Advocates Redesign

Category: Cases/PILIWA Members

  • ACA participates in 3rd African Business and Human Rights Forum in Nairobi

    The 3rd African Business and Human Rights Forum has ended in Nairobi, Kenya, under the theme: “Promoting Responsible Business Conduct in a Rapidly Changing Context.”

    The three-day program brought together stakeholders from across Africa who took stock of progress and discussed challenges and opportunities for promoting responsible business and human rights conduct and corporate accountability in the region.

    It was co-organized by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), the Working Group and UNICEF, in close collaboration with local and regional, continental and international actors.

    Advocates for Community Alternatives (ACA), a human right focused non-profit-making organization operating in West-Africa, was represented at the forum by its Legal Officer, Mustapha Mahamah, and co-hosted a side session on access to remedies as provided under the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) guidelines.

    This year, ACA joined OECD-Watch to co-host a session at the sidelines of the conference to foster policy dialogue and peer-to-peer learning on responsible business conduct (RBC) and the human rights implications of the emerging African and global regulatory and policy landscape in Africa, generating crucial insights as well as key recommendations for the adoption of strong regulatory and policy frameworks and business models that promote ethical and sustainable practices, in line with internationally agreed norms and principles.

    Outcomes

    At the end of the forum, different ways of using OECD guidelines were developed. These included a big push to move from voluntary initiatives and standards to hard law and policies on corporate accountability.

    The EU’s corporate sustainability due diligence directive was a big topic for discussion, with participants exploring both the challenges it may result in for African businesses as well as the opportunities it may present to raise the bar for accountability across value chains between the EU and Africa.

  • Tribunal Judiciaire in Paris begins hearing Zogota massacre victims

    The Tribunal Judiciaire in Paris, France has begun hearing the case brought before it by the survivors of the 2012 massacre by state security forces in the village of Zogota in the West African country of Guinea.

    The hearing was inconclusive as the government of Guinea was not represented, and as such not many arguments took place at the courtroom.

     

    The Presiding Judge said she would deliver her final decision on October 9, but it is still possible that she would reopen the arguments and give both sides a chance to submit more documentation and arguments.

     

    Among others, the judge asked lawyers for the plaintiffs to submit originals of some key documents and demonstrate that the government of Guinea was notified of the legal action.

     

    According to the lawyers, the Guinean government has been notified of the legal action while efforts are underway to furnish the court with the key documents being requested for.

    Exequatur suit

    In October last year, some survivors of the 2012 massacre by state security forces in the village of Zogota in the West African country of Guinea run to the Tribunal Judiciaire in Paris, France, to seek justice through a lawsuit against the Guinean state.

    Earlier in 2018, these survivors brought their case to the Abuja-based ECOWAS Court of Justice after their complaints were repeatedly stalled and ignored in the Guinean courts.  The ECOWAS Court found that Guinea had violated its international human rights obligations and ordered it to pay 4.56 billion Guinean francs (then approximately $436,000) to the plaintiffs, but the government is yet to comply.

    This led to an exequatur suit filed by the massacre survivors at the tribunal in Paris, which they hope will grant exequatur, or recognition, of the ECOWAS Court judgment.  The purpose of the exequatur suit is to recognize that the ECOWAS Court decision is enforceable in France, on an equal basis with judgments of the French courts.

    Exequatur, if granted, would allow the massacre survivors to locate and seize certain Guinean state assets in France to satisfy the ECOWAS Court’s compensation order.

    One of the biggest weaknesses in the international justice system for human rights abuses is the difficulty in enforcing human rights tribunals’ judgments against states, so this exequatur action could fill a major accountability gap.”

    High stakes

    The stakes in this action are high because not only could success make the difference that allows the Zogota massacre survivors to finally receive justice, but it would also pioneer an important new strategy for victims of grave abuses worldwide.

    “The exequatur procedure seems appropriate to us because it will allow the rights of victims of this atrocity to be restored. This is because of the refusal of the Republic of Guinea to execute the judgment of the ECOWAS Court of Justice”, Foromo Frederic Loua, one of the Lawyers for victims said in an interview.

    For his part, one of the village chiefs stated that: “We have suffered a lot from this atrocity, we lost close relatives, fathers, children and friends. And for a very long time we have continued to suffer, we have had no support from the Guinean authorities to date, we are asking for compensation for our losses and know that we can count on French justice.”

  • Tribunal Judiciaire in Paris hears Zogota massacre victims today

    Survivors of the 2012 massacre by state security forces in the village of Zogota in the West African country of Guinea are keeping their fingers crossed as hearing of their Exequatur suit begins today at the Tribunal Judiciaire in Paris, France.

    The stakes in this action are high because not only could success make the difference that allows the Zogota massacre survivors to finally receive justice, but it would also pioneer an important new strategy for victims of grave abuses worldwide.

    In October last year, some survivors of the 2012 massacre by state security forces in the village of Zogota in the West African country of Guinea run to the Tribunal Judiciaire in Paris, France, to seek justice through a lawsuit against the Guinean state.

    Earlier in 2018, these survivors brought their case to the Abuja-based ECOWAS Court of Justice after their complaints were repeatedly stalled and ignored in the Guinean courts.  The ECOWAS Court found that Guinea had violated its international human rights obligations and ordered it to pay 4.56 billion Guinean francs (then approximately $436,000) to the plaintiffs, but the government is yet to comply.

    This led to an exequatur suit filed by the massacre survivors at the tribunal in Paris, which they hope will grant exequatur, or recognition, of the ECOWAS Court judgment.  The purpose of the exequatur suit is to recognize that the ECOWAS Court decision is enforceable in France, on an equal basis with judgments of the French courts.

    Exequatur, if granted, would allow the massacre survivors to locate and seize certain Guinean state assets in France to satisfy the ECOWAS Court’s compensation order.

    One of the biggest weaknesses in the international justice system for human rights abuses is the difficulty in enforcing human rights tribunals’ judgments against states, so this exequatur action could fill a major accountability gap.

  • PILEX rescues of a Nigerian widow

    A member of ACA’s Public Interest Lawyering Initiative for West Africa (PILIWA), Courage Nsirimovu, has initiated pro bono legal steps to retrieve a car for a Nigerian widow, Pleasure Amadi, whose husband passed away on August 28, 2022, after a short illness.

    Madam Amadi’s late husband is said to have parked the car in his brother’s residence shortly before his demise, but the brother has refused to surrender the property to the widow despite various attempts to retrieve it.

    The widow says she badly needs the car for commercial use to enable her to fend for herself and her only child.

    Lawyer Courage Nsirimovu, who is also the Coordinator of PILEX Centre For Civic Education Initiative-The Peoples Advocates, says he, together with his team, will leave no stone unturned to secure justice for the widow.

    According to him, efforts will be made to ensure that all other properties that are supposed to be given to Madam Amadi and her child will be retrieved through the legal process that has been initiated.

  • OPEN LETTER ON SOCFIN’S PROPOSED DIVESTMENT FROM SRC IN LIBERIA

    OPEN LETTER ON SOCFIN’S PROPOSED DIVESTMENT FROM SRC IN LIBERIA

    We, the undersigned, are Liberian, West African, and international civil society organizations, communities, and individuals concerned with the legacy of harm that the operations of the Salala Rubber Corporation (SRC) have foisted on local communities in and around Weala, Liberia.  We are alarmed by news that SRC’s parent company, Socfin, is seeking to divest its shares in SRC without first settling its social, environmental, cultural, financial, and economic debts to affected communities.  We therefore address this open letter to the Liberian government, Liberia’s development partners, the public, Socfin, and, particularly, all prospective purchasers of SRC.

    Any purchaser will inherit extremely significant liabilities connected to the widespread land, environmental, and human rights violations associated with SRC’s rubber plantation.  The purchaser will also receive a concession based on insecure title to the land on which the plantation sits.  We therefore call on all stakeholders – SRC’s parent company, Socfin; investors; financiers; the Government of Liberia; and all prospective buyers – to desist from any sale or assignation of rights until the complaints against SRC are resolved and the rights to the land upon which the concession for the rubber plantation was granted are conclusively determined.

