Tanzanians NOT surprised at the tax fraud in the UK

Almost 1 in 5 of the biggest UK companies paid NOTHING last year and 5 companies even got a handout back from the taxman!

We, in Tanzania, already learnt our lessons the hard way with Barrick Gold and Acacia Mining who succeeded for many years to slither out of paying company taxes in Tanzania until they were caught and they were found GUILTY of tax evasion and they LOST their appeals to manipulate our tax and legal systems.

Now we read this news in the UK online media about how the British companies are actually ‘experts’ at defrauding their taxes in the UK also.   

Where details could be obtained, 13 firms – equivalent to one in five of the 69 that came clean – either paid no corporation tax in Britain or …

Britain’s worst tax Scrooges revealed:
Almost 1 in 5 of biggest firms paid NOTHING last year – and some even got a handout from the taxman…

• Names such as BP, Royal Mail and British Gas owner Centrica are included
• Some firms are even paying their chief executives more than they pay in tax
• The Mail on Sunday’s Fair Play on Tax campaign has called for a level playing field

Nearly one in five of Britain’s biggest companies haven’t paid any UK tax last year

Almost one in five of Britain’s biggest companies paid not a penny of corporation tax in the UK last year, it can be revealed.

The Mail on Sunday has managed to obtain the details of the tax paid by 69 of the FTSE 100 group of largest companies on the stock market – many of which do not publish these figures in their annual reports.

The remaining 31 refused or failed to respond to repeated requests to disclose their tax payments.

Where details could be obtained, 13 firms – equivalent to one in five of the 69 that came clean – either paid no corporation tax in Britain or received a tax credit from HM Revenue & Customs.

The list includes household names such as BP, Royal Mail and British Gas owner Centrica.

Usually firms pay corporation tax of 19 per cent of their total profits.

BP made £5.6 billion in profit last year – yet still received tax credits worth £134million. That meant it was a net receiver of tax money in the UK, rather than contributing to the cost of running the country where its shares are listed.

Some firms are even paying their chief executives more than they pay in tax. Royal Mail boss Rico Back stands to earn £1.4million this year on top of a £5.8million ‘golden hello’ for joining the company.

This payment might appear unremarkable given that the company, which was privatised in 2013, made £39million profit in the UK last year and £212million globally.

But it can now be revealed Royal Mail’s UK profit was then increased rather than reduced by tax, thanks to a huge tax credit of £93million – the second largest in our survey – of which £78million was attributed to a pension ‘accounting adjustment with no cash benefit’, according to the company.

The findings will raise concerns big businesses are failing to pay their fair share towards schools, hospitals and UK infrastructure.

None of the companies assessed by The Mail on Sunday is accused of acting illegally, but most have used UK tax laws to reduce their payments from the amount they might have been expected to pay.

These companies above have either not paid any UK tax or have actually received a credit back from the tax authorities.  Note Randgold is on the list – they are expected to be the “new” Acacia Mining – so more tax fraud to be expected here in Tanzania?

These rules allow firms to use opaque schemes and loans to move money from one jurisdiction to another, they do not have to declare what they have done and so many of the methods used to slash tax bills remain secret.

The Mail on Sunday’s Fair Play on Tax campaign has called for a level playing field – including spelling out how much revenue and profit they make in each country they operate – so that UK firms which pay their dues can more easily compete with multinational giants.

Last night, Dame Margaret Hodge, formerly chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, said: ‘Tax avoidance by large corporations is a blight on this country. It means there is less money for our underfunded public services.

‘This shocking revelation by The Mail on Sunday shows the Government is still failing to get to grips with this scandal.

‘The fact that some companies pay no corporation tax but grab our taxpayers’ money through tax credits beggars belief.’

BP and Centrica’s tax credits are understood to relate to the payments for decommissioning oil and gas rigs.

Centrica’s annual report says it ‘received a cash refund of tax overpaid in periods prior to 2015’. BP boss Bob Dudley was paid more than £10million last year.

A BP spokesman said: ‘We have recently completed one of our highest ever investment programmes in the North Sea – the key driver in our tax-paying position in the UK.’

Mining firms were prominent among the 13 companies which pay no tax. Several said there is no reason for them to pay tax in Britain, as their operations are overseas and their profits generated there.

Copper miner Antofagasta said all its mines are in Chile, so it paid 99.9 per cent of its taxes there.

Fresnillo, one of the world’s biggest producers of gold and silver, has its operations in Mexico and that it where it pays tax. Evraz, a mining and steel giant part-owned by Roman Abramovich, did not want to comment.

Randgold Resources, which mines gold in Africa, is based in the Channel Isles and pays no tax in Britain, where it is listed on the stock exchange.

Chief executive Mark Bristow received over £7million last year. A spokeswoman said: ‘Randgold Resources is not incorporated in the UK and the Randgold Group has no substantial UK presence and no operations in the UK.’

But Alex Cobham, of the Tax Justice Network, says even if the mines are abroad, often there is a significant management presence in the UK.

Two real estate investment trusts (REITs), British Land and Segro, paid no tax last year.

REITs are funds which enable investors to put money into commercial property. If they return 90 per cent of profits to investors no corporation tax is due.

British Land, whose assets include Meadowhall shopping mall in Sheffield, received a £6million tax credit last year, which it said came from overpayment in prior years.

The Government offers tax breaks for investment in research and development.

A spokesman for AstraZeneca, a global pharmaceuticals titan which made £1.7billion profit last year, said: ‘Investments in research and development during previous years and continuing into 2018 have resulted in a lower UK profit and there was no [UK corporation] tax paid in 2018.’

A spokesman for Ocado said the firm has ‘historically made tax losses’, so no tax was due.

Liverpool FC shirt sponsors Standard Chartered bank, which made £1.8billion profit last year, said of its £12million tax credit: ‘It’s a refund on previous years’ overpayment.’

A spokesman for Royal Mail said it made a £1.8 billion contribution to the Exchequer through National Insurance, income tax for staff and business rates and other taxes.

Our thanks to thisismoney.co.uk for the above online content.

Very, very disturbing how the ‘law’ allows these sophisticated accountants and lawyers to manipulate their NON-payments of taxation.

Barrick hits headlines again – in Australia – Loses Supreme Court Appeal

By Samantha Cole of Tanzania Business Ethics

Barrick Gold loses their Appeal in the Australia Supreme Court.  
No surprise that the Judges found Barrick “inappropriate” and “not reliable” in their methods. When will someone be accountable?

Last week, in Australia, following THREE lost appeals by Barrick Gold, the High Court of Australia ruled that Barrick must pay $55 million in a case that goes back to 2005 when Barrick acquired 100 per cent of the shares in Placer Dome Inc.

The majority judgement was delivered by Chief Justice Kiefel and Justices Bell, Nettle and Gordon.  Very briefly, the background of the case involves the Commissioner of Revenues’ assessment of Land-Rich Duties at the time of Barrick Gold’s acquisition Placer Dome. Barrick objected to the Commissioner’s assessment.  And the case went on for years and of course the lawyers got rich on the fees.

One the reasons put forward by Barrick for rejecting the land valuation, was the fact that it resulted in a large, unexplainable gap between the value of Placer’s land assets and the purchase price paid for the shares.  The Judges responded:  “That gap necessarily raised a question about the reliability of the DCF valuations [relied upon by Barrick] and, in turn, a question about the content of the $6.506 billion allocated to goodwill in Barrick’s accounts”.
(Discounted cash flow (DCF) is a valuation method used to estimate the attractiveness of an investment opportunity. DCF analysis uses future free cash flow projections and discounts them to arrive at a present value, which is then used to evaluate the potential for investment.)

The Judges held that the $6.506 billion that had been allocated to goodwill was based on the conventional accounting practice of allocating to Placer’s assets amounts nominated as their “fair value”, and allocating the residual of the purchase price to “goodwill”.
The amount that was recorded in the accounts as goodwill was not legal goodwill.
Further, a number of the “sources” of goodwill that had been identified by Barrick should not have been taken into account as part of the statutory valuation exercise under the land-rich rules and, of those sources that could be taken into account, a number were of no material value.  It followed that the direct valuation approach of valuing Placer’s land was inappropriate, in the circumstances, as it was not a reliable method of valuing Placer’s assets.

This is yet another example of how Barrick Gold tries to write their own rules in countries where they operate. And the most important factors are: Which executives are running the operations? Which executives are responsible for decision making?

Here in Tanzania, we have learnt the hard way with Barrick Gold for over 20 years.
In our Holy Bible, Ecclesiastes 1:9 states in Kiswahili:
Kile kilichokuwapo kitakuwapo tena, kile kilichofanyika kitafanyika tena, hakuna kilicho kipya chini ya jua.
That which has been, is that which will be, And that which has been done, is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun.

Let us not be fooled by these sophisticated global businessmen who hide behind their hi-power lawyers.  In fact, Barrick Gold is only “the vehicle” driven by people who are responsible for the actions of the vehicle. When Courts of Justice, anywhere in the world, rule on cases involving motor vehicle accidents involving different parties, the ruling is on the drivers, not the vehicles. Similarly, in cases involving companies, there should be a mechanism to rule against the responsible people who take decisions within their companies (the vehicles).

In 2016, Barrick Gold was found guilty to have evaded tax for four years consecutively from 2010. They lost their appeal against being found to have evaded tax for four years consecutively from 2010, amounting to US$ 81,843,1327.  Barrick threw all its weight behind their appeal to fault the judgment issued on March 31, 2016,  by the Tax Revenue Appeals Tribunal on the matter. Hakuna kilicho kipya chini ya jua.

The March 31 guilty verdict by the Tax Tribunal, headed by a High Court Judge, concluded that Barrick had failed to pay any corporate taxes in Tanzania from 2010 to 2013 while still paying more than $400-million in dividends to its shareholders from its gold-mining profits in Tanzania. The Tribunal noted that the company’s three Tanzanian gold mines were its only source of profits for the dividend payout. So, the Barrick Head Office overseas has income of enough billions to pay out astronomical dividends whilst in Tanzania, their ONLY three gold mines were making losses that prevents paying local corporate taxes.   

The Tribunal stated that Barrick’s explanation for its lack of corporate tax payments was “far from plausible” and that they engaged in a “sophisticated scheme of tax evasion”.  Needless to say that Barrick’s Tanzanian subsidiary immediately announced that it would appeal the Tribunal’s tax ruling (of March 31, 2016) to Tanzania’s highest court, calling it a “fundamentally flawed” decision. Hakuna kilicho kipya chini ya jua.

The Tribunal’s ruling sparked much publicity worldwide. The Guardian newspaper wrote: “Mining companies have long been suspected of being tax cheats, causing the government to get less than its fair share of revenues from the sector”.

Six months later, in October 2016, The Court of Appeals in Tanzania ruled against Barrick Gold and that the Tribunal’s verdict in March 2016, was correct and to be upheld.

All things being equal, why are the Barrick decision makers not held responsible and accountable in some way, with some form of mechanism, so that they may not be permitted to continue in this way and to rock the legal systems of so many countries in which they operate.  Take Kelvin Dushnisky, for example. Until recently, Dushnisky, himself a lawyer, was the President of Barrick Gold and also the Chairman of the Board of Directors of Barrick’s Tanzania subsidiary, Acacia Mining.  He joined Barrick in 2002 as Director of Regulatory Affairs.

