Posts Tagged ‘Scandal’

Damning video and contracts show BSGR was lying in Guinea mining scandal

Beny Steinmetz Group Resources says there was no corrupt behaviour in its acquisition of licences to one of the world’s largest iron ore concessions, in the West African nation of Guinea. It asserts that the wife of a former Guinean dictator had no involvement in its business dealings. All such allegations, it says, are part of a smear campaign.

Global Witness has seen evidence to the contrary.

A series of secret contracts seen by Global Witness spell out how BSGR promised Mamadie Touré (sometimes known as Mamadie Conté) millions of dollars and shares in the massive Simandou iron ore concession in return for help in acquiring the licences. Along with the stake in Simandou – a mountain range in the forested region of southeastern Guinea – Mme Touré was also promised stakes in uranium and bauxite mines that were granted to BSGR. Mme Touré was, at the time the deals were signed, one of the four wives of Guinean dictator Lansana Conté, who came to power in a 1984 coup, ruling the country until his death in December 2008. BSGR acquired the licences to Simandou two weeks before he died.

Just as contentious is the allegation by a Guinean mining review committee that BSGR asked Mme Touré to ensure that licences to Simandou were taken away from the company then holding them – the mining giant Rio Tinto. Blocks 1 and 2 – half the concession – were confiscated from Rio in July 2008, five months before they were granted to BSGR. The Guinean government said at the time that Rio had not met production deadlines.

A leaked video from a September 2006 meeting held by BSGR – an edited version of which we post online today – shows Mme Touré at the event with top BSGR officials. One of those who speak at the event is Frédéric Cilins, an adviser to BSGR who was arrested on Sunday in Florida, standing accused of obstructing a federal grand jury investigation into BSGR by seeking to destroy the secret contracts.

The FBI arrested Mr Cilins in a sting operation, after he allegedly tried to pay Mme Touré to hand over contracts she had signed in relation to Simandou in order for them to be destroyed, according to the indictment. Mr Cilins also instructed Mme Touré to tell the FBI, should she be questioned in relation to Simandou, that she had no involvement with BSGR, the indictment says.

Mme Touré now lives in Jacksonville, Florida, where she owns three properties. Property records indicate that Mr Cilins and another official who has worked for BSGR may have been tied to the purchase of these properties. Global Witness faxed a list of questions to a number listed as being for Mme Touré on Thursday evening but received no reply.

BSGR did not reply to questions e-mailed by Global Witness on Thursday afternoon relating to its dealings with Mme Touré. Global Witness has been seeking comment from BSGR on corruption allegations since November last year. The company has declined to engage with us, instead saying that our refusal to provide a pre-publication copy of our planned reports was “deeply suspicious”, and accusing us of orchestrating a smear campaign. BSGR has, at the same time, been using the law firm Mishcon de Reya – former lawyers to Princess Diana – to try to force us to give up our source material.

BSGR has denied all allegations of corruption and said that it is committed to transparency, saying in a press release of 25 March this year that it “acquired its exploration and mining rights in Guinea after a fully transparent and legal process”. In the same statement, BSGR also denounced the Guinean government as “illegitimate” and said the mining review process was biased and contrary to the Guinean constitution. After Cilins’ arrest, BSGR issued a new statement saying that he is not an employee of the company – although in a letter to the mining review committee, BSGR acknowledged that Mr Cilins has represented BSGR in meetings.

“BSG Resources has over 6,000 employees and operates in 12 countries globally…  We are not aware of any allegations against any of our employees,” BSG Resources said in the statement. “Allegations of fraud in obtaining our mining rights in Guinea are entirely baseless.”