    Background

    SRC, an indirectly owned subsidiary of Luxembourg-based agricultural giant Socfin since 2007, is the owner of an 8,000-hectare rubber plantation near the town of Weala.  The plantation operates according to a Concession Agreement concluded in 1959 and enacted by the Liberian legislature in 1960, which granted Socfin’s predecessors the rights to develop a rubber plantation on unencumbered, public land in what is now Lofa, Margibi and Bong Counties in the Republic of Liberia.  Since that time, the plantation has undergone several waves of expansion – most recently in 2015 – and has been associated with a wide range of violations of the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, including land grabbing, destruction of cultural sites, and sexual and gender-based violence.

    In its 2023 annual report, Socfin announced that a “sign of impairment” exists for SRC, assessed that impairment value at 7.5 million euros, and reclassified the plantation as an “asset for sale.”[1] According to the Article XI of SRC’s Concession Agreement, any assignment of rights to a third party must be approved by the Government of Liberia.[2]  Under Liberia’s 2018 Land Rights Act, local communities must have the opportunity to contribute their views to ensure that their rights and interests are protected when an existing concession is reviewed.[3]  That same law also provides that upon the termination of any concession on customary land, the land reverts to the local communities who are its original owners.[4]  The SRC concession will terminate on August 1, 2030.

    Serious Human Rights Impacts

    As the plantation has grown, it has engulfed the farmlands of at least 37 villages, miring their residents in poverty, food insecurity, and cultural dislocation.  Some communities, like Jorkporlorsue, are now a mere enclave surrounded by a sea of rubber, cut off from the graves of their ancestors and any form of self-sustenance.  Others, like Sayee Town, were burned when the plantation took over, sending their residents fleeing.  SRC did not pay compensation for the loss of land, and many testimonies from several communities attest that the company underpaid for the loss of productive and cultural assets.  Women are often harassed by workers and security guards when they cross the plantation for any reason, and many have been extorted for sex when they seek employment with the company.[5]

    These allegations were first reported by Green Advocates International in 2013[6] and confirmed in a 2019 report by Swiss NGO Bread for All.[7]  They are the subject of a 2019 complaint to the ombudsman’s office of the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the private sector financing arm of the World Bank, which partially funded Socfin’s rehabilitation of the SRC plantation after Liberia’s civil war and is currently finalizing an investigative report focused on how the IFC enforces its environmental and social safeguards.[8]  When Socfin engaged a consultant – Earthworm Foundation – to review its social and environmental performance in lieu of cooperating with the IFC’s investigation, the resulting report concluded that most of the communities’ complaints were, in fact substantiated and had not been properly addressed.[9]

    Land Rights Questioned 

    The plantation itself is the object of a lawsuit currently pending in the Liberian courts, in which residents of the affected communities claim that the land SRC took was not eligible for plantation development because it was neither public nor unencumbered.  The land was, in fact, under customary use and is part of the traditional territory of the local Kpelle communities.  The outcome of this lawsuit may decide whether the concession was validly granted or whether it should be recognized as customary land.

    Risks of Acquisition

    Socfin’s prospective divestment of SRC is a risky deal for all involved except Socfin itself.

    •       For affected communities, it could mean trading an international company that has committed – at least, on paper – to high standards of social and environmental responsibility and the resources to make good on them for a prospective purchaser whose willingness and capacity to protect community well-being is unknown.  Communities in Nigeria’s Niger Delta are currently facing a similar situation, as international oil companies with global reputations are seeking to divest their onshore operations to poorly known companies with little experience and few resources, without first resolving their environmental liabilities.[10]
    •       For the Republic of Liberia, as the purported owner of the land on which the plantation is located, it could mean being stuck with the social and environmental liabilities left behind by SRC under Socfin.
    •       For any prospective buyer, the purchase of the plantation would entail exposure to as-yet unquantified liability for claims for land, crop, cultural, and environmental damage and sexual and gender-based violence from thousands of individuals in 37 villages, as the Earthworm report and IFC assessment process clearly demonstrate.
    •       The buyer’s right to operate the plantation could also be affected by a potential finding from the Liberian courts that the Liberian government never had the authority to grant a concession over the land on which the plantation sits.[11] According to Article XI of the Concession Agreement, any assignee will have the same “rights, privileges, immunities and obligations” of the original concessionaire.  But given the uncertainty around Socfin’s outstanding liabilities to the communities and the validity of the concession itself, the rights transferred may be significantly less valuable than they appear, and the obligations may impose heavy, unforeseen costs on the purchaser.

    Recommendations

    In light of the above, Socfin’s planned divestment from SRC should not proceed without taking into account the following.

    To the Republic of Liberia:

    •       Ensure that process to seek the free, prior, and informed consent of affected communities with respect to any proposed assignation of rights by Socfin is respected, as it reviews the proposed sale, pursuant to Article 48(2) of the Land Rights Act of 2018 and general principles of international law with respect to the rights of indigenous peoples when their traditional land and natural resources are at risk.
    •       Immediately disclose to affected communities any request from Socfin to dispose of or assign its interest in SRC to any other party.
    •       Decline to approve any proposed assignment of rights by Socfin until the pending litigation over ownership of the plantation land and all other disputes regarding control of the land are resolved.
    •       Order a comprehensive forensic audit of SRC’s operations covering the entire concession period, focusing on production, environment, revenue, labor, and social obligations, as well as compliance with the terms and conditions of the concession agreement.
    •       In addition, decline to approve any proposed assignment of rights by Socfin unless a) Socfin has first deposited in a trust account in Liberia, under the joint control of community and government trustees, an amount adequate to cover all SRC’s potential environmental, social, cultural, and economic liabilities; and b) the purchaser has signed a community benefit agreement with the affected communities in which it commits to respecting the highest environmental and social standards and confers enforceable rights and benefits on the communities.  It is encouraging to note that in Nigeria, the government is taking seriously the need to ensure that exiting oil companies first pay for environmental cleanup;[12] nothing prevents Liberia from following suit.

    To prospective buyers:

    •       Refrain from completing any purchase until Socfin and SRC have settled all potential outstanding social, environmental, cultural, and economic liabilities with the surrounding communities.
    •       Prior to any engagements or negotiations with Socfin/SRC, commission a comprehensive risk assessment covering all potential, outstanding, and existing social, environmental, cultural, and economic liabilities toward the surrounding communities, private vendors/contractors, and the Government of Liberia.

    To Socfin:

    •       Refrain from seeking to divest from SRC until all potential and outstanding social, environmental, cultural, and economic liabilities with the surrounding communities are settled.

    To local communities:

    •       Exercise the right to submit comments and input to the government through the Community Land Development and Management Committee on Socfin’s proposed divestment, with a view toward protecting their human, environmental, cultural, and economic rights.

    Signed,

     

