Survival believes the Bushmen were evicted from their land due to its rich diamond reserves. De Beers, one of the world’s largest diamond companies held the mining concession at Gope, a Bushman community for 25 years.  However following the negative publicity from Survival’s campaign it sold its diamond deposit at Gope to Gem Diamonds in 2007. Gem Diamonds is now developing its mine within the Kalahari Reserve, whilst funding projects to re-instate and drill new boreholes.

See http://www.survivalinternational.org/news/7662.

See http://www.survivalinternational.org/news/7294.

Now, says the charity, “it appears that Vedanta has sent down its spies”.

See http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-business/article-23927570-vedanta-in-a-spin-as-it-digs-hole-for-itself.do.

See http://www.survivalinternational.org/news/6925 utm_source=Survival+International&utm_campaign=a032628180-enews_special_Bushmen_success_1_27_2011&utm_medium=email.

London-listed Gem Diamonds announced that its application to open a huge diamond mine near the Bushman community of Gope in the reserve has been approved. The company claims to have secured the consent of the Bushmen on whose lands the mine will be located.

Survival, however, has repeatedly told Gem Diamonds that the Bushmen are entitled to independent advice on what the likely impact of the mine will be. No such advice has been given, and many Bushmen whose lands will be affected still live outside the reserve in resettlement camps after their 2002 eviction, as the government refuses to allow them to hunt or even access water in the reserve. Survival and the Bushmen have always maintained that the Bushmen were evicted to make way for diamond mining. The government long denied this, claiming the diamond deposit at Gope was ‘sub-economic’.

See http://www.survivalinternational.org/news/6859.

Survival International believes that the government’s attitude to the Bushmen is affected by the presence of diamonds in the traditional territory. Diamond companies active in Botswana include De Beers (45% owned by London-based Anglo American) and London-based Gem Diamonds.

See http://www.survivalinternational.org/news/6766.

Celebrated jeweller, Pippa Small, said, ‘As jewellers we have for years made sure that we do not use blood diamonds.  Now we also need to boycott Botswana diamonds until the Bushmen are allowed to live and hunt freely on their land’.

Both De Beers (controlled by Anglo American) and Gem Diamonds are involved in Botswana.

See http://www.survivalinternational.org/news/6587.

Finsbury is the retained PR agency for Vedanta Resources, which has been the target of a worldwide campaign to stop it building a bauxite mine in the hills of Niyamgiri, Orissa, India. The mine would have had a devastating effect on the Dongria Kondh tribal people who live there.

See http://www.survivalinternational.org/news/6586.

The office of Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh has written to the Environment and Forests Ministry urging it to clear Vedanta’s proposed Niyamgiri mine in Odisha. The mine cannot go ahead without official clearance from the Ministry.

See http://www.survivalinternational.org/news/6152.

Survival International, a charity that supports tribal peoples, has been lobbying the main pension provider for academics to pull its investment from Vedanta for two years.

The company plans to open a bauxite mine on Niyamgiri Mountain in the state of Orissa, eastern India.

The Dongria Kondh tribe, about 8,000 of whom live in the area, have left the trees on the mountain untouched as they believe that a god inhabits the forest.

See http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=410629&c=1.

See http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100304/wl_sthasia_afp/indiabritainminingvedantarights.

British tabloid The Sun has joined those comparing the story of James Cameron’s film Avatar to that of the Dongria Kondh people resisting London-based Vedanta Resources in the Niyamgiri Hills in the Indian state of Orissa.

See http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/film/2880779/Oscars-week-The-real-life-story-like-that-in-Avatar.html.

After the Church of England, another British investor has decided to sell its shares worth 2.2 million pounds (Rs.159 million/$3.5 million) in the Indian-owned mining company Vedanta Resources, citing serious concerns about the company’s approach to human rights and environment in Orissa. International NGO ActionAid said that the Joseph Rowntree Trust withdrew its support to Vedanta, becoming the fourth high profile company to do so since 2007 on the same grounds.

See http://ibnlive.in.com/news/trust-sells-vedanta-shares-over-human-rights-abuse/110335-7.html?from=tn and the Trust’s press release (‘JRCT sells its Vedanta shares’) on its website, http://www.jrct.org.uk/.

Survival International applauds Rowntree decision to sell Vedanta shares over ethical concerns

Survival International welcomes the news that the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust is selling its shares in Vedanta Resources due to concerns over the company’s human rights record. Two other shareholders, the Marlborough Ethical Fund and Millfield House Foundation, have also sold their shares. Survival is campaigning for all shareholders to pull out of the company, and has been lobbying the Rowntree Trust since July 2009.

See http://www.survivalinternational.org/news/5563.

See http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/feb/08/dongria-kondh-help-stop-vedanta.

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