The Simandou flip

Global Witness has previously raised concerns about BSGR’s acquisition of blocks 1 and 2 of Simandou, noting the huge profits that the company made by flipping half their interest on to Vale, the world’s largest miner of iron. BSGR paid nothing for its rights to Simandou and sold 51% of its stake to Vale in 2010 for $ 2.5 billion. Of this sum, $ 500 million was paid out immediately, with the remainder to be paid in stages. Even allowing for the $ 160 million that BSGR says it invested in Simandou and a neighbouring concession, the profit was immense. The Guinean government’s entire annual budget in 2010 amounted to just $ 1.2 billion.

BSGR struck the deal with Vale under a period of often brutal military rule from December 2008. Longstanding opposition figure Alpha Condé was elected President two years later and, pledging to fight against corruption, launched a review of past mining contracts. The review committee has, among other matters, written to BSGR with detailed questions over alleged corruption linked to the Simandou deal and the way in which BSGR obtained its blocks.

In November last year Global Witness issued a statement, calling on BSGR to provide full answers to these allegations. Since then, we have seen three leaked letters from BSGR to the review committee, denying the allegations. In particular, BSGR states in a March 15 letter to the review committee that that Mamadie Touré was not married to President Conté and that questions relating to her were in any case “not pertinent…. As BSGR has never approached Mme Touré on the subject of the Simandou project”.

There is an abundance of reports and news articles from the Guinean media stating that Mamadie Touré was one of President Conté’s wives. This is also accepted as fact by Guinea’s mining review committee. In Global Witness’ opinion it seems unlikely that so many sources in Guinea are mistaken. Furthermore, it does not seem clear why BSGR would seek to question her relation to the former president if she was in no way connected to the company.

Still less credible is that BSGR “never approached Mme Touré on the subject of the Simandou project”.

Text, lies and video tape

In the video taken at a BSGR public relations event of 19 September 2006, Mme Touré – in the presence of Mr Cilins and surrounded by military guards, is introduced to: Asher Avidan, President of BSGR since June 2006; Roy Oron, a senior BSGR official who was described in the Guinean press at the time as being the General Manager of BSGR Afrique and who was CEO of all of BSGR from 1998 to 2007; and Mark Struik, at the time BSGR’s Chief Operating Officer and currently the CEO of its Mining and Metals Division. The person introducing the BSGR officials to Mme Touré is her brother, Ibrahima Sory Touré, then the Vice-President of BSGR’s Guinean subsidiary.

The video also shows Mr Struik announcing, in English, BSGR’s plans to start drilling in Simandou in November 2006 – despite the rights to the concession still belonging to Rio Tinto and there being no plans for Rio to give them up. Mr Cilins – the suspect recently arrested in Florida – is interpreting for Mr Struik.

The previous year, BSGR had formally initiated its relationship with Mamadie Touré by agreeing to a “collaboration contract”, which is referred to in a later termination contract seen by Global Witness. Global Witness has seen a series of other agreements bteween BSGR and affiliated entities. These agreements include:

–: An undated declaration signed by Mamadie Touré, representing a company called Matinda, that she received $ 2.4 million, which was payment stemming from her 2005 “collaboration contract” with a company called Pentler Holdings Ltd, registered in the British Virgin Islands. Pentler Holdings, registered by the company services firm Mossack Fonseca & Co. was a corporate vehicle that held 17.65% of BSGR Guinea.

It should be noted that the US indictment states that the “cooperating witness” (whom we know to be Mamadie Touré) has acknowledged that she has received funds at a bank account she controls in Florida.

–: Various promises of payment (it is unclear whether all were honoured, or whether they were subsequently revised). These documents notably include a “commission contract” of 27 February 2008, signed by Asher Avidan on behalf of BSGR and by Mamadie Touré on behalf of her company Matinda, saying that “BSG Resources commits to give a total sum of four million dollars as a commission for obtaining blocks 1 and 2 of Simandou, situated in the Republic of Guinea.” The contract says that “Matinda and Co. commits… to do everything necessary to obtain from the authorities the signature for the obtaining of the said blocks in favour of the company BSG Resources Guinea.” BSGR “proposes” to distribute the commission in two halves: $ 2 million directly to Matinda and the other half to “people of good will who will have contributed to the facilitation of the granting of the said blocks”. The contract also commits BSGR to building “school infrastructure” in Guinea belonging to Matinda.