    Community representatives

    Edwin Gbah, Elder Representative, Dedee-ta 1

    Tina Gibson, Women Representative, Dedee-ta 1

    Isaiah Gibson, Youth Representative, Dedee-ta 1

    Tommy Blackie, Elder Representative, Golonkalah

    Tenneh Gbomah, Women Representative, Golonkalah

    Emmanuel Singbah, Youth Representative, Golonkalah

    Musa Kaiffa, Elder Representative, Dokai Town

    Quita George, Women Representative, Dokai Town

    Jonah Singbah, Youth Representative, Dokai Town

    Alfred Gotolo, Elder Representative, Monkeytail Town

    Hawa Monkeytail, Women Representative, Monkeytail Town

    Remember Fellezey, Youth Representative, Monkeytail Town

    Mulbah Yarkpawolo, Elder Representative, Hawa Bondon

    Betty Kollie, Women Representative, Hawa Bondon

    Patrick Yah, Youth Representative, Hawa Bondon

    David Siaffa, Elder Representative, Siaffa Molley Village

    Hawa Siaffa, Women Representative, Siaffa Molley Village

    Moses Siaffa, Youth Representative, Siaffa Molley Village

    Olanto Forjah, Elder Representative, Martin Village

    Miatta Gbah, Women Representative, Martin Village

    Emmanuel Gbah, Youth Representative, Martin Village

    James Whalee, Elder Representative, James Whalee Village

    Hawa Whalee, Women Representative, James Whalee Village

    Titus G. Whalee, Youth Representative, James Whalee Village

    James K. Gorgbor, Elder Representative, Gorgbor Town

    Jartu Gorgbor, Women Representative, Gorgbor Town

    Penneh Mulbah, Youth Representative, Gorgbor Town

    Samuel D. Bindah, Elder Representative Jorkporlorsue Town

    Menatta Sackie, Women Representative, Jorkporlorsue Town

    Aaron F. Kollie, Youth Representative, Jorkporlorsue Town

    Moses David, Elder Representative, Varmue Town

    Ruth Cooper, Women Representative, Varmue Town

    Dennis Cooper, Youth Representative, Varmue Town

    Fahn Kolleh, Elder Representative, Blomu Town

    Finda Bengo, Women Representative, Blomu Town

    Stephen Nantee, Youth Representative, Blomu Town

    William Bainda, Elder Representative, Lango Town

    Karne Dolo, Women Representative, Lango Town

    Fahn Singbe, Youth Representative, Lango Town

    Pst. Milton F. Gweh, Elder Representative, Garjah Town

    Hawah Siaffa, Women Representative, Garjah Town

    Edward Lawad, Youth Representative, Garjah Town

    Emmanuel Kpaingba, Elder Representative, Kuwah-ta

    Yassah Mulbah, Women Representative, Kuwah-ta

    Victor Koko, Youth Representative, Kuwah-ta

    Roger Moore, Elder Representative, Dedee-ta 2

    Miatta Singbah, Women Representative, Dedee-ta 2

    Oretha Singbah, Youth Representative, Dedee-ta 2

    		  

    Civil Society supporters

    Alfred Lahai Gbabai Brownell Sr., Founder, Green Advocates International, 2019 Goldman Environmental Prize Winner

    AbibiNsroma Foundation (Ghana)

    Accountability Counsel (Global)

    Action Solidarité Tiers Monde asbl (Luxembourg)

    Advocates for Community Alternatives (USA/West Africa)

    Africa Transcribe (Tanzania)

    Ahmed Elseidi, public interest lawyer (Egypt)

    Al-Marsad Arab Human Rights Center (Syria)

    Alliance for Rural Democracy (Liberia)

    Asia Indigenous Peoples Network on Extractive Industries and Energy (Asia Regional)

    Asociación de Pescadores Artesanales del Golfo de Fonseca (Honduras)

    Attac CADTM Maroc (Morocco)

    Botswana Watch (Botswana)

    CADTM Afrique (Burkina Faso)

    CADTM Afrique (Mali)

    Claudia Lazzaro Socra (Argentina)

    CNCD-11.11.11 (Belgium)

    Collectif pour la défense des terres malgaches – TANY (Madagascar)

    Community Forest Watch (Nigeria)

    Consejo de los Pueblos Wuxhtaj (Guatemala)

    Daniel Santi, Pueblo Originario Kichwa de Sarayaku (Ecuador)

    Economic and Social Rights Centre – Hakihamii (Kenya)

    Environmental Defender Law Center (USA)

    FIAN-Belgium

    FIAN-Switzerland

    Fondation pour le Développement au Sahel (Mali)

    Foundation for Good Governance Development Initiative (Liberia)

    Global Rights (International)

    Good Health Community Programmes (Kenya)

    Green Advocates International (Liberia)

    GRAIN (International)

    HakiMadini (Tanzania)

    Hilfswerk der Evangelisch-reformierten Kirche Schweiz (HEKS) (Switzerland)

    Human Rights Awareness Center (Nepal)

    Inclusive Development International (International)

    Integrated Center for Community Empowerment (Liberia)

    Jamaa Resource Initiatives (Kenya)

    JPIC, Franciscans Africa (Kenya)

    Justicitz-ACORN (Liberia)

    Karapatan Alliance (Philippines)

    Karl Klare, International Social & Economic Rights Project (USA)

    Liberia Reform Movement (Liberia)

    Lok Shakti Abiyan (India)

    MENA Fem Movement (International)

    MUFRAS-32 (El Salvador)

    Natural Resources Women’s Platform (Liberia)

    National Civil Society Council of Liberia

    National Union of Domestic Employees (Trinidad and Tobago)

    Neighbourhood Environment Watch Foundation (Nigeria)

    Network Movement for Justice and Development (Sierra Leone)

    Protection International Africa

    Public Eye (Switzerland)

    ReAct Transnational (France)

    Réseau des Acteurs du Développement Durable (Cameroon)

    Renevlyn Development Initiative (Nigeria)

    Solifonds (Switzerland)

    SOS Faim (Luxembourg)

    SYNAPARCAM (Cameroon)

    West Point Women for Health and Development Organization (Liberia)

    Witness Radio (Uganda)

    WoMin Alliance Africa (Burkina Faso)

    Yeabamah National Congress for Human Rights (Liberia)

     

     

    [1] Socfin 2023 Annual Report at 65, 105, available at https://socfin.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/2023-Socfin-Annual-report.pdf. 

    [2] Concession Agreement between the Republic of Liberia and Rubber Cultur Maatschappij ‘Amsterdam’ & Nordmann Rasmann and Company, dated 1st August 1959 AND Acts passed by the Legislature of the Republic of Liberia during the session 1959-1960, art. II.

    [3] Republic of Liberia, Land Rights Law of 2018, art. 48(2).

    [4] Ibid, art. 48(4).

    [5] See Ashoka Mukpo, At a rubber plantation in Liberia, history repeats in a fight over land, Mongabay (January 17, 2023), at https://news.mongabay.com/2023/01/at-a-rubber-plantation-in-liberia-history-repeats-in-a-fight-over-land/.

    [6] Green Advocates International, Livelihood Challenges at Salala Rubber Corporation (SRC) (April 2013).

    [7] Bread for All, Struggle for Life and Land: Socfin’s Rubber Plantations in Liberia and the Responsibility of Swiss Companies (2019), at  https://www.heks.ch/sites/default/files/documents/2021-12/Bfa_Socfin_Report_Update_Nov_19.pdf.

    [8] See Compliance Advisor Ombudsman, Liberia: Salala Rubber Corporation (SRC)-01/Margibi & Bong Counties, at https://www.cao-ombudsman.org/cases/liberia-salala-rubber-corporation-src-01margibi-bong-counties; Victoria Schneider, World Bank’s IFC under fire over alleged abuses at Liberian plantation it funded, Mongabay (April 4, 2024), at https://news.mongabay.com/2024/04/world-banks-ifc-under-fire-over-alleged-abuses-at-liberian-plantation-it-funded/

    [9] Earthworm Foundation, Earthworm’s Deep Dive Greivance Work: Salala Rubber Corporation (SRC) (2023), at https://www.earthworm.org/uploads/files/EF-Public-report_SRC_310723.pdf.

    [10] Amnesty International, Nigeria: Government must halt Shell’s sale of its Niger Delta business unless human rights are fully protected (April 15, 2024), at https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/04/nigeria-government-must-halt-shells-sale-of-its-niger-delta-business-unless-human-rights-are-fully-protected/.

    [11] See Selma Lomax, Liberia: Government, Salala Rubber Plantation Company Suffer Major Setback in Court Case, Front Page Africa (December 14, 2022), at https://frontpageafricaonline.com/news/liberia-government-salala-rubber-plantation-company-suffer-major-setback-in-court-case/.

    [12] Camilius Eboh & Issac Anyaogu, Oil majors offered faster Nigerian exit if they pay for cleanup, Reuters (May 3, 2024), at https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/oil-majors-offered-faster-nigerian-exit-if-they-pay-cleanup-2024-05-03/.

     

    LETTRE OUVERTE SUR LE PROJET DE DÉSINVESTISSEMENT DU GROUPE SOCFIN DE LA SRC AU LIBERIA 

    Nous, soussignés, sommes des organisations de la société civile libérienne, ouest-africaine et internationale, ainsi des communautés et individus, préoccupés par les préjudices que les activités de la Salala Rubber Corporation (SRC) ont infligés aux communautés locales de Weala, au Liberia, et de ses environs. Nous sommes alarmés par la nouvelle selon laquelle la société mère de la SRC, Socfin, cherche à céder ses parts dans la SRC sans d’abord régler ses dettes sociales, environnementales, culturelles, financières et économiques à l’égard des communautés affectées. Nous adressons donc cette lettre ouverte au gouvernement libérien, aux partenaires de développement du Liberia, au grand public, à Socfin et, en particulier, à tous les acheteurs potentiels du SRC.