During Dushnisky’s 16 years at Barrick Gold, he held senior management positions and would always have had first hand access to full details from all their operations all over the world. In 2015, he was appointed the President of Barrick.  Who could possibly say he was NOT involved in decision making?  Nonetheless, there are patterns of recurring Barrick problems over and over, worldwide, and one must wonder how many times must Barrick experience the same category of problem before they will learn how to prevent OR when it happens, how to rectify quickly and quietly.

Morally and ethically, the world should take Dushnisky to task over his knowledge, consent and involvement of everything that happened at Barrick during the past 16 years.  He should be made accountable for crimes, violations, human-rights abuses, damages and more in many countries around the world.  Please download the detailed lists of crimes, violations, human-rights abuses, tax evasion, environmental damages, and worse, by clicking here:  K. Dushnisky Accountable Lists

There are those cynics worldwide who criticize our Hon. President, John P. Magufuli for whatever reason they come up with.  However, Dushnisky, who recently became the CEO of AngloGold Ashanti, another Tanzania gold mine, will one day soon have to sit with our Government officials on a host of issues. As he is unquestionably responsible (even partly) for the fraud, corruption, murder, rape, environmental devastation, tax evasion, illegal exports, and many more crimes in Tanzania, whether these crimes were committed under Barrick’s period of management or Barrick’s subsidiary, Acacia Mining’s period of management, in all cases Dushnisky is accountable and our President will undoubtedly take this into consideration in relation to future dealings with Dushnisky.

Should we be surprised if Dushnisky is arrested when he arrives in Tanzania?  Will our President grant him some form of conditional amnesty?  Will Dushnisky manage AngloGold Ashanti in the same immoral and despicable manner in which he managed Barrick Gold?  Hakuna kilicho kipya chini ya jua.

Sources out of London tell us that following the arrests in Tanzania of Acacia Mining’s top in-country executives and the ongoing fraud and corruption investigations of Barrick-Acacia in Tanzania, the UK Serious Fraud Office (SFO) is AGAIN opening investigations of Acacia Mining.  Dushnisky, Brad Gordon, Andrew Wray, Gary Chapman, Katrina White, Peter Spora, and all the other Acacia executives who jumped ship – be assured that law enforcement is coming after you!

 

https://tanzaniabusinessethics.wordpress.com

 

High Court Judge: Acacia Mining playing tactics to defeat justice.

A PUBLIC LETTER TO THE HON. PRESIDENT OF TANZANIA, MINISTER OF JUSTICE, ATTORNEY GENERAL AND OTHERS

Hon. President John P. Magufuli, Prof Palamagamba Kabudi and Dr Adelardus Kilangi

Copies to:
Board members of Barrick Gold & Acacia Mining;
Chief Secretary, Amb. JWH Kijazi;
Minister of Minerals:  Ms. Angellah Kairuki;
Other Tanzania Ministers;
Journalists worldwide.

Dear Hon. President Magufuli and Distinguished Dignitaries

OUR HIGH COURT JUDGE MAKES JUDGEMENT AGAINST ACACIA MINING ADJUDICATOR

In July 2015, as a result of media reports in Bloomberg online, and in August 2015 another report from African Intelligence online, and then again in November 2015 from African Intelligence online our group took great interest to investigate further what was honestly behind these two stories about the small family mining business from Mwanza fighting against the biggest gold mining company in the world.  We understood from these media reports online that there were two mining cases that were being disputed; one case in Mgusu (near Geita) and the second case in Siga Hills (near Kahama).

We tried to communicate with the Mwanza family (company called Bismark) to receive indepth details but they would not discuss serious details with us because of their restrictions of confidentiality due to the cases being in the formal process of Adjudication.

A few months later, in February 2016,  The Citizen TZ online published yet another public report about this Mgusu case. This report started a constant flow media coverage about the Bismark-Acacia-Barrick disputes.

In March 2016:

The Business Times newspaper reported further about this case as did the Raia Tanzania newspaper and the Majira newspaper also published their reports.
Added to the news of the dispute was the huge Acacia-Barrick scandal of the tax evasion Judgement against them which the media jumped onto as well.

In April 2016:

Another Business Times newspaper report with more details about the case followed by the Mwanachi newspaper releasing their report and then again the Raia Tanzania newspaper and the Majira newspaper and the Business Times newspaper also published their follow up reports.

Mr. President, all these above public media reports and those that came after April 2016 represented the picture of how Acacia Mining were trying to manipulate our local Tanzanian companies for the sole benefit of Acacia.  Even when it became public knowledge that Acacia proposed an Adjudicator in their case against the Mwanza family (Bismark), Acacia chose Karel Daele who was found to be conflicted and he deliberately hid the truth about his past contacts with Barrick Gold and Acacia Mining.  Mr. Kaele did not disclose:
–  his history with Barrick-Acacia;
–  his having working closely with Acacia Mining’s lawyers, Quin Emanuel;
–  he worked with Acacia Mining employees in previous jobs.

When Bismark objected to Karel Daele in 2016, Acacia triggered their standard operating procedure with disputes with their opponents:  Attack, pressure, legal fees, break the opponent.  Acacia’s UK lawyers are Quin Emanuel and they are famous for this exact procedure.

Furthermore, Mr. President, you remember that we reported to you in February 2017, Quin Emanuel even sent us a letter of threat to take legal action against our group because we expose everything which Barrick-Acacia is doing in Tanzania.

Bismark’s objection against Karel Daele was met with accusations that Bismark are acting frivolous. So they had no objection but to turn to the High Court for assistance in this matter.

For almost two years, Karel Daele used delay tactics to upset the Bismark application to the High Court to remove him.  Judge Ama Munisi was on the bench for this case.

A UK journalist investigating different African cases explained that during these past almost two years, Karel Daele did not make any effort to respond or appear at the Court according to Judge Munisi’s instructions. The Judge even took the extra step of instructing Bismark to insert notices in the UK so that Karel Daele will never have an excuse that he did not know of the proceedings in the High Court in Dar es Salaam.  Bismark proceeded to arrange the notice in the UK and the cost was quite high as well – exactly what Acacia and Quin Emanuel wanted.

Recently, Judge Munisi presented her final judgement in which she ruled AGAINST Acacia Mining and Karel Daele and Quin Emanuel and their local lawyers, IMMMA.

The same UK journalist contacted the lawyers of both sides for comment on the judgement against Acacia and Mr. Daele.  He contacted Advocate Fatma A. Karume at IMMMA, representing Acacia Mining and he contacted Advocate Onesmo S. Mpinzile from FMD Advocates, representing Bismark.
The UK journalist said that Adv. Karume ignored his requests for comments.  However, Adv. Mpinzile did comment via messenger.  Adv. Mpinzile said that in Court, it was observed (by Judge Munisi) that Karel Daele was wasting time and playing tactics to defeat justice while he should have recused himself long ago and let Adjudication take its cause. Further, he commented that Judge Munisi’s ruling took more than 45 minutes to read meaning that the judgement was detailed and extensive.

Mr. President, is this typical of the Acacia Mining we know in Tanzania?  We asked lawyers for comments about this and the feeling was that Adv. Fatma Karume is also responsible for allowing Karel Daele to delay and obstruct justice.

Mr. President, at what point do we say TUMECHOKA to Acacia Mining for even interfering with our judicial system? If we understand Judge Munisi’s observation, these are people who waste our Courts time (and the wasted efforts and costs of our Judges and their staff) and they play tactics to defeat justice. Where will these people stop?  How can they believe that they are the law to do what they will, when they will and how they will?  Our Tanzanian Sisters and Brothers who have legitimate claims against Acacia Mining are entitled to a fair and stable process of justice without their interfering with their high-power lawyers delay tactics.  These UK people with their Quin Emanuel lawyers will continue to make fun of our judicial system until there is a road-block erected in their way that will make them stop and understand that in Tanzania, there will not be any more of these games that they play or manipulate.

God bless you and our Country and our People.

Samantha Cole
https://tanzaniabusinessethics.wordpress.com
https://www.facebook.com/sam.cole.ethics
…
(Any reader who wants a copy of the Judge Munisi’s 12 page judgement, please email me at scoop20151@gmail.com and I will send the copy to you)

Has the Devil come back to Tanzania wearing a different uniform?

AN OPEN LETTER TO HIS EXCELLENCY, PRESIDENT JOHN P. MAGULFULI, TANZANIA

Dear Mr. President

We all, in Tanzania, thought that our Nation received a blessing when Kelvin Dushnisky, the Chairman of the Acacia Mining Board of Directors announced that he was resigning (also as the president of Barrick Gold).  We were so happy that this man who has allowed so much suffering in Tanzania and other countries in the world, was finally leaving us and going somewhere else.

Then we received the terrible news that he is coming back into Tanzania but working for another company.  That is what we ask:
Has the Devil come back to us wearing the uniform of AngloGold Shanti ?

There are no secrets about the Fraud and Corruption sponsored by KELVIN DUSHNISKY whilst he was President of Barrick Gold & Chairman of Acacia Mining.
See at the bottom of this letter, there is a link to the LISTS of crimes and abuse and violations over many of Dushnisky’s years at Barrick & Acacia.

Why was he NOT held accountable for his companies illegal activities?
The main difference between responsibility and accountability is that responsibility can be shared while accountability cannot.

Mr. Dushnisky being accountable, not only means he is responsible for everything he authorized, but also he was ultimately answerable for damages and devastations that his ex-companies caused globally.  The murders, the rapes, the misery, the damage to environments, the fraud, the corruption, the tax evasion….. This is NOT a Hollywood movie, this is for real! Mr. Dushnisky should have been accountable.

Let us call a spade, a spade. Mr. Dushnisky ran Barrick Gold and Acacia Mining with a clear tendency and pattern of FRAUD and CORRUPTION.
Regardless of if we call it money FRAUD, human rights FRAUD, environment FRAUD – whatever he decided, was without thinking twice.
His bottom line was: “make more money and screw everyone else”.

Most of the Barrick’s and Acacia’s mines under Dushnisky’s past control are located in regions referred to as Developing Regions and Nations? Tanzania, Chile, Papua New Guinea, Argentina, Burkina Faso, Pakistan, Kenya, Philippines, Dominican Republic ?

Let us call a spade a spade…
Those Barrick mines are in areas where the labor force is all Black, Brown or Native – all local populations that Barrick can control with their money.
Barrick will take out the gold from the ground as quickly as possible and then run away to their next victim mine.

Please allow us to give a clear picture of the “Kelvin Dushnisky business model” for Barrick Gold and Acacia Mining and the operations of their mines:

1.    Manipulate the local Government to give Barrick the land almost for free on the promises of wonderful taxes (if we open the subject of Barrick’s corruption, this letter will never end!)
2.    Use the local population labor force and pay them lowest possible salaries – money that workers can never save for their family’s futures after working for years in Barrick mines
3.    Make a terrible mess and damages of the local environment that is almost impossible to remedy. Local deaths and rapes and misery by Barrick’s “security” workers.
4.    Barrick will pay NO taxes because Barrick complain that they make no profits – but they pay hundreds of millions in Dividends to shareholders overseas using the system of illegal price transferring!
5.    As soon as Barrick decide that they want to leave the mine, they close shop and walk away for FREE.