A further undated “termination contract” (July 2010, according to one source) that ends the Pentler-Matinda relationship and in which Pentler commits to pay Matinda “$ 3.1 million for its part in all the activities carried out in Guinea”. This document is signed by Mme Touré and by an unknown individual for Pentler.

–: The granting to Mme Touré’s company Matinda of five per cent of BSGR’s Simandou blocks and also to its uranium and bauxite (aluminium ore) blocks in Guinea.

Florida property

Property and corporate documents related to Mme Touré’s three houses in Jacksonville, Florida, where she moved to after the death of President Conté, also indicate a link to BSGR.

One of the properties Mme Touré is listed as owning in Florida’s property records is

4658 Fern Hammock Drive, which was sold 50% to Mme Touré under her own name and 50% to her company Matinda and Co. LLC. The “Articles of Organisation” for Matinda and Co list its original registered agent as the Aventura, Florida-based lawyer Adam R. Schiffman. Mr Schiffman is the registered agent for several companies, including at least two where the owners are listed in a 2012 corporate document as: Avraham Lev Ran, who signs on behalf of the BSGR vehicle Pentler in a 20 February 2006 “letter of engagement” agreed with Mme Touré; and Mr Cilins. Another company that Mr Schiffman is the registered agent for, FMA USA, also has Mr Lev Ran and Mr Cilins as its owners.

When taken together – the video, the contracts, the property documents and the US indictment – there is compelling evidence that BSGR obtained its rights to one of the world’s most important mining assets through bribery. BSGR’s replies regarding Mme Touré and Mr Cilins fail to convince. Instead of answering our questions seriously, the company has resorted to labeling us as part of a plot and refusing to engage with us.

Answers please

As the US Department of Justice investigates the company’s behaviour in Guinea and as the Guinean government persists in asking difficult questions, BSGR should realise this is not a plot. The issues being raised are serious and matter very much for the people of Guinea, whose lives have for decades been blighted by corruption.

In light of Mr Cilins’ arrest and the release of this new evidence, it’s time BSGR stopped dodging the questions – and started providing answers.

Contact:

Daniel Balint-Kurti: +44 207 492 5872; +44 7912 517 146. E-mail: [email protected]

Simon Taylor: +44 7957 142 121. E-mail: [email protected]

Notes to Editors:

The video discussed in the story above is available on Youtube: http://youtu.be/HOfNE2gZH1o

Global Witness has published two previous press releases on BSGR. See our statement of 16 April, “Corruption arrest in US puts Beny Steinmetz Group Resources in the frame”, and our statement of 9 November 2012, “Beny Steinmetz Group Resources must publicly address questions over Guinea mining concession”.

Horsemeat scandal lies in the supply system

More horsing around: Customers at the frozen prepared meals section at a Tesco's store in London. Tesco's has admitted that some of its Everyday Value Spaghetti Bolognese has contained 60 per cent horse meat, after DNA were carried out.
Horsemeat scandal shows that supermarkets have managed to maintain their margins at the cost of their customers and the quality and safety of their products. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA

It seems the horsemeat scandal is just going to go on and on, until the point at which our media attention span runs out. The failure, yet again, of “light touch regulation” is now glaringly obvious; this couldn’t be said to be worse than the financial crisis, but it has certainly been felt closer to home – the sickening lurch in the stomach millions have felt when they realised that they were likely to have eaten something they’d never have chosen, something they find repulsive.

There seems little doubt that the decision by this government to remove the Food Standards Agency from its sole responsibility for food contents and safety in the “bonfire of the quangos” in 2010, with the labelling and composition side going to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, had some part in this affair, although experts say the FSA was already getting far cosier and less critical of the industry. It’s clear this decision should be reversed – and the independence of the FSA strengthened.