    Tout acquéreur héritera d’un passif extrêmement important lié aux violations généralisées des droits fonciers, environnementaux et humains associées à la plantation d’hévéas de la SRC. L’acheteur recevra également une concession basée sur un titre de propriété incertain pour le terrain sur lequel se trouve la plantation. Nous appelons donc toutes les parties prenantes – la société mère du SRC, Socfin, les investisseurs, les financiers, le gouvernement du Liberia et tous les acheteurs potentiels – à s’abstenir de toute vente ou cession de droits jusqu’à ce que les plaintes contre le SRC soient résolues et que les droits sur les terres sur lesquelles la concession pour la plantation d’hévéas a été accordée soient déterminés de manière concluante. 

    Historique

    SRC, une filiale indirecte du géant agricole luxembourgeois Socfin depuis 2007, est propriétaire d’une plantation de caoutchouc de 8 000 hectares près de la ville de Weala. La plantation est exploitée conformément à un accord de concession conclu en 1959 et ratifié par le législateur libérien en 1960, qui a accordé aux prédécesseurs de Socfin le droit de développer une plantation d’hévéas sur des terres publiques non grevées dans ce qui est aujourd’hui les comtés de Lofa, Margibi et Bong dans la République du Liberia. Depuis lors, la plantation a connu plusieurs vagues d’expansion – la dernière en 2015 – et a été associée à un large éventail de violations des droits des peuples autochtones et des communautés locales, notamment l’accaparement de terres, la destruction de sites culturels et la violence sexuelle et sexiste.

    Dans son rapport annuel 2023, Socfin a annoncé l’existence d’un « signe de dépréciation » pour SRC, a évalué cette valeur de dépréciation à 7,5 millions d’euros et a reclassé la plantation en tant qu’ « actif à vendre ».[1] Selon l’article XI de la convention de concession de SRC, toute cession de droits à un tiers doit être approuvée par le gouvernement du Liberia.[2] En vertu de la loi libérienne de 2018 sur les droits fonciers, les communautés locales doivent avoir la possibilité d’exprimer leur point de vue afin de garantir la protection de leurs droits et de leurs intérêts lors de la révision d’une concession existante.[3] Cette même loi prévoit également qu’à l’expiration d’une concession sur des terres coutumières, les terres reviennent aux communautés locales qui en sont les propriétaires d’origine.[4] La concession actuelle de la SRC prendra fin le 1er août 2030. 

    Incidences graves sur les droits de l’homme 

    Au fur et à mesure de son développement, la plantation a englouti les terres agricoles d’au moins 37 villages, plongeant leurs habitants dans la pauvreté, l’insécurité alimentaire et la dislocation culturelle. Certaines communautés, comme Jorkporlorsue, ne sont plus qu’une enclave entourée d’une mer de caoutchouc, coupée des tombes de leurs ancêtres et de toute forme d’autosuffisance. D’autres, comme Sayee Town, ont été brûlées lorsque la plantation en a pris le contrôle, faisant fuir leurs habitants. La SRC n’a pas versé de compensation pour la perte de terres, et selon de nombreux  témoignages émanant de plusieurs communautés la société n’a pas payé suffisamment la perte de biens productifs et culturels. De nombreux témoignages affirment que les femmes sont harcelées par les travailleurs et les gardes de sécurité lorsqu’elles traversent la plantation pour quelque raison que ce soit, et nombre d’entre elles ont été extorquées à des fins sexuelles lorsqu’elles cherchaient un emploi au sein de la compagnie.[5]

    Ces allégations ont été rapportées pour la première fois par Green Advocates International en 2013[6] et confirmées par l’ONG Suisse Pain pour le Prochain dans un rapport de 2019.[7] Elles font l’objet d’une plainte déposée en 2019 auprès du bureau du médiateur de la Société financière internationale (SFI), la branche de financement du secteur privé de la Banque mondiale, qui a partiellement financé la réhabilitation par Socfin de la plantation SRC après la guerre civile au Liberia. et qui finalise actuellement un rapport d’enquête axé sur la manière dont la SFI applique ses mesures de sauvegarde environnementales et sociales.[8] Lorsque Socfin a engagé un consultant – Earthworm Foundation – pour examiner ses performances sociales et environnementales au lieu de coopérer à l’enquête de la SFI, le rapport qui en a résulté a conclu que la plupart des plaintes des communautés étaient en fait fondées et n’avaient pas été correctement traitées.[9] 

    Les droits fonciers remis en question

    La plantation elle-même fait l’objet d’un procès actuellement en cours devant les tribunaux libériens, dans lequel les résidents des communautés concernées affirment que les terres prises par le SRC n’étaient pas éligibles pour le développement de la plantation car elles n’étaient ni publiques ni libres de toute charge. Le terrain était en fait utilisé de manière coutumière et fait partie du territoire traditionnel des communautés locales de Kpelle. L’issue de ce procès pourrait décider si l’accord de concession est valide ou si elle doit être reconnue comme terre coutumière. 

    Risques liés à l’acquisition

    La cession envisagée de la SRC par Socfin est une opération risquée pour toutes les parties concernées, à l’exception de Socfin elle-même.

    – Pour les communautés touchées, cela pourrait signifier l’échange d’une entreprise internationale qui s’est engagée – au moins sur le papier – à respecter des normes élevées en matière de responsabilité sociale et environnementale et à disposer des ressources nécessaires pour les mettre en œuvre, contre un acheteur potentiel dont on ne connaît pas la volonté et la capacité à protéger le bien-être de la communauté. Les communautés du delta du Niger, au Nigeria, sont actuellement confrontées à une situation similaire, car des compagnies pétrolières internationales de réputation mondiale cherchent à céder leurs activités terrestres à des entreprises peu connues, dotées de peu d’expérience et de ressources, sans avoir au préalable résolu leurs responsabilités environnementales.[10]

    – Pour la République du Liberia, en tant que propriétaire présumé du terrain sur lequel se trouve la plantation, cela pourrait signifier qu’elle doit assumer les responsabilités sociales et environnementales laissées par le SRC dans le cadre de la Socfin.

    – Pour tout acheteur potentiel, l’achat de la plantation entraînerait une exposition à une responsabilité non encore quantifiée pour des réclamations concernant des dommages causés à la terre, aux cultures, à la culture et à l’environnement, ainsi que des violences sexuelles et sexistes sur des milliers de personnes dans 37 villages, comme le rapport Earthworm et le processus d’évaluation de la SFI l’ont clairement démontré.

    – Le droit de l’acheteur d’exploiter la plantation pourrait également être affecté par une éventuelle décision des tribunaux libériens selon laquelle le gouvernement libérien n’a jamais eu l’autorité d’accorder une concession sur le terrain où se trouve la plantation.[11] Selon l’article XI de la convention de concession, tout cessionnaire aura les mêmes « droits, privilèges, immunités et obligations » que le concessionnaire d’origine. Toutefois, compte tenu de l’incertitude qui entoure les dettes de Socfin envers les communautés encore en suspens et la validité de la concession elle-même, les droits transférés pourraient avoir beaucoup moins de valeur qu’il n’y paraît et les obligations pourraient imposer à l’acquéreur des coûts lourds et imprévus. 

    Recommandations

    À la lumière de ce qui précède, le désinvestissement prévu par Socfin de la SRC ne devrait pas avoir lieu sans prendre en considération le suivant.

    À la République du Liberia :

    – Assurer que le processus pour rechercher le consentement libre, préalable et éclairé des communautés affectées en ce qui concerne toute proposition de cession de droits par Socfin soit respecté, lors de l’examen du projet de vente, conformément à l’article 48(2) de la loi sur les droits fonciers de 2018 et aux principes généraux du droit international relatifs aux droits des peuples autochtones lorsque leurs terres traditionnelles et leurs ressources naturelles sont menacées.

    – Divulguer immédiatement aux communautés affectées toute demande de Socfin de céder ou d’attribuer sa participation dans le SRC à une autre partie.