Mr. Dushnisky can never explain :
•    the disgusting disparity of mine worker’s salaries in the Barrick North American mines compared to an equivalent Black or Native worker in Chile / Argentina / Tanzania / Papua New Guinea / etc!   Does a Barrick mine worker in Nevada USA receive the same salary as the same worker, doing the same job, in a Barrick mine in Tanzania?
•    why there are no proportionate percentages of Blacks or Natives in senior management positions.
•    why are there no proportionate percentages of Blacks or Natives on the Barrick or Acacia Boards of Directors?

In all the many years of mining in Tanzania, in Chile, in Argentina, in Papua New Guinea, in the Philippines, etc…. how is possible that Mr. Dushnisky never met or trained any of the talented local brain-power to sit in the senior positions in his companies?
Why not? Because they are not “WHITE” !!
Because in Mr. Dushnisky’s world …. When he is right, he is right …. And when he is wrong, then he is still right….. But that is ONLY BECAUSE HE IS WHITE!

Mr. Dushnisky can NOT show you, what did he and Barrick do for “Developing Regions or Countries”?  He can send sophisticated lying lawyers letters.  He thinks to pay for a soccer team or contribute to a new clinic is all they must do whilst they cleverly take all the precious gold out of the all the lands (natural given resources).
And then to add insult to injury, THEY KILL, RAPE, ABUSE, MISTREAT, DESTROY ENVIRONMENTS AND IN THE END, BARRICK STILL PAY LITTLE OR NO TAXES ….
However, Mr. Dushnisky simply sends his sophisticated lawyers and accountants to prove to the Blacks and the Natives why Barrick Gold makes NO PROFITS…. Whilst they pay hundreds of millions of Dollars in Dividends and … let us not forget about the tens of millions of Dollars that they throw around in bonuses!!

Please allow us to bring to your attention the very painful and distressing example of Barrick Gold’s two-faced, deceitful and treacherous swindles that they played with the Tulawaka mine in Tanzania:

Internet research tells us:
The original discovery of gold at the Tulawaka mine was in 1998.
Barrick Gold’s involvement was in 2000 via Pangea Goldfields and they operated this mine from 2005 through to 2013.
During those 8 years, from 2005 through to 2013, the mine produced nearly 1 million oz of gold.
That was ALMOST DOUBLE THE QUANTITY OF GOLD OF THE ORIGINAL EXPECTATIONS!

Then suddenly Barrick decided to stop and within a short period of time, they were all gone!!
What did Barrick leave behind after taking 1 million oz of gold ? They certainly did NOT pay much taxes!
They left behind massive unemployment, massive damage to the environment, massive social problems…. All for the Tanzania government to repair and remedy alone. This is the style of Mr. Kelvin Dushnisky… he takes, he rapes and he leaves!
It is NO surprise that President Magufuli said publicly in a speech that mining companies who report no profits in Tanzania “better go back to their countries” and the President instructed the Tax Revenue Services to seal the loop holes for tax evasion that the mining companies are using!!

And this is the same style of treatment he gives local mining companies that are partners with Barrick. He will use them and then abuse them – as we see with the very real example of Bismark Limited in Tanzania. On June 3, 2016, Business Times reported that a Tanzanian MP stated in Parliament how Barrick Gold “colluded with certain officials of dubious probity at the Ministry of Energy & Minerals in order to get their support for the Big Miner’s “suppression of small Tanzania mining companies!”

And one thing is for certain…. When Barrick decides to stop operations in their other 3 mines in Tanzania, they will do exactly the same….. they will fraudulently and in a corrupt manner, search for a hole in the system and then sneak out the back door!
Barrick will leave their three mines as “ghost towns” and walk away from total devastation in every direction and sphere.

On the subject of deceitful and treacherous swindles, kindly permit us to raise the subject of mine labor manipulation and falsification:
Barrick have a system where they bring an overseas labor sub-contractor to their mines. In this case, we refer to the Australian company, BYRNECUT OFFSHORE GROUP who operates in Tanzania on behalf of Barrick Gold.  Barrick created a sophisticated system to distance themselves from their labor force by bringing the Australian’s to employ workers.  This means that all labor suppression and humiliation problems are directed away from Barrick Gold and to the Australian’s.
What is this scheme for ?
Why bring an Australian company to Africa to hire local workers? Is there no local company in all of Tanzania that can offer this same service?
Or maybe Mr. Dushnisky only relied on the Australian’s because they are white?

Mr. Dushnisky was born in September 1963 and is a qualified lawyer. His career in Barrick Gold began in 2002 and over the past about 16 years, he has worked and been promoted up through the different levels of senior management, up the top of Barrick Gold. Following below, you can find a detailed report of Mr. Dushnisky’s employment at Barrick and his other positions and Directorships outside of Barrick.

So, we have established that Mr. Dushnisky, a lawyer, has risen up through the senior management ranks of Barrick over the past 16 years. Undoubtedly, he has been exposed to most issues facing Barrick all around the world – he has been exposed to the full spectrum from the success stories to the crisis situations and tragedies.
A man who earns multi-million dollars a year is paid to deliver to his company full value services – ideally success stories as opposed to crises and tragedies. Whilst one cannot question accidents, one can question a crisis situation and the management skills behind those responsible for solving each and every crisis situation for the benefit of that company.

There have been literally hundreds of crisis situations, disasters and tragedies during the 16 years that Mr. Dushnisky worked in Barrick. Suffice it to say that Kelvin Dushnisky can boast that “he has seen it all, done it all and got the t-shirt”.

Certainly he has “seen it all” but is it not obvious that he lacks the managerial skills to actually keep all aspects of the global company on track and under control in Barrick operations around the world? Despite the fact that he has “seen it all”, one would think even more so that he would ensure that problem situations are put to rest immediately that they rear their ugly heads! And better yet, why are the same problems cropping up all the time – year after year and similarities country by country around the world?
But no, Mr. Dushnisky prefers to come out fighting with his sophisticated lawyers and accountants, bullying, intimidating, mistreating and oppressing anything or anyone that might be a “threat” to Barrick. Indeed, these are strong words BUT the facts speak for themselves.

We started this public letter with the question:
Has the Devil come back to Tanzania wearing a different uniform?

Mr. President, we prepared a list of problems, disasters and tragedies that go on and on, year after year, for you….  The internet does wonders when researching Barrick and Acacia scandals and indignities.  Sadly, the results do not seem to finish….

What with all these hundreds of crisis situations right under Mr. Dushnisky’s nose during his 16 years in senior management, one must wonder why Barrick did not have a better management team to steer their ship away from these recurring problems?
One must wonder why the Board of Directors and Shareholders and Investors were not sick and tired of hearing about crisis after crisis, over and over again in multiple countries? Does Kelvin Dushnisky not learn from his mistakes?
And, let us not make a mistake here:  The buck stops with him and these are effectively his mistakes!

Being accountable not only means being responsible for something but also ultimately being answerable for your actions. Why is Mr. Dushnisky NOT answering for all these failures?
And failures they are because Barrick knows how to prevent these problems, failing which, by

Mr. Dushnisky thinks we, Tanzanian’s may all be underprivileged / unexposed / uneducated / uncivilized “Blacks and Natives” but it is obvious to us that as things stand now, looking at the scenario presented above, it is time for Governments to take pro-active action so that MINING COMPANIES will change their tendencies and patterns of Fraud and Corruption.

Great caution is needed and emergency measures to be prepared when this Devil arrives wearing his new CEO uniform of AngloGold Shanti.

Following are the links to the LISTS of crimes and abuse and violations over many of Dushnisky’s years at Barrick & Acacia:
Lists online:
https://wordpress.com/post/tanzaniabusinessethics.wordpress.com/1752 
Lists download:

Click to access k-dushnisky-accountable-lists.pdf

Kelvin Dushnisky – Accountable for crimes, violations, human-rights abuses, damages

Please download the Lists of crimes, violations, human-rights abuses, damages, and worse by clicking here:  K. Dushnisky Accountable Lists

Alternatively – here are are the lists below:

Prepared by:
Tanzania Business Ethics,  July 5, 2016
http://www.tanzaniabusinessethics.wordpress.com
http://www.facebook.com/sam.cole.ethics

MR. KELVIN DUSHNISKY

His personal history at Barrick Gold:
2002: Mr. Dushnisky joined Barrick as Director of Regulatory Affairs.
2003: Mr. Dushnisky was promoted to Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
2005: Mr. Dushnisky was promoted to Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs
2007: Mr. Dushnisky was promoted to Executive Vice President, Corporate Affairs
2010: Mr. Dushnisky was promoted to Executive Vice President, Corporate & Legal Affairs
2012: Mr. Dushnisky assumed the position of Senior Executive Vice President including global
responsibility for the Government Relations, Permitting, Corporate Responsibility and
Communications functions
2013: Mr. Dushnisky was named Chairman of the Board of Directors of London‐listed African Barrick
Gold plc (today called Acacia Mining Plc).
2015: Mr. Dushnisky was appointed President of Barrick
2016: Mr. Dushnisky joined the company’s Board of Directors. He provides overall leadership to the
organization and holds responsibility for the execution of Barrick’s strategic priorities.
Mr. Dushnisky is a member of :
 The Law Society of British Columbia
 The Canadian Bar Association
 He is a Director of :
o The Mining Association of Canada
o The Institute of the Americas
o The Canadian Council of the Americas
o The Canadian Chamber of Commerce, among others.

In March 2013, The Globe & Mail newspaper reported that Barrick paid Mr. Dushnisky $ 6.6 million in

2012.
On the following pages, we list some of the literally hundreds of crisis situations right under Mr. Dushnisky’s nose.
(Note about the “short list”: This is a cross section of numerous problems experienced by Barrick worldwide over the past about 12 years. During all 12 of these years, Mr. Dushnisky held senior management positins and would have had first hand access to full details.
Nonetheless, there are patterns of recurring problems over and over and one must wonder how many times must Barrick experience the same category of problem before they will learn how to prevent OR when it happens, how to rectify quickly and quietly.)
On March 11, 2016, Mr. Dushnisky said (in relation to a disaster in Argentina):
“We recognise that we have disappointed many of our partners in San Juan province and we deeply regret this incident. The company is committed to ensuring we have robust polices and standards in place that protect the environment at all of our operations….“
BUT THIS DISASTER COULD HAVE AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED…..

First, we list the crisis situations in order by country and years.
Then at the end, we list the crisis situations again in order by years only.
Here begins the pattern of much the same problems, disasters and tragedies in multiple countries…

Argentina

2016: Argentina
Federal Court reports that the 2015 cyanide spill at Barrick’s Veladero mine contaminated five rivers in the region. Federal Police confirmed that Barrick to be investigated over environmental crimes in the country and state there is “definite case of law infringement” of the country’s legislation on the proper handling of hazardous substances.

2015: Argentina
Argentina judge ordered a five‐day suspension of the gold leaching process at Barrick’s Veladero mine.
The purpose is to investigate the environmental damage from a cyanide leak.
United Nations experts invited to analyze water samples.