But there’s much more to consider beyond this basic failure of government.

There’s also the nature of food supply chains – products at the heart of this scandal came from factory producing tens of thousands of tonnes of ready meals each year, the inputs memorably described as giant lumps of anonymous frozen meat, sold to Findus by contractors, who acquired it from a trader, who subcontracted the order to another trader …

And the fact is that British supermarkets are reliant on similar systems for many of their products. The supermarkets have assumed that they didn’t need to think about the producers of their goods, could always buy cheaply on the world market, ship in cheaply (without considering the real environmental costs of those food miles) – to treat food like a commodity like oil or iron ore.

Supermarkets have managed to maintain their margins while squeezing almost to nothing those of farmers and manufacturers – but we now understand even more clearly that’s been at the cost of their customers and the quality and safety of their goods. (Horsemeat may not present a significant health risk, but you have to wonder what else has been making its way into meat dishes.)

A further cost has been the destruction by the supermarkets of entire high streets, and small independent shops such as butchers, which have generally far shorter, more certain, more stable, but generally higher cost, supply chains. (The sudden rise in trade for them as a result of the scandal has sadly come too late for many.)

The groceries ombudsman, promised in the 2010 election manifestos, will not be in place until 2014, downgraded to “adjudicator”. The adjudicator will have power to fine errant supermarkets – a basic function that came only after a long battle – but how many real teeth this fledgling institution will have against the supermarkets giants, with their close links with Tories and Labour, remains to be seen.

Yet the problems extend even beyond our severely distorted food supply system. They go to the heart of our economic model.

Britain has settled on a low-wage, low-jobs economy; in abandoning manufacturing for services, in relying on a handful of remaining, dubious, industries – finance, pharmaceuticals and arms – we’ve condemned hundreds of thousands to unemployment and many more to underemployment, and unstable and uncertain jobs (including unconscionable zero-hours contracts). Living standards – and money available for food – has been squeezed and squeezed again.

The massive rise in the cost of housing in particular has at least in part come out of the food budget; in the two decades to 2007, the price of food for consumers fell, and the share of British household income spent on food dropped to 10%. This is clearly going to have to rise, given world food prices and the likely direction of sterling, but with our hard pressed households – already struggling with rising rents/mortgages and energy bills and leaping transport costs – it is hard to see how this is to be found.

We already know that food, as the one of the few possibly flexible item in those expenses, is where households are looking to make cuts. Half of all parents report they have a tighter food budget than they had a year ago.

There are two more important and related factors in Britain’s food culture – long working hours and lack of a cooking culture. Stand by a transport hub around 7pm-8pm (or even later), and you’ll see many weary workers, emerging, then swerving into the nearest mini-superstore and emerging with a ready meal – yes the same ready meals that appear so prominently in the horsemeat story.

Cooking from scratch, raw vegetables, can be just as quick, but it does take a modicum of thought, a little time and energy – both of which feel overstretched for many workers. Children now have grown up in households where real cooking almost never happens – this stretches through the generations, and cooking lessons, which might fill the gap, have almost disappeared from schools.

So we need to tackle our regulation, we need to tell our supermarkets very firmly that helping return food production to Britain – paying our farmers decently, providing them with certainty of markets – is essential.

But we also need to think more deeply about the kind of society we’ve become. How we can restore a sense of security to households facing huge pressure on food budgets, and give workers roles that fairly reward them?

Making the minimum wage a living wage, ensuring that benefits allow for a basic decent standard of living, ending our long-hours working culture – these are all ways to deal with the circumstances that created the horsemeat scandal. And educating children, and adults, about cooking and food are important additions.

Environment news, comment and analysis from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk

ThePuffingtonhost.com Reports: Michael Phelps On Marijuana Scandal,…

Oakland, CA (PRWEB) July 12, 2012

ThePuffingtonhost.com aggregates medical cannabis news from around the world into one easy to navigate site. In addition they provide unique content from industry leaders like: Ed Rosenthal, Mamakind, Eddy Lepp, Marc Emery, Mickey Martin and more.