    – Refuser d’approuver toute proposition de cession de droits par Socfin tant que le litige en cours sur la propriété des terres de plantation et tous les autres litiges concernant le contrôle des terres n’auront pas été résolus.

    – Commander un audit complet de conformité des opérations de la plantation SRC couvrant toute la durée de la concession, en se concentrant sur la production, l’environnement, les revenus, le travail et les obligations sociales, ainsi que sur le respect des termes et conditions de l’accord de concession.

    – En outre, refuser d’approuver toute proposition de cession de droits par Socfin à moins que a) Socfin n’ait d’abord déposé sur un compte fiduciaire au Liberia., sous le contrôle conjoint de la communauté et du gouvernement, un montant adéquat pour couvrir toutes les responsabilités environnementales, sociales, culturelles et économiques potentielles du SRC ; et b) que l’acheteur n’ait signé un accord de bénéfice communautaire avec les communautés affectées dans lequel il s’engage à respecter les normes environnementales et sociales les plus élevées et confère des droits et des bénéfices exécutoires aux communautés. Il est encourageant de constater qu’au Nigeria, le gouvernement prend au sérieux la nécessité de veiller à ce que les compagnies pétrolières sortantes paient d’abord pour l’assainissement de l’environnement[12] ; rien n’empêche le Liberia de suivre cet exemple.

     

    Aux acquéreurs potentiels :

    – S’abstenir de conclure tout achat jusqu’à ce que Socfin et SRC aient réglé toutes les dettes sociales, environnementales, culturelles et économiques potentielles en suspens avec les communautés environnantes.

    – Avant tout engagement ou toute négociation avec Socfin/SRC, commander une évaluation complète des risques couvrant toutes les responsabilités sociales, environnementales, culturelles et économiques potentielles, en cours et existantes à l’égard des communautés environnantes, des vendeurs/contractants privés et du gouvernement du Liberia.

     

    A Socfin :

    – S’abstenir de chercher à céder le SRC jusqu’à ce que toutes les responsabilités sociales, environnementales, culturelles et économiques potentielles en suspens avec les communautés environnantes soient réglées.

     

    Aux communautés locales :

    – Exercer le droit de soumettre au gouvernement, par l’intermédiaire du comité de développement et de gestion des terres communautaires, des commentaires et des suggestions sur le projet de désinvestissement de Socfin, en vue de protéger leurs droits humains, environnementaux, culturels et économiques.

     

    Signé,

     

    Représentants des communautés

    Edwin Gbah, Elder Representative, Dedee-ta 1

    Tina Gibson, Women Representative, Dedee-ta 1

    Isaiah Gibson, Youth Representative, Dedee-ta 1

    Tommy Blackie, Elder Representative, Golonkalah

    Tenneh Gbomah, Women Representative, Golonkalah

    Emmanuel Singbah, Youth Representative, Golonkalah

    Musa Kaiffa, Elder Representative, Dokai Town

    Quita George, Women Representative, Dokai Town

    Jonah Singbah, Youth Representative, Dokai Town

    Alfred Gotolo, Elder Representative, Monkeytail Town

    Hawa Monkeytail, Women Representative, Monkeytail Town

    Remember Fellezey, Youth Representative, Monkeytail Town

    Mulbah Yarkpawolo, Elder Representative, Hawa Bondon

    Betty Kollie, Women Representative, Hawa Bondon

    Patrick Yah, Youth Representative, Hawa Bondon

    David Siaffa, Elder Representative, Siaffa Molley Village

    Hawa Siaffa, Women Representative, Siaffa Molley Village

    Moses Siaffa, Youth Representative, Siaffa Molley Village

    Olanto Forjah, Elder Representative, Martin Village

    Miatta Gbah, Women Representative, Martin Village

    Emmanuel Gbah, Youth Representative, Martin Village

    James Whalee, Elder Representative, James Whalee Village

    Hawa Whalee, Women Representative, James Whalee Village

    Titus G. Whalee, Youth Representative, James Whalee Village

    James K. Gorgbor, Elder Representative, Gorgbor Town

    Jartu Gorgbor, Women Representative, Gorgbor Town

    Tenneh Mulbah, Youth Representative, Gorgbor Town

    Samuel D. Bindah, Elder Representative Jorkporlorsue Town

    Menatta Sackie, Women Representative, Jorkporlorsue Town

    Aaron F. Kollie, Youth Representative, Jorkporlorsue Town

    Moses David, Elder Representative, Varmue Town

    Ruth Cooper, Women Representative, Varmue Town

    Dennis Cooper, Youth Representative, Varmue Town

    Fahn Kolleh, Elder Representative, Blomu Town

    Finda Bengo, Women Representative, Blomu Town

    Stephen Nantee, Youth Representative, Blomu Town

    William Bainda, Elder Representative, Lango Town

    Karne Dolo, Women Representative, Lango Town

    Fahn Singbe, Youth Representative, Lango Town

    Pst. Milton F. Gweh, Elder Representative, Garjah Town

    Hawah Siaffa, Women Representative, Garjah Town

    Edward Lawad, Youth Representative, Garjah Town

    Emmanuel Kpaingba, Elder Representative, Kuwah-ta

    Yassah Mulbah, Women Representative, Kuwah-ta

    Victor Koko, Youth Representative, Kuwah-ta

    Roger Moore, Elder Representative, Dedee-ta 2

    Miatta Singbah, Women Representative, Dedee-ta 2

    Oretha Singbah, Youth Representative, Dedee-ta 2

    		  

    Société civile

    Alfred Lahai Gbabai Brownell Sr., Founder, Green Advocates International, 2019 Goldman Environmental Prize Winner

    AbibiNsroma Foundation (Ghana)

    Accountability Counsel (Global)

    Action Solidarité Tiers Monde asbl (Luxembourg)

    Advocates for Community Alternatives (USA/West Africa)

    Africa Transcribe (Tanzania)

    Ahmed Elseidi, public interest lawyer (Egypt)

    Al-Marsad Arab Human Rights Center (Syria)

    Alliance for Rural Democracy (Liberia)

    Asia Indigenous Peoples Network on Extractive Industries and Energy (Asia Regional)

    Asociación de Pescadores Artesanales del Golfo de Fonseca (Honduras)

    Attac CADTM Maroc (Morocco)

    Botswana Watch (Botswana)

    CADTM Afrique (Burkina Faso)

    CADTM Afrique (Mali)

    Claudia Lazzaro Socra (Argentina)

    CNCD-11.11.11 (Belgium)

    Collectif pour la défense des terres malgaches – TANY (Madagascar)

    Community Forest Watch (Nigeria)

    Consejo de los Pueblos Wuxhtaj (Guatemala)

    Daniel Santi, Pueblo Originario Kichwa de Sarayaku (Ecuador)

    Economic and Social Rights Centre – Hakihamii (Kenya)

    Environmental Defender Law Center (USA)

    FIAN-Belgium

    FIAN-Switzerland

    Fondation pour le Développement au Sahel (Mali)

    Foundation for Good Governance Development Initiative (Liberia)

    Global Rights (International)

    Good Health Community Programmes (Kenya)

    Green Advocates International (Liberia)

    GRAIN (International)

    HakiMadini (Tanzania)

    Hilfswerk der Evangelisch-reformierten Kirche Schweiz (HEKS) (Switzerland)

    Human Rights Awareness Center (Nepal)

    Inclusive Development International (International)

    Integrated Center for Community Empowerment (Liberia)

    Jamaa Resource Initiatives (Kenya)

    JPIC, Franciscans Africa (Kenya)

    Justicitz-ACORN (Liberia)

    Karapatan Alliance (Philippines)

    Karl Klare, International Social & Economic Rights Project (USA)

    Liberia Reform Movement (Liberia)

    Lok Shakti Abiyan (India)

    MENA Fem Movement (International)

    MUFRAS-32 (El Salvador)

    Natural Resources Women’s Platform (Liberia)

    National Civil Society Council of Liberia

    National Union of Domestic Employees (Trinidad and Tobago)

    Neighbourhood Environment Watch Foundation (Nigeria)

    Network Movement for Justice and Development (Sierra Leone)

    Protection International Africa

    Public Eye (Switzerland)

    ReAct Transnational (France)

    Réseau des Acteurs du Développement Durable (Cameroon)

    Renevlyn Development Initiative (Nigeria)

    Solifonds (Switzerland)

    SOS Faim (Luxembourg)

    SYNAPARCAM (Cameroon)

    West Point Women for Health and Development Organization (Liberia)

    Witness Radio (Uganda)

    WoMin Alliance Africa (Burkina Faso)

    Yeabamah National Congress for Human Rights (Liberia)

    [1] Socfin, Rapport Annuel 2023, pp. 65-66 et 102, disponible à https://socfin.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/2023-Socfin-Rapport-annuel-1.pdf.