2011: Argentina
Barrick accused of interfering in Argentina election politics including corrupt arrangements with certain officials.

2011: Argentina
Barrick Threatens Legal Action Against NGO, Center for Human Rights and Environment (CEDHA), over publication of Contamination of Gold Mining Projects in Argentina. The report concludes that Barrick is responsible for contaminating San Juan’s rivers and streams around Barricks mines.

2011: Argentina
Application to the Supreme Court of Argentina for immediate cessation of Barrick’s mining activities due to Barrick violating the law

2010: Argentina
San Juan province governor exposed of ‘economic ties’ with Barrick. Also the President de Kirchner accused of vetoing the Glaciers Law in order to favour Barrick. Later, lawmakers approve a glacier protection bill that ban mining and oil drilling in the country’s Andean ice fields.

2008: Argentina
Reports of Barrick bribery and scandal of Barrick’s open‐pit mining

Australia

2010: Australia
Report that Barrick is responsible for massive environment damage to Lake Cowal. A national campaign is launched to save the lake.

2009: Australia
The Supreme Court of Appeal blocks Barrick mine expansion

2009: Australia
Local supporters refuse Barrick mine expansion and demand to close mine down

2008: Australia
Barrick fighting in the Land & Environment court to increase mining

2008: Australia
Barrick fined for tailings spill in 2006

2008: Australia
Problems of Barrick mine “swallowing” historic town

2008: Australia
Authorities investigate misconduct of company taken over by Barrick

2006: Australia
Barrick mine has tailings spill

Canada

2015: Canada
Corruption at its best: Former foreign affairs minister John Baird joins Barrick international advisory board. Reports expose that John Baird’s former department was responsible for payments of millions of dollars of public monies to Barrick and Munk’s projects.

2013: Canada & USA
Public reports of 8 or more law firms inviting the public to sue Barrick for their fraudulent activity
leading up to the crashing of Barrick’s shareholder value.

2012: Canada – World
Reports that conflicts in Canadian mines around the world causing grave problems for Canada and the Canadian “halo” reputation of peace‐loving, human‐rights respecting and tree‐hugging.

2012: Canada
Report exposes how the Harper government has close connections with Barrick and Peter and Anthony Munk :
 Prime Minister Harper’s Chief of Staff, Nigel Wright, connected to the Munk’s which is Conflict of Interest;
 Ms. Marketa Evans connected to the Munk’s was appointed CSR (Corporate Social
Responsibility) Director for the Canadian government under Harper;
 About $50 million of government funds contributed to the Munk’s “School of Global Affairs” and Munk’s other personal “education” efforts.
 Harper ignored report on human rights and environmental standards of Canadian Mining Companies (Barrick included) but rather published the report “Building the Canadian Advantage”, that rejected human rights problems and instead, promised more funds to mining companies.

2012: Canada
Barrick launches new corporate social responsibility advisory board. What happened to the board?
Where are the improvements?

2011: Canada
The Harper government recently announced public funding for Canadian mining companies. Corruption at its best – not long after, Harper is appointed to the Barrick Board of Directors.

2011: Canada
Barrick’s AGM: Friends of the Earth International demands, on behalf of communities around the world, that Barrick stop destructive mining practices. They have documented studies of human rights abuses and environmental devastation globally, including in the Philippines, P.N. Guinea, Tanzania, Australia and more.

2009: Canada
Report exposes Barrick of making mining agreements in 2002 with two eastern DRCongo militias, which at the time were in the midst of murdering hundreds of civilians

2009: Canada
Evidence given at a hearing of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee exposes Barrick in Argentina for using political and economic corruption to block government intervention in Barrick’s mining operations in Argentina

2009: Canada
Evidence given at a hearing of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee exposes Barrick’s mine in Papua New Guinea for numerous accounts of group rape by Barrick’s guards.
Amnesty International reveals that local police at the same mine violently evicted local families and burned down and destroyed at least 130 buildings and houses. Barrick initially denied the allegations, but after the conclusions of Amnesty’s local investigation were released, Barrick was forced to accept the findings

2009: Canada
Government taking steps against Canadian companies, Barrick specified, for environmental and human rights abuses in developing countries.

2009: Canada
Reports on the government, influenced by Barrick, given the green light for misbehaviour abroad

2008: Canada
Book published linking Barrick to the deaths of Tanzanian miners in 1996

2007: Canada
Corruption reports involving ex‐Prime Minister Brian Mulroney

2007: Canada
A wave of Barrick top executives selling off their Barrick shares

Chile

2015: Chile
Environment authorities start process to apply for new sanctions against Barrick’s mine which will cause additional delays and complications for Barrick to resume construction and operations.

2015: Chile
Chile’s environment authorities re‐evaluate penalties on Barrick’s mine which include the possibility of cancelling Barrick’s mining permit.

2014: Chile
Chile Supreme Court refuses to rule on the merits of a challenge filed by Barrick against a lower court decision regarding the injunctions imposed by government regulators regarding Barrick’s breaches of permits.

2014: Chile & Argentina
One year passed since the suspension of operations at Barrick’s mine. Government Tribunal starts regarding environment problems around Barrick’s mine.
Director of the Center for Human Rights and Environment (in Argentina) gives expert testimony against Barrick.

2013: Chile
Appeals court ruled against Barrick in favor of Chilean Indians who accuse Barrick of contaminating their water downstream thus creating more doubts about the future of the world’s highest gold mine.
In a separate case in the Supreme Court, an indigenous appeal against Barrick to protect the environment

2013: Chile
Charges filed in court against the Barrick mine failing to meet the environmental standards, conditions, and measures. Further, Chilean authorities also found Barrick’s self‐reporting did not meet accurate, truthful and verifiable fact standards.
Later, reports received that after a series of frauds regarding mining property and repeated poor environmental practices, Barrick might lose the complete Chile side of the mine. Also, court order
made to suspend Barrick’s mine operations after indigenous communities complained that the project is threatening their water supply and polluting glaciers.
Barrick appeals the court order and loses the appeal. The mine operations remain suspended.

2012: Chile – Canada
Legal action started to force Barrick to appear in a Canadian court to respond to accusations that Barrick falsified information regarding their Pascua Lama mine.

2012: Chile
Appeals Court to hear injunction request against Barrick’s mine for environmental problems.

2012: Chile
Criminal charges filed against Barrick

2010: Chile
Chile Environmental Authorities began an investigation of Barrick’s mine construction, which could lead to fines or even a revoked concession.

2010: Chile
Chile’s National Water Commission (DGA) exposes that Barrick is failing to comply with Chile’s environmental laws

2009: Chile
Barrick’s Pascua Lama project denounced as illegal, lacks social license to operate.

2009: Chile
Barrick backed out of a debate 20 minutes before it was scheduled to begin

2008: Chile
Barrick mine the most severe threat to local indigenous communities

2007: Chile
Barrick bribes to officials

2006: Chile
Scandals involving land rights underpaid by Barrick

Dominican Republic

2016: Dominican Republic
Barrick back in court to defend land dispute cases from local farmers. Hundreds of farmers gathered at the Land Court for the fifth hearing in their case against the Barrick.
Hundreds of people sued the mining company to demand payment for the farmers’ properties.

2015: Dominican Republic
Court application filed for an injunction to halt Barrick’s local mining operation

2015: Dominican Republic
Reports of environmental damage to local residents as far as an hour away from Barrick’s mine.
Farmers there say that even the cattle refuse to drink the water!

2013: Dominican Republic
Residents sue Barrick’s mine for poisoning rivers, causing illnesses and the death of farm animals.

2013: Dominican Republic
Government halts yet another Barrick shipment at the airport in effort for Barrick to reach an agreement with the government. Customs official inspect the shipment and find alleged irregularities resulting in Barrick being fined US$96 Million.

2013: Dominican Republic
Government halts Barrick gold shipment worth millions at the airport due to Barrick not reaching an agreement with the government.

2013: Dominican Republic
The Congress said it wants a “more favourable” contract with Barrick for their mine. The original contract was made in 2009 but looked upon suspiciously.

2012: Dominican Republic
Activists demand to ban cyanide outside Barrick’s offices

2010: Dominican Republic
Barrick’s mine workers strikes caused the Labor Ministry to investigate if Barrick are respecting their workers’ rights.
It’s the third setback for Barrick in 2010, including calls to review the exploitation contract over alleged non‐binding clauses on environmental cleanup, and food poisoning which sickened hundreds of workers.

2010: Dominican Republic
Senate Environmental Commission ask the Presidency to review the gold mining contract with Barrick to obtain better advantages and compensate affected communities.
Reports expose Barrick as being dishonest about poisoning more than 300 Barrick workers at the Barrick mine in central Dominica.

England

2015: England
Barrick settle out of court with the Tanzanian Villagers who sued Barrick in 2013 for deaths and injuries in Barrick’s North Mara mine in Tanzania. Barrick denied the allegations.

2014: England
Barrick faces court action in London against the Tanzanians who sue Barrick for deaths and injuries allegedly caused by Barrick’s security and police guarding Barrick’s North Mara mine in Tanzania.

2014: England
British MP’s alarmed and get involved regarding the killings at Barrick’s North Mara mine in Tanzania.
Lawyers and human rights experts call on the British government to intervene.
Barrick’s spokesman states that Barrick is vigorously defending itself against the 10 villager’s lawsuit started in 2013.

New Zealand

2013: New Zealand
Superannuation Fund excludes Barrick on responsible investment grounds due to concerns at the treatment of workers and the environment at Barrick’s mines

Norway

2009: Norway
Due to human rights crimes, Norway’s Ministry of Finance drops Barrick from Norway’s Government Pension Fund‐Global investments

Pakistan

2010: Pakistan
After Baluchistan’s chief minister announced severing ties to Barrick, Canadian diplomats went to lobby Pakistan Prime Minister and other government officials to support Barrick’s negotiation of a formal mining lease with the Baluchistan government

2009: Pakistan
Report exposes Pakistani, Muslim Lakhani, in Barrick corruption scandal in Baluchistan

2009: Pakistan
Pakistani army colonel working for Barrick exposed interfering with Baluchistan locals

2008: Pakistan
Government scandal with Barrick deal in Chaghi, Balochistan

Papua N Guinea

2016: Papua N Guinea
Human rights group near to Barrick’s mine is once again reporting on behalf of human rights victims of the mine. Around Sept 2015, the group submitted to Barrick 256 names of victims who have been shot dead, injured and raped by Barrick security personnel. They received a claims number, but there has been no progress on the claims.

2016: Papua N Guinea
Villagers living around Barrick’s mine are still suffering from violence at the hands of mine security and police guarding the mines. Women have been beaten and raped and men have been maimed and killed by mine security. Barrick is aware of the ongoing human rights abuses at their mine and selectively provided remedy packages to some victims in return for legal waivers.
However, the remedy process is not reaching all victims, is not equitable, and is not meeting victims’ needs. NGO’s are chasing Barick for solutions but none are forthcoming.

2015: Papua N Guinea & USA
Barrick settle out of court with the 200 women who survived brutal rapes by Barrick security guards at the Barrick mine. 11 women and 3 men were represented by US‐based Earth Rights International and their settlements were very much higher than all the other women and men who were not fortunate to have US representation.
The 11 women said that the balance of the women accepted very low settlements and were mistaken to accept the Barrick offer.

