, Monterrico Metals, Rio Tinto, Vedanta and Xstrata
• CAFOD and Peru Support Group, page Ev 189; deals with BHP Billiton in the Philippines, Monterrico Metals in Peru and UK Government support for mining companies, and mentions Vedanta-owned Konkola Copper in Zambia
• Harrison Grant, page Ev 193; deals with an unnamed diamond mining company registered on London’s Alternative Investment Market (AIM) and active in Sierra Leone
• Margo Drakos, Tarek Maassarani and Jenik Radon, page Ev 236; mentions South African diamond company De Beers, in which Anglo American is a major shareholder
• Latin American Mining Monitoring Programme, page Ev 257; deals with BHP Billiton and Xstrata in Peru
• Global Witness, page Ev 260; deals with Afrimex, Amalgamated Metal Corporation and Anvil Mining (a Canadian-Australian company with some British connections) and UK Government support for mining companies in the Democratic Republic of Congo; also contains recommendations for tackling abuses
• RAID, page Ev 274; deals with UK Government support for mining companies, particularly Anvil Mining in DRC, and the role of AIM; also contains recommendations for tackling abuses
• Leigh Day and Co, page Ev 293; mentions Afrimex and Rio Tinto
• Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, page Ev 297; mentions Anglo American, GCM Resources, Metals Exploration, Rio Tinto and Vedanta
• Amalgamated Metal Corporation, page Ev 323; response to allegations
• BHP Billiton, page Ev 325; response to allegations; as usual with BHP Billiton, it claims that the allegations contain ‘errors’ without specifying what they are, and that some of the claims are ‘out of date’, without specifying which ones
• GCM Resources, page Ev 342; response to allegations

See http://www.cafod.org.uk/news/goldcorp-2009-12-02.