    [2] Concession Agreement between the Republic of Liberia and Rubber Cultur Maatschappij ‘Amsterdam’ & Nordmann Rasmann and Company, daté le 1er août 1959 et Acts passed by the Legislature of the Republic of Liberia during the session 1959-1960, art. II.

    [3] Republic of Liberia, Land Rights Law of 2018, art. 48(2).

    [4] Ibid, art. 48(4).

    [5] Voir Ashoka Mukpo, At a rubber plantation in Liberia, history repeats in a fight over land, Mongabay (17 janvier 2023),  https://news.mongabay.com/2023/01/at-a-rubber-plantation-in-liberia-history-repeats-in-a-fight-over-land/.

    [6] Green Advocates International, Livelihood Challenges at Salala Rubber Corporation (SRC) (Avril 2013).

    [7] Pain pour le prochain, Lutte pour la vie et pour la terre les plantations de caoutchouc de Socfin au Libéria et la responsabilité des entreprises suisses (2019), at https://www.heks.ch/sites/default/files/documents/2022-08/Bfa_Socfin_Summary_F_Update_Nov_19.pdf.

    [8] Voir Compliance Advisor Ombudsman, Liberia: Salala Rubber Corporation (SRC)-01/Margibi & Bong Counties, https://www.cao-ombudsman.org/cases/liberia-salala-rubber-corporation-src-01margibi-bong-counties ; Victoria Schneider, World Bank’s IFC under fire over alleged abuses at Liberian plantation it funded, Mongabay (4 avril 2024), https://news.mongabay.com/2024/04/world-banks-ifc-under-fire-over-alleged-abuses-at-liberian-plantation-it-funded/

    [9] Earthworm Foundation, Earthworm’s Deep Dive Greivance Work: Salala Rubber Corporation (SRC) (2023), https://www.earthworm.org/uploads/files/EF-Public-report_SRC_310723.pdf.

    [10] Amnesty Internationa, Nigeria: Government must halt Shell’s sale of its Niger Delta business unless human rights are fully protected (15 avril 2024), https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/04/nigeria-government-must-halt-shells-sale-of-its-niger-delta-business-unless-human-rights-are-fully-protected/.

    [11] Voir Selma Lomax, Liberia: Government, Salala Rubber Plantation Company Suffer Major Setback in Court Case, Front Page Africa (14 décembre 2022), https://frontpageafricaonline.com/news/liberia-government-salala-rubber-plantation-company-suffer-major-setback-in-court-case/.

    [12] Camilius Eboh & Issac Anyaogu, Oil majors offered faster Nigerian exit if they pay for cleanup, Reuters (3 mai 2024), https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/oil-majors-offered-faster-nigerian-exit-if-they-pay-cleanup-2024-05-03/.

  • Sierra Leone Court of Appeal continues hearing on Kono Community’s human rights claims

    Lawyers for the Marginalized Affected Property Owners (MAPO), a community association seeking justice for harmful mining practices in Kono, Sierra Leone, concluded their marathon of argument before the Court of Appeal in Freetown last Thursday, May 30, 2024.

    The Court of Appeal is determining whether Kono community members and associations can take Koidu Limited, a multinational diamond mining company, to court for causing harm to their livelihoods, health, and their traditional lands.

    At the court last Thursday, the lead counsel for the plaintiffs, Dr. Chernor Mamoud Benedict Jalloh, completed presenting arguments for the Plaintiffs, after which counsel for the mining company and its affiliates commenced his arguments.  Dr. Jalloh argued, among other things, that all citizens should have the right to sue to enforce Sierra Leone’s environmental laws, as environmental pollution affects everyone.

    On Thursday June 6, 2024, when the court reconvenes, counsel for the respondents will be expected to conclude his arguments, after which the court will schedule a date for its judgement.

    For now, the Kono community members and their civil society partners are keeping their fingers crossed, hoping that the Court of Appeal will expedite work on the case.  If the appellate court sides with the community, then the way will be clear for them to take Koidu Limited and its related companies to trial regarding alleged human rights abuses.

    The hearing of the Koidu community’s appeal has become possible after a ruling on Thursday February 29, 2024, that struck out preliminary objections filed by the defendant mining company, Koidu Limited.

    Last week’s hearing comes on the heels of the Court of Appeal’s ruling of February 29, 2024, which breathed new life into the Koidu plaintiffs’ case by granting their right to appeal.  The case was dismissed by the High Court in Makeni on October 27, 2022, on the basis that the plaintiffs were not qualified to press their claims in court.  The dismissal order also ruled that the plaintiffs should have used a non-judicial grievance mechanism before going to court, despite also recognizing that the grievance mechanism did not actually exist.

  • Koidu Appeals Court hearing begins at last

    After several adjournments, on Tuesday May 21, 2024, the Sierra Leone Court of Appeal began hearing human rights claims that will determine whether community members can legally take on Koidu Limited, a multinational diamond mining company, for causing harm to their livelihoods, health, and their traditional lands.

    At the court hearing in Freetown on Tuesday, the lead counsel for the plaintiffs, Dr. Chernor Mamoud Benedict Jalloh, advanced cogent arguments before the panel of judges on the 12 grounds of appeal.

    His argument mainly centered whether the company can force residents to submit all their complaints to an internal grievance office instead of going to court, whether members of the public can sue to hold companies to environmental laws and commitments.  The stakes are high: if the defendants’ arguments are upheld, then communities could lose their rights to sue when mining companies harm them and instead be required to let the company resolve all complaints internally.

    The other grounds of appeal will be dealt with on May 30, 2024, when the court will reconvene to continue its sitting on the matter.

    The hearing of the Koidu community’s appeal became possible after a ruling on Thursday February 29, 2024, that struck out preliminary objections filed by the defendant mining company, Koidu Limited and allowed the appeal to go forward.  This ruling breathed new life into the Koidu plaintiffs’ case, which was dismissed by the High Court in Makeni on 27th October 2022, on the basis that the plaintiffs were not qualified to press their claims in court.  The dismissal order also ruled that the plaintiffs should have used a non-judicial grievance mechanism before going to court, despite also recognizing that the grievance mechanism did not actually exist.

    Kono community members and their civil society partners were in court in their numbers, hoping that the Court of Appeal will quickly rule that their claims were wrongly dismissed by the High Court and send the case for a speedy trial.

  • CiCoNet calls for allocation of 20% of Minerals Dev’t Fund proceeds to mining communities

    The Citizens Committee Network (CiCoNet), an interface group of concerned citizens who help protect their communities’ development vision, is calling for the allocation of 20% of proceeds into the Minerals Development Fund to be disbursed to mining communities.

    This proposed allocation, according to CiCoNet, is to be used for sustainable development projects chosen by each mining community under the supervision of the managers of the Fund.

    CiCoNet believes that this will ensure fair and equitable use of proceeds into the Fund under the Minerals Development Fund Act, 2016, Act 912.

    This was one of the advocacy action plans agreed upon at a three-day training session for the nine-member national executives held at Asiakwa near Kyebi in the Eastern region of Ghana.

    Code-named “Legal Learning Workshop”, the training session was organised upon the request of the of CiCoNet to sharpen the group’s advocacy skills on laws about mining, land and general understanding of Ghana’s constitution.

    Advocates for Community Alternatives (ACA), a non-profit-making organisation, which helps West African communities that are threatened by the destructive impacts of extractive projects to take control of their futures, facilitated the training through its Legal Office and the Community-Driven Development Department.

    The CiCoNet national executives noted that after nearly ten years of the setting up of the Minerals Development Fund, very little can be shown for it as most mining communities which are bearing the brunt of the devastating effects of mining operations can barely boast of any development project executed under the Fund.