2015: Papua N Guinea
MP claims that says Barrick owes $US 4 billion for breach of contract agreements including landowners’ resettlement packages, agreement projects, infrastructure projects including roads and bridges, social and environmental damages.
The MP reports the claims are genuine and states if Barrick does not pay, they will take action in international arbitration.

2014: Papua N Guinea
Barrick tries to offer about 200 women who survived brutal rapes by Barrick security guards at the Barrick mine, to waive their legal rights in exchange for small “business grants” and “business training”.
Human rights and women’s rights advocates are criticizing Barrick’s offer as totally insufficient and created only to protect Barrick’s interests rather than bring a solution for the abuses, pain and suffering.

2014: Pap N Guinea ‐ Canada
Barrick refuses to relocate villagers who suffer murder, rape and house burning around Barrick’s mine
in Papa New Guinea.
Representation is made at Parliament Hill to report about the local villagers problems caused by the Barrick mine.

2013: Papua N Guinea
Report exposes Barrick’s settlement deal for the women raped by security guards at Barrick’s mine as neither fair nor best practice. Report states Barrick knew for years that its guards were raping local women without doing anything about it, ignoring reports from local leaders, and legal and human rights clinics at New York University and Harvard.

2011: Papua N Guinea
Human Rights Watch confirms allegations of gang rapes and other human rights abuses by security guards of Barrick’s mine. Reports that Barrick respond to credible attempts to alert the company to the abuses of its security personnel with denial and, frequently, by attempting to discredit those who raised the issues.

2010: Papua N Guinea
Reports that approx 5,000 adults live within area of Barrick’s mine. They desperate seek resettlement to another area for the lifestyle and livelihood of 75% of the population. Barrick denied all requests and prefer to offer individual cash payments to villagers as their homes fall victim to waste‐related landslides and police‐instigated arson.

2009: Papua N Guinea
Barrick exposed and accused of far‐reaching environmental destruction

2009: Papua N Guinea
Reports that Barrick torch hundreds of houses to clear way for mine expansion

2009: Papua N Guinea
Enga Province Governor calls on Barrick and government to relocate people who live near Barrick mine

2009: Papua N Guinea
Near Barrick mine, houses burned down in a joint military and police action

2009: Papua N Guinea
Soldiers & police sent to help deteriorating security situation at Barricks mine

2008: Papua N Guinea
Barrick accused of rape, murder, detainment of local people

2008: Papua N Guinea
Reports on mine killings, impacts on rivers, food security and health

2007: Papua N Guinea
Public warned to stay away from Barrick mine due to local shot dead

Peru

2005: Peru
Reports of corruption of tax evasion through the courts

Philippines

2015: Philippines & USA
Local authorities from the Philippines province where Barrack’s mine is situated appear in court in Nevada against Barrick demanding that Barrick take full responsibility for providing solutions for multiple disastrous mine waste failures around the Barrick mine that have caused serious damage to major river and sea ecosystems and have harmed multiple local residents.
In 2014 the local authorities refused a very minimal offer that was totally insufficient.

2014: Philippines
Lawmakers oppose Barrick’s “take it or leave it” offer countering the need to prepare for major environmental disaster due to the Barrick dam walls in danger of collapse and the life threatening and environmental disastrous repercussions and also the “clean‐up costs” after Barrick leaves.

2013: Philippines
After about 5 years of Barrick’s fight in court against the Philippines authorities about taking responsibility for the environment around the Barrick mine, Barrick bullies the authorities to accept a “take it or leave it” minimal amount that is totally inadequate to protect the health and safety of the local population around Barrick’s mine.
Another Barrick corporate “victory” instead of taking responsibility for their damage to the local people, to the local environment and the host country.

2011: Philippines
Supreme Court issues writ on Barrick (and one other) over toxic waste that spilled into the Boac River in 1996.

2009: Philippines
U.S. District Court of Appeals reinstates a nearly four‐year‐old lawsuit accusing Barrick of polluting water and land for decades in the Philippines

2009: Philippines
Reports on Barrick toxic effects on remote Philippine communities

Tanzania

2016 : Tanzania
Fraud and Corruption and tax evasion scandals including Barrack being lambasted in Parliament and the President of Tanzania stating that if Barrick and other overseas miners cannot make profits and pay taxes in Tanzania, they better go back to their own countries.

2016: Tanzania
Villagers living around Barrick’s North Mara mine are still suffering from violence at the hands of mine security and police guarding the mines. Women have been beaten and raped and men have been maimed and killed by mine security. Barrick is aware of the ongoing human rights abuses at their mine and selectively provided remedy packages to some victims in return for legal waivers.
However, the remedy process is not reaching all victims, is not equitable, and is not meeting victims’ needs. NGO’s are chasing Barick for solutions but none are forthcoming.

2016: Tanzania
Due to the high levels of violence at Barrick’s North Mara mine, NGO’s meet with Barrick’s Acacia office in London to clarify the process and procedures of North Mara’s Non‐Judicial Grievance Mechanism for the victims of excessive use of force by mine security and police guarding the mine. Issues needing Barrick attention: Absence of a comprehensive remedy framework document; Lack of clarity about how claims are investigated; Lack of clarity about how claims are accepted or rejected; Complainants
lack access to adequate, independent legal advice; Use of legal waivers

2015: Tanzania
Human rights field assessment at Barrick’s North Mara mine indicates failure of Barrick’s commitments to stop excessive use of force by Barrick security and police guarding the mine. Barrick fails to deal with ongoing violence. NGO’s and RAID confirmed the report given at the United Nations in December 2014, that the grievance mechanism at the North Mara mine was used strategically to divert victims from taking legal action. Locals suffer injuries related to gunfire, severe beatings with batons and other weapons, rape, and gang rape. In short, the vicious, brutal violence against locals around the Barrick mine continues with no sign from Barrick of any solutions.

2014: Tanzania
Killing continues at Barrick’s North Mara mine. Local ward councilor reports that in the previous three years, 69 people have been killed and hundreds more have been severely injured at this Barrick mine.
In the first month of 2014, four more people were killed.

2013: Tanzania – England
Tanzanian villagers sue Barrick in UK High Court for deaths and injuries in Barrick’s North Mara mine in Tanzania. Barrick deny the allegations.

2013: Tanzania
Industry reports of Barrick not paying corporate tax at all.

2013: Tanzania
Barrick terminates MOU for land disputes with communities around North Mara mine.

2013: Tanzania
National Environment Management Council orders Barrick: Close down the toxic tailings pit due to toxic leakages that are contaminating local water sources.

2011: Tanzania
Shootings on Barrick’s mine. Seven deaths.
Barrick accused of tainting Canada’s international mining image. Allegations of more sexual assault by police and Barrick security guards.

2011: Tanzania
Barrick claimed that due to theft of fuel, the Buzwagi mine had to cut production and suspend workers.
Reports are that Barrick in fact arranged ‘organised and systematic’ fuel theft themselves to create a smokescreen and illegal suspension of workers.

2011: Tanzania
Reports of killings and toxic spill from Barrick’s mine into the Thigithe River. Reports of villagers dying from drinking the water.

2010: Tanzania
International Fed. of Chemical, Energy, Mine & General Workers’ Unions reveal blatant abuses of freedom of association in Barrick’s mines.

2009: Tanzania
Reports of chemical spill and river and water contamination from Barrick’s North Mara mine. Thousands of locals stranded without water

2009: Tanzania
Barrick’s North Mara mine given 10 days to compensate local families affected by its poisonous heavy metals.

2009: Tanzania
MP’s report Barrick’s North Mara mine discharge of acid materials into River Tigiti in Tarime District.
MP’s demand full compensation for all victims and investigation of all negligent government officials implicated in the scandal

2009: Tanzania
The Tanzanian Labor Court rules against Barrick for wrongful dismissal of about 700 ex‐Barrick miners

2009: Tanzania
Tanzania Government bans all water usage from the Tigithe River, which may be contaminated with Sulphiric acid from Barrick’s mine. Independent experts also confirm the presence of high levels of toxic chemicals in the area surrounding Barrick’s mine.

2009: Tanzania
Studies by Norway & University of Dar Es Salaam, of the environment around Barrick’s North Mara mine expose “Extremely high levels of arsenic, cadmium, cobalt, copper, crom, nickel and zinc… The environment has been seriously contaminated”

2008: Tanzania
One shot dead when thousands invade Barrick mine & destroy equipment worth $ 15  million

2008: Tanzania
Business & Human Rights Centre publish that overall of mining policy is urgently needed

2008: Tanzania
Report of cruelty, pillaging and colonial practices at Barrick’s mine in Tanzania

2008: Tanzania
Buzwagi mine: Corruption exposed involving Barrick & ex‐minister for mines, Nazir Karamagi

2008: Tanzania
Local activists expose that Tanzania failing to benefit from gold mining United States

United States of America

2016: United States
A New York federal judge ruled against Barrick in the class action suit from investors who accused Barrick of repeatedly and knowingly misleading them about whether the Barrick troubled $8.5 billion South American mining project complied with environmental regulations.

2014: United States
Hearing in Grants, New Mexico to review water discharge from Barrick’s mine, where contamination
has spread in recent years. Controversy over the cleaning and flushing systems used.

2013: United States
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency fine Barrick close to US$ 300,000 for failure to report toxic chemical releases and waste management activities at the Barrick mines between 2005 and 2008.
Furthermore, Barrick must pay $ 340,000 for a supplemental environmental project at its Cortez mine.

2013: Alaska, United States
Report exposes Barricks plan for the gold mine planned in southwest Alaska threatens environment and local communities. The planned Donlin Gold mine estimates 27 years production is bound to have serious consequences for the region.

2013: United States
A class action lawsuit filed against Barrick for “making false and misleading statements and concealed material information” relating to Barrick’s Chile‐Argentina mine delays and costs. At least 9 or more law‐firms have taken on the case against Barrick. Five whistleblowers give evidence against Barrick revealing the lies reported by Barrick regarding the Chile‐Argentina mine delays and costs. Evidence given showed Barrick’s estimated for the project at between $2.8 ‐ $3 billion where in fact Barrick had
engineering reports estimating costs at nearly double the amount.

2009: United States
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted an injunction to force Barrick to postpone digging a 2,000‐foot deep open pit in Nevada due to concerns of harm to the environment

2009: United States Ex‐President George W. Bush exposed for corruptly and secretly helping Barrick since about 1994.

2009: United States
United Nations to tackle mercury emissions. Gold mining is the second biggest source of mercury releases.

2008: United States
Barrick voted 4th WORST company in the world

2008: United States
Lawsuit to stop one of the largest open pit cyanide heap leach gold mines

2008: United States
US & Canada found guilty of racism and shows Barrick included

2008: United States
United Nations report against Barrick on human rights problems

2004: United States
Barrick mine workers severely exposed to Uranium

Zambia

2011: Zambia
Reports that former High Commissioner to Canada, Nevers Mumba, had no authority to collect over K500 million from Barrick for the government. Special audit of the account the Barrick money was held.