Today’s coverage includes:
Selen Yeager of Details Magazine 2012 issue covers Michael Phelps marijuana induced weight gain.
The Fresno Bee reports: “Murder warrant issued after teen disappears trying to steal marijuana”
News core reports: “Texas man accused of eating dog while high on synthetic marijuana”

Ed Vogel with the Las Vegas Review discusses “Medical marijuana bill proposed for 2013 Legislature”

Read the latest about Snoop Dogg getting high…

Stay up-to-date on the latest cannabis headlines, the Puff’s own comic “Puff, Puff & Pass”, and the latest celebrity pot news direct from celebstoner.com.

Toke it Easy!
About us: ThePuffingtonhost.com, The Internet Rolling Paper: News, Blog, Video Cannmunity, is a sophisticated source for everything cannabis. Created as a one-stop provider of unique content, industry blogs, dispensary search engine, forum, fun and more. The site aggregates the most pertinent and influential news as well as provides unique content from the who’s who in the business.

For more information:
Please visit http://www.thepuffingtonhost.com
For media inquiries please email:
contact(at)thepuffingtonhost(dot)com
ThePuffingtonHost.com


Environment

Govt must tackle the national scandal of fuel poverty

Global Witness spokespeople available for comment on “secret sales” scandal in DR Congo

Global Witness welcomes the recent statement by UK MP Eric Joyce raising concerns over the secretive sales of what appear to be billions-of-dollars-worth of mining assets in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Mr Joyce, who is Chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on the Great Lakes Region of Africa, described “a systematic pattern of underselling Congolese mining assets to off-shore ‘shell’ companies incorporated almost exclusively in the British Virgin Islands.”

Mr Joyce raises hugely important issues that are central to the governance of one of the most resource-rich nations on earth, at a critical point in its troubled history.

Global Witness has been independently looking into this matter and is able to comment on Mr Joyce’s statement, which echoes concerns the organisation expressed in written and oral testimony to the UK’s International Development Committee on 23 September.

Contact:

Daniel Balint-Kurti: +44 (0)20 7492 5872, [email protected]

Oliver Courtney: +44 (0)7815 731 889, [email protected]

Notes:

Full content generated by Get Full RSS.

Rail price hikes are a national scandal

15 August 2011

Commenting on Government plans to increase rail fares by around 30 per cent by May 2015, Friends of the Earth’s transport campaigner Richard Dyer said:

“It’s a national scandal that train fares are to increase above inflation – passengers in the UK already pay some of the highest ticket prices in Europe.

“Price hikes send out the wrong message to commuters seeking a greener alternative to driving – the Government should encourage people to travel by train by capping rail fare rises and upgrading the rail network to make services more reliable.”

ENDS

Notes to editors

 1.    The Campaign for Better Transport’s Fair Fares Now campaign is calling for affordable ticket prices, reliable services that aren’t overcrowded, and straightforward tickets that make train travel simple. 

 2.    Friends of the Earth says that to cut rail fares for passengers, the Government should tax fuel on domestic flights and use that money to subsidise rail, and find ways to make the railway industry run more efficiently.

If you’re a journalist looking for press information please contact the Friends of the Earth media team on 020 7566 1649.

Published by Friends of the Earth Trust

Full Feed Generated by Get Full RSS, sponsored by Used Car Search.
Press releases by RSS

IPCC: critics ignore real scandal

Cumulus clouds in a blue sky
The IPCC showed the world the reality and danger of climate change, but has come under a public relations cloud in recent years. Photograph: First/zefa/Corbis

The world truly woke up to the threat of climate change on Friday 2 February 2007 when a report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded that humanity’s activities were – beyond all reasonable doubt – driving dangerous global warming. It remains the seminal moment, and the IPCC’s work was recognised with the award of the Nobel peace prize, shared with Al Gore.