    The group believes that if the communities are directly involved in the usage of their share of the Fund, it will go a long way to engender communalism and cost-effectiveness in the execution of sustainable development projects in their respective areas.

    Paul Uthan, National Secretary of CiCoNet, in an interview after the training, said the Minerals Development Fund, created by the Minerals Development Fund ACT, 2016 Act 912 to provide financial resources for the direct benefit of mining communities, among others, must be judiciously used to inure to the benefit of the intended beneficiaries.

    “We are therefore going to create a lot of awareness about this Fund and push for the 20% allocation to mining communities”, he further said.

    The National President of CiCoNet, Emmanuel Antwi, disclosed that the group will also be advocating the need for the National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE) to be well-resourced to effectively carry out its functions as mandated by law.

    “This training has been very fruitful. It is in our plans as CiCoNet to educate our community members about their fundamental human rights, so our main aim is to ensure community development. In this regard, we, as CiCoNet executives, need to be well equipped with the legal aspects of what we intend doing so we came for the workshop to keep ourselves abreast of the rights of people living in communities threatened by mining activities”, he explained.

    From here we’re setting the ball rolling by sharing the knowledge gained here with all CiCoNet members and going down to the communities to educate community members on their rights under the country’s legal regime on mining.

    CiCoNet

    The Citizens Committee Network (CiCoNet), an interface group of concerned citizens who help protect their communities’ development vision.  CiCoNet members are trained to speak with government officials and other stakeholders on behalf of their communities, raising concerns in ways that allow local authorities to help resolve key community concerns.

    Through CiCoNet, some communities have won key victories, such as prompting the suspension of a highly polluting mining company’s operating permit and inducing companies to fill over 40 abandoned pits that endangered the welfare of children and livestock in places such as Juaso and Nsuapemso in the Eastern region of Ghana.

  • SIMILIMI

    [et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ theme_builder_area=”post_content” _builder_version=”4.18.1″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.18.1″ _module_preset=”default” theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_column _builder_version=”4.18.1″ _module_preset=”default” type=”4_4″ theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.1″ _module_preset=”default” theme_builder_area=”post_content” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″]

    What happened?

    The inhabitants of Similimi, a village in the sub-prefecture of Bondoukou, about 430 km from Abidjan in the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire, mainly grew cashew nuts, planted other fruit trees, legumes and vegetables on plots of land before manganese mining company, Bondoukou Manganèse SA (BMSA) began operations. These lands were their sole form of economic support until the Ivorian government granted the company a mining concession in the area.

     Organizing workshops to train and exchange views with administrative authorities about the impacts of the mining operations on the lives of the Similimi residents, national and international standards on relocation, and the associated risks.

    Over more than a decade, the operations of BMSA have caused serious disruption to the lives of the people of Similimi. Improper disposal of waste products has polluted the waters, resulting in serious – and sometimes fatal – digestive disorders. Heavy vehicular traffic and extensive strip mining create constant dust and fumes causing respiratory problems. The company’s land clearing activities have deforested the landscape and devastated places of worship, making cultural practices of residents impossible. And the noise of dynamite disrupts residents’ sleep and affects their mental health. Women are particularly affected, as the loss of natural resources undermines their social status and ability to provide for the basic needs of their families.

    It took an advocacy by the community members and Groupe pour la Recherche et le Plaidoyer sur les Industries extractives (in English, the Extractive Industries Research and Advocacy Group, known by its French acronym, GRPIE, for the company to provide a fountain and renovate the village school. GRPIE is the partner organisation of Advocates for Community Alternatives (ACA) in our partner in Cote d’Ivoire.

    Air and water pollution has taken a toll on health conditions of the people vis-à-vis their means of livelihood. As pertains in a lot of mining communities in Africa, farmlands belonging farmers have been taken over for mining activities without the prior notice and approval by the owners. Even though some amounts were paid as compensation, they were inadequate.

    The company has gone further to destroy the sacred hill where the residents previously conducted traditional practices.  Considering all this, the community needs to be relocated immediately.

    Despite numerous complaints addressed to the mining company and the Ivorian authorities, the injuries and human rights violations have persisted without an effective remedy. The people of Similimi have requested repeatedly to be relocated away from the mine, but their prayers have gone unanswered.

     With time, the people of Similimi then decided to file a complaint before the ECOWAS Court of Justice against the Ivorian government in April 2020.

     What’s new?

    On Thursday, November 30, 2023, the ECOWAS Court of Justice, at its sitting in Abuja, declared the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire guilty and ordered the government to pay 20 million CFA Francs each to eleven individual plaintiffs and to repair the environmental damage caused by the mining project.

    Residents of Similimi could not hide their joy upon hearing this as they celebrated this decision of the ECOWAS Court of Justice, which found the Ivorian government culpable of human rights violations in connection with destructive manganese mining on their traditional lands. 

    On Monday December 11, 2023, the ECOWAS Court of Justice released its judgment on the ruling, which justified its earlier ruling against the Ivorian government in a case brought before it by 14 representative inhabitants of Similimi, along with a communal self-help organization.

    “It is precisely this failure to act, to prevent environmental damage and to hold offenders accountable, who feel free to carry out their damaging activities with a clear expectation of impunity, that characterizes the Respondent State’s violation of articles 1, 16 and 24 of the African Charter and article 12 of the ICESCR”, the court said in its ruling.

    The court further accused the Ivorian government of failing to take adequate steps to protect the environment, saying: “It is important to note that, despite all the laws it has passed and all the agencies it has created, the Respondent has not been able to point, in its defense, to a single action that has been taken in recent years to hold to serious and diligent account the perpetrator of the many acts of environmental degradation that have taken place in the Similimi region.”

    The Court’s November 30 ruling indeed affirms the plaintiffs’ long-held view that the State is in fact responsible for violations of Similimi community’s rights to a healthy environment, to health, to an adequate standard of living, to private and family life, and freedom of worship and religion. The Court dismissed the Applicants’ claim that their right to property was violated, for lack of sufficient evidence of ownership. 

    Standing up for justice – how the legal battle started

    In the hope of obtaining justice, 14 representative inhabitants of Similimi, along with a communal self-help organization, filed a complaint in the ECOWAS Court of Justice in April 2020. The communities were supported by two-member organization of the Public Interest Lawyering Initiative for West Africa (PILIWA), Advocates for Communities Alternatives (ACA) and GRPIE.

    The plaintiffs accused the State of Côte d’Ivoire of illegal expropriation, non-compliance with the rules of due diligence, and complicity in environmental, economic, and cultural damage.

    “Even if the Court did not recognize our proprietary right to our ancestral lands, we are indeed happy that our voices were heard by a regional tribunal and that the suffering that we have endured over the years has not been in vain,” said Adou Kouamé, village chief of Similimi and a complainant.

    “We welcome this decision of the ECOWAS Court of Justice which recognized that the State of Côte d’Ivoire voluntarily facilitated and permitted the actions of BMSA, leading to the deterioration of the environment, causing health problems among residents, deteriorating the quality of water and air, destroying their crops and places of worship,” declared Mr. Rashidi Ibitowa, lawyer for the plaintiffs.

     

    Road to justice – Highlights of activities in the last few years

    Complaints registered by the residents to the authorities on many times have fallen on death ears as no action has been taken to protect them from the negative impacts of manganese extraction. 

    To this end, ACA and its Ivoirian partner, GRPIE, stepped in with local lawyers to support the people of Similimi with the following:

    1. Awareness Raising
    • Organizing several meetings with the people of Similimi to help them understand their rights and the strategic actions they can take to address the risks of mining and defend their interests.
    • Organizing a learning exchange to share experiences with other communities that have been affected by mining and been through the process of relocation.

     

    1. Advocacy
    • Advocating and lobbying Ivoirian authorities about the need to relocate the community.
    • Creating pressure at the international level on the dangers and suffering faced by the people of Similimi.
    • The Ivoirian government continues to organize meetings with the residents of Similimi, with the aim of eventually relocating them.
    • In August 2020, GRPIE commissioned an independent study into the environmental impacts of BMSA’s operations, which revealed dangerous levels of particulate matter and noise pollution.