<<<<<< >>>>>>

Following is the list of the crisis situations listed again below in order by years only

2004: United States
Barrick mine workers severely exposed to Uranium

2005: Peru
Reports of corruption of tax evasion through the courts

2006: Chile
Scandals involving land rights underpaid by Barrick

2006: Australia
Barrick mine has tailings spill

2007: Chile
Barrick bribes to officials

2007: Canada
A wave of Barrick top executives selling off their Barrick shares

2007: Canada
Corruption reports involving ex‐Prime Minister Brian Mulroney

2007: Papua N Guinea
Public warned to stay away from Barrick mine due to local shot dead

2008: Australia
Authorities investigate misconduct of company taken over by Barrick

2008: Australia
Problems of Barrick mine “swallowing” historic town

2008: Tanzania
Local activists expose that Tanzania failing to benefit from gold mining

2008: Tanzania
Buzwagi mine: Corruption exposed involving Barrick & ex‐minister for mines, Nazir Karamagi

2008: Canada
Book published linking Barrick to the deaths of Tanzanian miners in 1996

2008: United States
United Nations report against Barrick on human rights problems

2008: Chile
Barrick mine the most severe threat to local indigenous communities

2008: Papua N Guinea
Reports on mine killings, impacts on rivers, food security and health

2008: Australia
Barrick fined for tailings spill in 2006

2008: United States
US & Canada found guilty of racism and shows Barrick included

2008: Argentina
Reports of Barrick bribery and scandal of Barrick’s open‐pit mining

2008: Pakistan
Government scandal with Barrick deal in Chaghi, Balochistan

2008: Australia
Barrick fighting in the Land & Environment court to increase mining

2008: Tanzania
Report of cruelty, pillaging and colonial practices at Barrick’s mine in Tanzania

2008: Papua N Guinea
Barrick accused of rape, murder, detainment of local people

2008: United States
Lawsuit to stop one of the largest open pit cyanide heap leach gold mines

2008: Tanzania
Business & Human Rights Centre publish that overall of mining policy is urgently needed

2008: Tanzania
One shot dead when thousands invade Barrick mine & destroy equipment worth $ 15 million

2008: United States
Barrick voted 4th WORST company in the world

2009: Philippines
Reports on Barrick toxic effects on remote Philippine communities

2009: Papua N Guinea
Soldiers & police sent to help deteriorating security situation at Barricks mine

2009: Norway
Due to human rights crimes, Norway’s Ministry of Finance drops Barrick from Norway’s Government Pension Fund‐Global investments

2009: United States
United Nations to tackle mercury emissions. Gold mining is the second biggest source of mercury releases.

2009: Chile
Barrick backed out of a debate 20 minutes before it was scheduled to begin

2009: Canada
Reports on the government, influenced by Barrick, given the green light for misbehaviour abroad

2009: Australia
Local supporters refuse Barrick mine expansion and demand to close mine down

2009: Papua N Guinea
Near Barrick mine, houses burned down in a joint military and police action

2009: Chile
Barrick’s Pascua Lama project denounced as illegal, lacks social license to operate.

2009: Papua N Guinea
Enga Province Governor calls on Barrick and government to relocate people who live near Barrick mine

2009: Canada
Government taking steps against Canadian companies, Barrick specified, for environmental and human rights abuses in developing countries.

2009: Tanzania
Reports of chemical spill and river and water contamination from Barrick’s North Mara mine. Thousands of locals stranded without water

2009: Tanzania
Barrick’s North Mara mine given 10 days to compensate local families affected by its poisonous heavy metals.

2009: Papua N Guinea
Reports that Barrick torch hundreds of houses to clear way for mine expansion

2009: Papua N Guinea
Barrick exposed and accused of far‐reaching environmental destruction

2009: Pakistan
Pakistani army colonel working for Barrick exposed interfering with Baluchistan locals

2009: Papua N Guinea
Violence around Barrick mine gives new name: A walk through the valley of death. Villagers expose lists of dozens of people killed or assaulted by police and Barrick security forces.

2009: Tanzania
MP’s report Barrick’s North Mara mine discharge of acid materials into River Tigiti in Tarime District.
MP’s demand full compensation for all victims and investigation of all negligent government officials implicated in the scandal

2009: Australia
The Supreme Court of Appeal blocks Barrick mine expansion

2009: Tanzania
The Tanzanian Labor Court rules against Barrick for wrongful dismissal of about 700 ex‐Barrick miners

2009: Tanzania
Tanzania Government bans all water usage from the Tigithe River, which may be contaminated with Sulphiric acid from Barrick’s mine. Independent experts also confirm the presence of high levels of toxic chemicals in the area surrounding Barrick’s mine.

2009: United States
Ex‐President George W. Bush exposed for corruptly and secretly helping Barrick since about 1994.

2009: Pakistan
Report exposes Pakistani, Muslim Lakhani, in Barrick corruption scandal in Baluchistan

2009: Philippines
U.S. District Court of Appeals reinstates a nearly four‐year‐old lawsuit accusing Barrick of polluting water and land for decades in the Philippines

2009: Canada
Report exposes Barrick of making mining agreements in 2002 with two eastern DRCongo militias, which at the time were in the midst of murdering hundreds of civilians

2009: Tanzania
Studies by Norway & University of Dar Es Salaam, of the environment around Barrick’s North Mara mine expose “Extremely high levels of arsenic, cadmium, cobalt, copper, crome, nickel and zinc…   The environment has been seriously contaminated”

2009: Canada
Evidence given at a hearing of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee exposes Barrick’s mine in Papua New Guinea for numerous accounts of group rape by Barrick’s guards.
Amnesty International reveals that local police at the same mine violently evicted local families and burned down and destroyed at least 130 buildings and houses. Barrick initially denied the allegations, but after the conclusions of Amnesty’s local investigation were released, Barrick was forced to accept the findings

2009: Canada
Evidence given at a hearing of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee exposes Barrick in Argentina for using political and economic corruption to block government intervention in Barrick’s mining operations in Argentina

2009: United States
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted an injunction to force Barrick to postpone digging a 2,000‐foot deep open pit in Nevada due to concerns of harm to the environment

2010: Chile
Chile’s National Water Commission (DGA) exposes that Barrick is failing to comply with Chile’s environmental laws

2010: Pakistan
After Baluchistan’s chief minister announced severing ties to Barrick, Canadian diplomats went to lobby Pakistan Prime Minister and other government officials to support Barrick’s negotiation of a formal mining lease with the Baluchistan government

2010: Chile
Chile Environmental Authorities began an investigation of Barrick’s mine construction, which could lead to fines or even a revoked concession.

2010: Dominican Republic
Senate Environmental Commission ask the Presidency to review the gold mining contract with Barrick to obtain better advantages and compensate affected communities.
Reports expose Barrick as being dishonest about poisoning more than 300 Barrick workers at the Barrick mine in central Dominica.

2010: Papua N Guinea
Amnesty International publish new report of Barrick’s role in violent forced evictions. The report details the human rights abuses occurring near Barrick’s mine and about Barrick’s continued support for a police unit participating in illegal activities in the region including burning to the ground more than 130 homes within about 4 months in 2009.
Also, Barrick’s support for the police unit even after a court order to stop their activities.
2010: Dominican Republic Barrick’s mine worrkers strikes caused the Labor Ministry to investigate if Barrick are respecting their workers’ rights.
It’s the third setback for Barrick in 2010, including calls to review the exploitation contract over alleged non‐binding clauses on environmental cleanup, and food poisoning which sickened hundreds of workers.

2010: Tanzania
International Fed. of Chemical, Energy, Mine & General Workers’ Unions reveal blatant abuses of freedom of association in Barrick’s mines.

2010: Papua N Guinea
Reports that approx 5,000 adults live within area of Barrick’s mine. They desperate seek resettlement to another area for the lifestyle and livelihood of 75% of the population. Barrick denied all requests and prefer to offer individual cash payments to villagers as their homes fall victim to waste‐related landslides and police‐instigated arson.

2010: Argentina
San Juan province governor exposed of ‘economic ties’ with Barrick. Also the President de Kirchner accused of vetoing the Glaciers Law in order to favour Barrick. Later, lawmakers approve a glacier protection bill that ban mining and oil drilling in the country’s Andean ice fields.

2010: Australia
Report that Barrick is responsible for massive environment damage to Lake Cowal. A national campaign is launched to save the lake.

2011: Papua N Guinea
Human Rights Watch confirms allegations of gang rapes and other human rights abuses by security guards of Barrick’s mine. Reports that Barrick respond to credible attempts to alert the company to the abuses of its security personnel with denial and, frequently, by attempting to discredit those who raised the issues.

2011: Philippines
Supreme Court issues writ on Barrick (and one other) over toxic waste that spilled into the Boac River in 1996.

2011: Canada
Barrick’s AGM: Friends of the Earth International demands, on behalf of communities around the world, that Barrick stop destructive mining practices. They have documented studies of human rights abuses and environmental devastation globally, including in the Philippines, P.N. Guinea, Tanzania, Australia and more.

2011: Tanzania
Reports of killings and toxic spill from Barrick’s mine into the Thigithe River. Reports of villagers dying from drinking the water.

2011: Argentina
Application to the Supreme Court of Argentina for immediate cessation of Barrick’s mining activities due to Barrick violating the law 

2011: Tanzania
Barrick claimed that due to theft of fuel, the Buzwagi mine had to cut production and suspend workers.
Reports are that Barrick in fact arranged ‘organised and systematic’ fuel theft themselves to create a smokescreen and illegal suspension of workers.

2011: Tanzania
Shootings on Barrick’s mine. Seven deaths. Barrick accused of tainting Canada’s international mining image. Allegations of more sexual assault by police and Barrick security guards.

2011: Argentina
Barrick Threatens Legal Action Against NGO, Center for Human Rights and Environment (CEDHA), over publication of Contamination of Gold Mining Projects in Argentina. The report concludes that Barrick is responsible for contaminating San Juan’s rivers and streams around Barricks mines.

2011: Argentina
Barrick accused of interfering in Argentina election politics including corrupt arrangements with certain officials.

2011: Canada
The Harper government recently announced public funding for Canadian mining companies. Corruption at its best – not long after, Harper is appointed to the Barrick Board of Directors.

2011: Zambia
Reports that former High Commissioner to Canada, Nevers Mumba, had no authority to collect over K500 million from Barrick on behalf of the government. Special audit of the account the Barrick money was held.

2012: Canada
Barrick launches new corporate social responsibility advisory board. What happened to the board?
Where are the improvements?

2012: Dominican Republic
Activists demand to ban cyanide outside Barrick’s offices

2012: Chile
Criminal charges filed against Barrick

2012: Canada
Report exposes how the Harper government has close connections with Barrick and Peter and Anthony Munk :
 Prime Minister Harper’s Chief of Staff, Nigel Wright, connected to the Munk’s which is Conflict of Interest;
 Ms. Marketa Evans connected to the Munk’s was appointed CSR (Corporate Social
Responsibility) Director for the Canadian government under Harper;
 About $50 million of government funds contributed to the Munk’s “School of Global Affairs” and Munk’s other personal “education” efforts.
 Harper ignored report on human rights and environmental standards of Canadian Mining Companies (Barrick included) but rather published the report “Building the Canadian Advantage”, that rejected human rights problems and instead, promised more funds to mining companies.