How things change. Given much of the recent reporting of the IPCC’s work, you’d be forgiven for thinking it’s a tinpot group of green zealots, rather than the greatest feat of global scientific cooperation ever seen. Its reports are approved and endorsed by every nation on the planet, making it utterly unique and authoritative.

The most recent “controversy” was over the IPCC’s special report on renewable energy. “Its launch was hijacked by Greenpeace, with the actual report buried until weeks later,” screamed critics. Here’s what they failed, for some reason, to tell you.

1. The summary for policy makers (SPM) was released before the full report for the very same reason that gives the IPCC its unique clout. The SPM is discussed and then approved by all 194 countries, which means some changes are made to the draft. Those changes need to then be woven back into the full report, 1000 pages in this case. That takes time, but the SPM is already widely available. Suppressing the SPM until the revisions to the full report are made is simply impossible.

2. The scientist who works for Greenpeace, Sven Teske, was one of nine lead authors for the relevant chapter, one of whom worked for an oil company. The ultimate responsibility for the chapter, one of 11 in the report, was with two coordinating lead authors. Overall, 120 scientists authored the report, and there were 269 contributors and 340 or so reviewers.

3. The research suggesting 80% of electricity could be generated from renewable source by 2050 was in a Greenpeace report. But far more saliently, it was also peer reviewed and published in a respected scientific journal. It was the latter, not the former, that was part of the IPCC report.

4. The press release for the special report on renewables makes clear that over 160 scientific scenarios for the expansion of green energy sources were examined, with four looked at in depth. The most optimistic suggests 77% use by 2050, the least optimistic – cited in the next paragraph – suggest just 15%.

Has the IPCC made mistakes in its communication? Most certainly. The response to the revelation that in one 3,000-page report there was an erroneous claim that Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035 was extremely clumsy and counter-productive. Lessons have been learned and implemented to try to prevent future repeats, though no system will be foolproof in such a giant endeavour.

Does the IPCC’s crucial work make it above journalistic scrutiny or criticism? Absolutely not. Journalists should work without fear or favour, and I have done so myself in relation to information in the US diplomatic cables obtained by Wikileaks on how some senior IPCC figures were appointed.

Some critics has gone so far as to suggest that NGO scientists have no place as authors for IPCC reports. You’d think Nature, the most prestigious science journal publishers in the world, would agree. But they don’t. In fact they take quite the opposite view. An editorial in the August edition of Nature Climate Change (free registration) states:

Widening the circle of expertise and information contributing to the IPCC is essential for the organization’s evolution, and the [renewable energy] report should be commended in that regard. Some of the greatest insights into how we cope with climate change could come from such diversity, be that in the form of authors with industry or advocacy links, sources of information outside of journals, or meta-analyses

It is true that a perception of bias can be damaging, even if it is groundless. But that perception comes from biased reporting, shorn of proper context and omitting crucial facts.

The real IPCC scandal is altogether different. For a body of such unique global importance, its secretariat is scandalously tiny – just 12 staff. Not so long ago it was half that number. Its annual budget is a mere few million dollars, with just a single communications professional. It’s a miracle they get anything out.

How can this be? Ironically, it is once again for the same reason that gives the IPCC its unique authority. If you think getting 194 nations to agree on global warming, try getting 194 nations to agree on raising their subscription fees.

The IPCC certainly needs to communicate better and it needs the resources to do so. That, in my opinion, is something worth screaming about.

Note: In point 2 above in the original post I was did not use the IPPC’s exact terminology for the different author role, i.e. lead and coordinating lead. That’s now corrected. My thanks to Richard Klein.






Environment news, comment and analysis from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk

No Scandal behind these gates

Since December there has been a glut of stories challenging the science of climate change as represented by the IPCC. Should we be concerned? Only about climate change.

Further information:

Article source