     

    1. Legal strategy

    Conducting missions to investigate, document, and collect testimony and evidence necessary for legal action at the national level against Bondoukou Manganèse and at the ECOWAS Court of Justice against the government of Côte d’Ivoire.

    Collaboration with the law firm SCPA les OSCARS in Côte d’Ivoire to provide pro bono legal assistance to the community and represent them in national and regional forums.

    In October 2019 and May 2020, the lawyers for Similimi were granted “ordonnances de compulsoire” – orders from a court that require the company and the government to disclose the documents forming the basis for the renewal of BMSA’s operating permit despite the unresolved complaints of the community.

    The documents provided reveal important procedural gaps, and the community is considering its options.

    On January 29, 2021, the residents of Similimi sued the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire in the ECOWAS Court of Justice for facilitating the pollution of their natural environment, the appropriation of their traditional lands, and the destruction of their sacred sites. The Court initially set the date to release its ruling in February 2022, but later postponed, and eventually the judge’s 5-year mandate expired before the new release date could be set. As of September 2022, the plaintiffs are waiting for the new judge to be appointed to their case and clarify the status of the ruling.

    In October 2019 and May 2020, the lawyers for Similimi were granted “ordonnances de compulsoire” – orders from a court that require the company and the government to disclose the documents forming the basis for the renewal of BMSA’s operating permit despite the unresolved complaints of the community.

    The documents provided reveal important procedural gaps, and the community is considering its options.

    Your content goes here. Edit or remove this text inline or in the module Content settings. You can also style every aspect of this content in the module Design settings and even apply custom CSS to this text in the module Advanced settings.

    [/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

  • Aggah community puts Eni’s word to test in court

    [et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ theme_builder_area=”post_content” _builder_version=”4.18.1″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.18.1″ _module_preset=”default” theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_column _builder_version=”4.18.1″ _module_preset=”default” type=”4_4″ theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.1″ _module_preset=”default” theme_builder_area=”post_content” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″]

    Aggrieved community members of the Nigerian town of Aggah have taken Italian energy giant, Eni S.p.A., and its subsidiary, Nigerian Agip Oil Company Ltd. (NAOC), to court in Italy for relief from floods that have caused damage to the people’s lives and property for decades.

    Brief Background

    Aggah is a community in the western part of Rivers State, Nigeria, with a population of about 10,000. Its residents traditionally make their living as farmers and fishermen.

    In the early 1970s, Eni/NAOC created 40,000 ft2 earthen embankments at three locations near Aggah to support wellheads and constructed raised access roads to connect them. These constructions completely blocked the natural course of streams that flowed through the Aggah community and its environs.

    Because adequate measures were not put in place to channel the water, the streams backed up and flooded large swathes of Aggah’s farmlands and residential areas each year, typically during the rainy season.

    Over the course of several decades, Aggah residents and community leaders have contacted Eni/NAOC repeatedly in hopes of resolving the flooding and its impacts. However, these attempts to seek relief have been to no avail. Community members and even the Rivers State Ministry of Environment sued the company on several occasions; while those attempts have on some occasions led to judgments against the company or settlement agreements with individual families, the flooding situation remains unremediated.

    The Italian OECD Complaint and 2019 Settlement Agreement

    In December 2017, Egbema Voice of Freedom – a local community group representing hundreds of Aggah residents – Nigerian law firm Chima Williams and Associates, and Advocates for Community Alternatives (ACA) filed an NCP complaint with Italian and Dutch National Contact Points (NCPs) for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.  The NCPs, which are offices located in the governments of the mostly wealthy countries that belong to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, are charged with helping to resolve disputes between companies and the people and communities affected by their operations, arising from the failure to respect high social and environmental standards.

    In June 2019, the parties reached a settlement: the Eni/NAOC agreed to build “new culverts/drainages” and to work with the complainants to take any further necessary steps to ending the annual flooding.

    NAOC then hired contractors who built new culverts through the access roads. These constructions, however, were poorly designed and shoddily executed, according to an independent report that NAOC suppressed. The company has disavowed any responsibility to take further measures to lift the floods, insisting (against the findings of its own technical experts) that the natural marshy environment of the Niger Delta is to blame. Consequently, the flooding continues to wreak destruction on Aggah community every year.

    Fresh suit against Eni

    Having reached an impasse in its negotiations with Eni/NAOC, the complainants from the OECD process have filed a lawsuit at the Tribunal of Milan in Italy. Represented by Studio Legale Dini-Saltalamacchia, the aggrieved Aggah community members are asking the court to enforce the settlement agreement with Eni by requiring Eni and NAOC to take all necessary steps to lift the floods in Aggah. The community members are also seeking damages for the loss of lives, livelihoods and properties over the years due to Eni’s floods.

    Disappointed Community Members Hope for Justice

    One of the flood victims and a native of Aggah is Mrs. Sandra Ubah. She says she is “highly impressed with the case because NAOC has refused to keep to agreement and the last hope of the common man. Again, the issue of Eni/NAOC human right violation will be addressed.”

    “My expectations in the trial in Italy is to get justice served on our side because the injustices and human right violations we suffer at the hands of the Italian company are numerous, including deaths, strange diseases, etc., and so I am confident that the case will favor us because the court is the place of justice.”

    For Mrs. Victoria Elechi, another resident, it is impressive that Eni/NAOC are being hauled before an Italian court as this is a good step in seeking justice for the people.

    “I am expecting justice for our people. We have suffered a lot of injustices and human rights violations in the hands of the company. E.g., refusal to lift the blockage of water right of way caused by Eni’s facility, which has caused a lot of damage like building collapse, sicknesses and diseases, deaths, etc. I have confidence because the court, as last hope of the common man, will give us justice at last.

    “This suit that has just been filed in Milan court in Italy would give hope to victims of human rights violations everywhere, especially in West Africa,” said Lalla Touré, ACA’s Legal Director. “We’re counting on the Italian legal system to help ensure that the fundamental human rights of Aggah community members are upheld.”

    “It is so shocking that a multi-national organisation like Eni would be living in disobedience to an outcome of an agreement which they willingly signed before the Italian and Dutch governments and then turn around and deceive the world. Eni has operated on our land for over sixty years in this manner. They don’t care about our lives, our environment and source of livelihood. Eni take oil, we pay with our lives.  Eni lives in disobedience to both natural and constituted laws in our land and to me this is genocide,” Pastor Evaristus Nicholas, the leader of Egbema Voice of Freedom said after the case had been filed in Italy.

    “I’m expecting nothing but justice for me and my people, just the same way it was given to us before the Italian and Dutch NCP, but Eni refused to obey, which is why we have come before the Italian judiciary to get the backing of the law.”

    ———————————————————————————————————————

    Advocates for Community Alternatives (ACA) – ACA helps West African communities that are threatened by the destructive impacts of extractives-led development to take control of their own futures. ACA works directly with communities to design their own sustainable development plans and advocate to achieve those plans, and it builds and supports networks of lawyers and other professionals that will serve communities in need. ACA is providing strategic legal support to MDT as part of their participation in the Public Interest Lawyering Network for West Africa (PILIWA), which ACA coordinates.

    Chima Williams & Associates (CWA) – CWA is a public interest law firm based in Benin City, Edo State, Nigeria, that supports communities in the Niger Delta in cases involving human rights and environmental abuses, particularly by oil companies.

    Egbema Voice of Freedom (EVF) – EVF is a community-based organization in Aggah Community in Rivers State, Nigeria, that was formed to represent the people of Aggah in the defense of their human rights, especially with respect to the oil extraction operations of Eni/NAOC in and around their territory.

    END

    Media Contacts

    1. ACA: Lalla Toure, Legal Director: lalla@advocatesforalternatives.org”lalla@advocatesforalternatives.org | +233 50 985 0018
    2. CWA: Chima Williams, Principal Attorney: princewchima@yahoo.co.uk”princewchima@yahoo.co.uk |+234 802 364 9890
    3. Egbema Voice of Freedom: Pastor Nicholas Evaristus: royalgraceassembly_evarist@yahoo.com”royalgraceassembly_evarist@yahoo.com | +234 806 432 9322

    Your content goes here. Edit or remove this text inline or in the module Content settings. You can also style every aspect of this content in the module Design settings and even apply custom CSS to this text in the module Advanced settings.

    [/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]