2012: Chile
Appeals Court to hear injunction request against Barrick’s mine for environmental problems.

2012: Chile – Canada
Legal action started to force Barrick to appear in a Canadian court to respond to accusations that Barrick falsified information regarding their Pascua Lama mine.
2012: Canada – World Reports that conflicts in Canadian mines around the world causing grave problems for Canada and the Canadian “halo” reputation of peace‐loving, human‐rights respecting and tree‐hugging.

2013: Tanzania
National Environment Management Council orders Barrick: Close down the toxic tailings pit due to toxic leakages that are contaminating local water sources.

2013: Dominican Republic
The Congress said it wants a “more favourable” contract with Barrick for their mine. The original contract was made in 2009 but looked upon suspiciously.

2013: USA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency fine Barrick close to US$ 300,000 for failure to correctly report toxic chemical releases and waste management activities at the Barrick mines between 2005 and 2008.
Furthermore, Barrick must invest $ 340,000 for a supplemental environmental project at its Cortez mine.

2013: Papua N Guinea
Report exposes Barrick’s settlement deal for the women raped by security guards at Barrick’s mine as neither fair nor best practice. Report states Barrick knew for years that its guards were raping local women without doing anything about it, ignoring reports from local leaders, and legal and human rights clinics at New York University and Harvard.

2013: Alaska, USA
Report exposes Barricks plan for the gold mine planned in southwest Alaska threatens environment and local communities.
The planned Donlin Gold mine estimates 27 years production is bound to have serious consequences for the region.

2013: Tanzania
Barrick terminates MOU for land disputes with communities around North Mara mine.
2013: Dominican Republic Government halts Barrick gold shipment worth millions at the airport due to Barrick not reaching an agreement with the government.

2013: Chile
Charges filed in court against the Barrick mine failing to meet the environmental standards, conditions, and measures. Further, Chilean authorities also found Barrick’s self‐reporting did not meet accurate, truthful and verifiable fact standards.
Later, reports received that after a series of frauds regarding mining property and repeated poor environmental practices, Barrick might lose the complete Chile side of the mine. Also, court order made to suspend Barrick’s mine operations after indigenous communities complained that the project is threatening their water supply and polluting glaciers.
Barrick appeals the court order and loses the appeal. The mine operations remain suspended.

2013: Dominican Republic
Government halts yet another Barrick shipment at the airport in effort for Barrick to reach an agreement with the government. Customs official inspect the shipment and find alleged irregularities resulting in Barrick being fined US$96 Million.

2013: New Zealand
Superannuation Fund excludes Barrick on responsible investment grounds due to concerns at the treatment of workers and the environment at Barrick’s mines

2013: Canada & USA
Public reports of 8 or more law firms inviting the public to sue Barrick for their fraudulent activity leading up to the crashing of Barrick’s shareholder value.

2013: Tanzania
Industry reports of Barrick not paying corporate tax at all.

2013: Chile
Appeals court ruled against Barrick in favor of Chilean Indians who accuse Barrick of contaminating their water downstream thus creating more doubts about the future of the world’s highest gold mine.
In a separate case in the Supreme Court, an indigenous appeal against Barrick to protect the environment

2013: USA
A class action lawsuit filed against Barrick for “making false and misleading statements and concealed material information” relating to Barrick’s Chile‐Argentina mine delays and costs. At least 9 or more law‐firms have taken on the case against Barrick.
Five whistleblowers give evidence against Barrick revealing the lies reported by Barrick regarding the Chile‐Argentina mine delays and costs. Evidence given showed Barrick’s estimated for the project at between $2.8 ‐ $3 billion where in fact Barrick had engineering reports estimating costs at nearly double the amount.

2013: Tanzania – England
Tanzanian villagers sue Barrick in UK High Court for deaths and injuries in Barrick’s North Mara mine in Tanzania. Barrick deny the allegations.

2013: Dominican Republic
Residents sue Barrick’s mine for poisoning rivers, causing illnesses and the death of farm animals.

2013: Philippines
After about 5 years of Barrick’s fight in court against the Philippines authorities about taking responsibility for the environment around the Barrick mine, Barrick bullies the authorities to accept a “take it or leave it” minimal amount that is totally inadequate to protect the health and safety of the local population around Barrick’s mine.
Another Barrick corporate “victory” instead of taking responsibility for their damage to the local people, to the local environment and the host country.

2014: Philippines
Lawmakers oppose Barrick’s “take it or leave it” offer countering the need to prepare for major environmental disaster due to the Barrick dam walls in danger of collapse and the life threatening and environmental disastrous repercussions and also the “clean‐up costs” after Barrick leaves.

2014: Tanzania
Killing continues at Barrick’s North Mara mine. Local ward councilor reports that in the previous three years, 69 people have been killed and hundreds more have been severely injured at this Barrick mine.
In the first month of 2014, four more people were killed.

2014: USA
Hearing in Grants, New Mexico to review water discharge from Barrick’s mine, where contamination has spread in recent years.
Controversy over the cleaning and flushing systems used.

2014: Chile & Argentina
One year passed since the suspension of operations at Barrick’s mine. Government Tribunal starts regarding environment problems around Barrick’s mine.
Director of the Center for Human Rights and Environment (in Argentina) gives expert testimony against Barrick.

2014: England
British MP’s alarmed and get involved regarding the killings at Barrick’s North Mara mine in Tanzania.
Lawyers and human rights experts call on the British government to intervene.
Barrick’s spokesman states that Barrick is vigorously defending itself against the 10 villager’s lawsuit started in 2013.

2014: Pap N Guinea ‐ Canada
Barrick refuses to relocate villagers who suffer murder, rape and house burning around Barrick’s mine in Papa New Guinea.
Representation is made at Parliament Hill to report about the local villagers problems caused by the Barrick mine.

2014: England
Barrick faces court action in London against the Tanzanians who sue Barrick for deaths and injuries allegedly caused by Barrick’s security and police guarding Barrick’s North Mara mine in Tanzania.

2014: Papua N Guinea
Barrick tries to offer about 200 women who survived brutal rapes by Barrick security guards at the Barrick mine, to waive their legal rights in exchange for small “business grants” and “business training”.
Human rights and women’s rights advocates are criticizing Barrick’s offer as totally insufficient and created only to protect Barrick’s interests rather than bring a solution for the abuses, pain and suffering.

2014: Chile
Chile Supreme Court refuses to rule on the merits of a challenge filed by Barrick against a lower court decision regarding the injunctions imposed by government regulators regarding Barrick’s breaches of permits.

2015: Chile
Chile’s environment authorities re‐evaluate penalties on Barrick’s mine which include the possibility of cancelling Barrick’s mining permit.

2015: Dominican Republic
Reports of environmental damage to local residents as far as an hour away from Barrick’s mine.
Farmers there say that even the cattle refuse to drink the water!

2015: Philippines & USA
Local authorities from the Philippines province where Barrack’s mine is situated appear in court in Nevada against Barrick demanding that Barrick take full responsibility for providing solutions for multiple disastrous mine waste failures around the Barrick mine that have caused serious damage to major river and sea ecosystems and have harmed multiple local residents.
In 2014 the local authorities refused a very minimal offer that was totally insufficient.

2015: England
Barrick settle out of court with the Tanzanian Villagers who sued Barrick in 2013 for deaths and injuries in Barrick’s North Mara mine in Tanzania. Barrick denied the allegations.

2015: Papua N Guinea
MP claims that says Barrick owes $US 4 billion for breach of contract agreements including landowners’ resettlement packages, agreement projects, infrastructure projects including roads and bridges, social and environmental damages.
The MP reports the claims are genuine and states if Barrick does not pay, they will take action in international arbitration.

2015: Canada
Corruption at its best: Former foreign affairs minister John Baird joins Barrick international advisory board. Reports expose that John Baird’s former department was responsible for payments of millions of dollars of public monies to Barrick and Munk’s projects.

2015: Papua N Guinea & USA
Barrick settle out of court with the 200 women who survived brutal rapes by Barrick security guards at the Barrick mine. 11 women and 3 men were represented by US‐based Earth Rights International and their settlements were very much higher than all the other women and men who were not fortunate to have US representation.
The 11 women said that the balance of the women accepted very low settlements and were mistaken to accept the Barrick offer.

2015: Chile
Environment authorities start process to apply for new sanctions against Barrick’s mine which will cause additional delays and complications for Barrick to resume construction and operations.

2015: Dominican Republic
Court application filed for an injunction to halt Barrick’s local mining operation

2015: Tanzania
Human rights field assessment at Barrick’s North Mara mine indicates failure of Barrick’s commitments to stop excessive use of force by Barrick security and police guarding the mine. Barrick fails to deal with ongoing violence. NGO’s and RAID confirmed the report given at the United Nations in December 2014, that the grievance mechanism at the North Mara mine was used strategically to divert victims from
taking legal action. Locals suffer injuries related to gunfire, severe beatings with batons and other weapons, rape, and gang rape. In short, the vicious, brutal violence against locals around the Barrick mine continues with no sign from Barrick of any solutions.

2015: Argentina
Argentina judge ordered a five‐day suspension of the gold leaching process at Barrick’s Veladero mine.
The purpose is to investigate the environmental damage from a cyanide leak.
United Nations experts invited to analyze water samples.

2016: Dominican Republic
Barrick back in court to defend land dispute cases from local farmers. Hundreds of farmers gathered at the Land Court for the fifth hearing in their case against the Barrick.
Hundreds of people sued the mining company to demand payment for the farmers’ properties.

2016: Tanzania
Due to the high levels of violence at Barrick’s North Mara mine, NGO’s meet with Barrick’s Acacia office in London to clarify the process and procedures of North Mara’s Non‐Judicial Grievance Mechanism for the victims of excessive use of force by mine security and police guarding the mine. Issues needing Barrick attention: Absence of a comprehensive remedy framework document; Lack of clarity about how claims are investigated; Lack of clarity about how claims are accepted or rejected; Complainants
lack access to adequate, independent legal advice; Use of legal waivers

2016: Argentina
Federal Court reports that the 2015 cyanide spill at Barrick’s Veladero mine contaminated five rivers in the region. Federal Police confirmed that Barrick to be investigated over environmental crimes in the country and state there is “definite case of law infringement” of the country’s legislation on the proper handling of hazardous substances.

2016: USA
A New York federal judge ruled against Barrick in the class action suit from investors who accused Barrick of repeatedly and knowingly misleading them about whether the Barrick troubled $8.5 billion South American mining project complied with environmental regulations.

2016: Tanzania
Villagers living around Barrick’s North Mara mine are still suffering from violence at the hands of mine security and police guarding the mines. Women have been beaten and raped and men have been maimed and killed by mine security. Barrick is aware of the ongoing human rights abuses at their mine and selectively provided remedy packages to some victims in return for legal waivers.
However, the remedy process is not reaching all victims, is not equitable, and is not meeting victims’ needs. NGO’s are chasing Barick for solutions but none are forthcoming.

2016: Papua N Guinea
Villagers living around Barrick’s mine are still suffering from violence at the hands of mine security and police guarding the mines. Women have been beaten and raped and men have been maimed and killed by mine security. Barrick is aware of the ongoing human rights abuses at their mine and selectively provided remedy packages to some victims in return for legal waivers.
However, the remedy process is not reaching all victims, is not equitable, and is not meeting victims’ needs. NGO’s are chasing Barick for solutions but none are forthcoming.

2016: Tanzania
Fraud and Corruption and tax evasion scandals including Barrack being lambasted in Parliament and the President of Tanzania stating that if Barrick and other overseas miners cannot make profits and pay taxes in Tanzania, they better go back to their own countries.

2016: Papua N Guinea
Human rights group near to Barrick’s mine is once again reporting on behalf of human rights victims of the mine. Around Sept 2015, the group submitted to Barrick 256 names of victims who have been shot dead, injured and raped by Barrick security personnel. They received a claims number, but there has been no progress on the claims.

<<<<<< >>>>>>

WATER, WATER EVERYWHERE – BUT NO WATER FOR THE RESIDENTS OF TARIME, TANZANIA?

An open letter to His Excellency, President John P. Magufuli, President of Tanzania
By Samantha Cole of Tanzania Business Ethics

In our Holy Bible: Ecclesiastes 1:9
That which has been, is that which will be, And that which has been done, is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun.

A few days ago, President Magufuli said that many still face shortage of water in our country!
There is nothing new under the sun!

The reason for the shortage of water is ONE word: CORRUPTION

Only days ago, President Magufuli gave an order to the National Environment Management Council to investigate the water pollution caused by Acacia Mining’s North Mara gold mine that has basically destroyed the water sources in the Tarime region causing our Sisters and Brothers there to suffer from toxic water and water shortages, year after year after year.

The President said openly, as quoted by IPPMedia: “He had reached the decision after a previous assessment carried out by NEMC when he was a minister for Works was tampered with.”

But Mr. President, we will show you that Acacia Mining is tampering far worse than only with that assessment that you refer to as quoted by IPPMedia and worse, there are CORRUPT officials assisting Acacia Mining.
There is nothing new under the sun!

The problem, Mr. President, is that Acacia Mining will continue to control the next assessment reports exactly as they controlled the reports in past years unless YOU, MR. PRESIDENT takes steps to remove the CORRUPT people from positions of responsibility.

Let us look at the facts:

January 14, 2016:
The Citizen published a report that the Government wants proof that North Mara mine water is safe.
At that time, deputy environment minister, Luhaga Mpina, led a team of experts who took samples of water from Acacia North Mara Mine for tasting and testing.
Mr. Mpina was quoted as saying:
“We cannot just ignore the plea of the people that has been going in for years. We must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the water is safe for the use of human and other animals”.
Here is the link: www.thecitizen.co.tz/News/1840340-3032850-ltcmbdz/index.html
Nothing happened! Where was deputy environment minister, Luhaga Mpina?

January 26, 2016:
The Citizen published a follow up report to the previous report on January 14, 2016.
The report headlines was: Acacia Mining to implement better waste management.
The mine’s general manager, Gary Chapman said the company complies with all government’s directives to ensure environmental safety and health of the surrounding community. Absolute lies!
Mr. Mpina said that he gave Acacia Mining a “deadline of 2 weeks” at that time. Also he “stressed his shock about how the mine stored the toxic water..”
Here is the link: Acaci to implement better waste management
Nothing happened! Where was deputy environment minister, Luhaga Mpina?

February 01, 2016:
The Citizen published yet another follow up report to the two previous reports on January 14 and 26, 2016.
Water samples were again taken from Acacia’s North Mara mine for testing. Mr. Mpina was quoted as saying that there were still many complaints about safety of the water even as the Acacia management claimed they had permits for discharging treated water into River Mara.
Mr. Mpina even took the boxes containing the samples, apparently not trusting they would be safe in anyone’s else’s custody.
Here is the link: Water samples from mine taken for tests
What happened to the testing? 
Nothing happened! Where was deputy environment minister, Luhaga Mpina?

We contacted deputy Minister Mpina on his phone (0759 278388) to ask for progress updates for our Sisters and Brothers suffering from having little or no clean water.
Sadly, Mr. Mpina chose not to reply to our request.

May 3, 2016:
A laboratory testing report was published on behalf of the National Ground Water Association regarding the North Mara water. Very briefly, as a summary, the report stated:
>> Eleven trace elements (Al, As, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb, and Zn) were determined, and averages of Fe and Al concentrations were higher than levels accepted by the Tanzanian drinking water guideline.
>> Levels of Pb in three samples were higher than the World Health Organization (WHO) and United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) drinking water guidelines of 10 and 15 µg/L, respectively.
>> One sample contained a higher As level than the WHO and USEPA guideline of 10 µg/L.
>> Analysis confirmed a relationship between element concentration and distance of a sampling site from the mine tailings dam. This relationship raises concerns about the increased risks of trace elements to people and ecosystem health.
>> A metal pollution index also suggested a relationship between elemental concentrations in the groundwater and the sampling sites’ proximity from the mine tailings dam.

May 9, 2016:
I sent an email directly to Dep. Minister Mpina to ask for progress updates for our Sisters and Brothers suffering from having little or no clean water. Mr. Mpina chose not to reply to our email.

May 12, 2016:
I sent a follow-up email to Dep. Minister Mpina to ask for a reply but he did not respond at all.

May 16, 2016:
I sent yet another follow-up email to Dep. Minister Mpina to ask for a reply but he did not respond at all.

June 20, 2016:
I sent an email to Dep. Minister Mpina again. This time, the question was regarding the TSh 40 million fines that Dep Minister Mpina was involved in issuing in January 2016 for companies breaching environment management laws and regulations.
Dep Minister shrugged off the question and sent a short answer: 
“Thanx Samantha NEMC will respond accordingly”.

Nothing! Everything was swept under the carpet and hidden away from the People of Tanzania.

July 19, 2016:
The Citizen published a report that the previous Minister of Minerals, Prof. Sospeter Muhongo promised that the Government will find a new water source for those same residents suffering from the clean water shortage as a result of the river that they depend on was contaminated by toxic waste by Acacia’s North Mara mine.
Village to get fresh water source amid poison concerns
Nothing happened! Where was Minister Muhongo and also deputy environment minister, Luhaga Mpina?

July 18, 2016:
Another report in the media that residents in communities around the region near the Acacia North Mara Gold Mine still insisted that the water was not safe for human consumption.
After that… Nothing! All swept under the carpet.

MR. PRESIDENT:
We are now more almost THREE years since the first media report of Dep Minister Mpina’s visit and on site investigation where he was quoted saying:
“We cannot just ignore the plea of the people that has been going in for years. We must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the water is safe for the use of human and other animals“.
Almost THREE YEARS and no solution to this ever surfaced.
Why is Minister Luhaga Mpina not accountable and not responsible for this gross incompetence and lack of taking action? 
And the risk and danger still remains for the women, men, elderly, children and their animals and cattle in communities around the region near the Acacia North Mara Gold Mine – and we did not even raise the danger factors for the fish and water fauna and flora in the rivers and streams in that region.

Mr. President, you said yourself only days ago: “They (Acacia Mining) take our gold but they don’t want to give us the water”

We do not doubt that there is more to this terrible, sad situation that we do not know. But Sir, look at this picture that IPPMedia published only a few days ago :

Who can explain why Barrick Gold & Acacia Mining are falling to pieces?

BARRICK GOLD SHARES
July 2016 – around US$ 22.30
August 2018. – around US$ 09.80

ACACIA MINING SHARES
August 2016 – around GB£ 600.00
August 2018 – around GB£ 109.00

We are NOT happy about this because it is is in our interests for these companies to be successful so that our people have employment and our country receives VAT, export royalties, Levies and more!

So, who can explain why these companies are falling to pieces?

AND – WHY SHOULD THE CHINESE BUY ACACIA MINING WHEN THERE IS SO MUCH DIRTY LAUNDRY IN THE COMPANY ?

Almost ALL the senior management have run away from the company:

Gary Chapman      – Manager of North Mara Mine
Katrina White       – Head of Legal
Kelvin Dushnisky – Chairman of the Board of Directors
Brad Gordon         – Chief Executive Officer
Andrew Wray       – Chief Finance Officer
Mark Morcombe  – Chief Operating Officer
Peter Spora           – Head of Discovery
Deo Mwanyika     – Vice President and Mr. Fix-It in Tanzania

Kelvin Dushnisky was a big problem for Tanzania all the years.  He ran away from Acacia which we were all happy about BUT then we found he is coming back into Tanzania via AngloGold Shanti !!!  😦  

This will be more problems and we will write separately about Kelvin Dushnisky – God help us!

Is LAWRENCE MAFURU amongst the MOST CORRUPT in TZ in recent years?

The Tanzania Business Ethics Group looks at high profile individuals who could be amongst the MOST CORRUPT people in Tanzania (TZ). 

Is LAWRENCE MAFURU amongst the MOST CORRUPT people in Tanzania in the past few decades?

Let us understand how we failed our country – so we can be sure never to repeat the same mistakes again. 

Lawrence Nyasebwa Mafuru

 ​

Part 1

Brief outline of Lawrence Nyasebwa Mafuru :

He was born 1972

Education:
2013 – 2016 Master Business Administration (MBA) at University of Dar es Salaam ; and
1996 – 1998 Banking Certificate (CIB) at The Chartered Institute of Banking, London.

Employment:
1998 – 2007     Standard Chartered Bank Tanzania
2007 – 2010     National Bank of Commerce (NBC)
2010 – 2012     Tanzania Bankers Association Ltd
2010 – 2012     National Bank of Commerce (NBC)
Feb 2013 – Apr 2013 (3 months)   Government of Tanzania
Jan 2014 – Jan 2015 (1 year)          President’s Office
Dec 2013 – Mar 2015 (1.4 years)   Tanzania Investment Centre (TIC)
Jan 2015 – Dec 2016 (2 years)        Ministry of Finance – Treasury Registrar 
May 2014 – Present (3.7 years)     CRDB Bank PLC

Mafuru’s on-line LinkedIn profile tries to give the impression that he is God’s gift to Tanzania. He writes in his profile, amongst his many other duties:

“- To invest or dispose investments in public or statutory corporations and other state owned enterprises
– Supervise Public and Statutory corporations investments funds
– Make follow up and ensure government receives return from its investments either in form of dividends or contributions
– Monitor and evaluate performance of all state owned enterprises
– Ensure that all public and statutory corporations enters into performance contract with Treasury Registrar.” ​

If only it was all true, it would be very impressive. 
The fact is that Mafuru was quite the opposite of God’s gift to Tanzania.

In July 2012, at age 40, Mafuru was caught and in big trouble!!

A whistle blower report raised issues around irregular governance practices, fraud and corruption against the National Bank of Commerce (NBC) executive management team
The Board of Directors of NBC was forced to suspend Mafuru from the bank and to order an investigation.
We all know that unless investigations are official, like via the PCCB, the results can be anything that the Directors choose. 
In early October, the Board of Directors announced that Mafuru may return to his duties at NBC.
But justice always prevails and about 2 months later, in December 2012, Mafuru was gone from NBC forever! Is it surprising that he left behind at NBC scandals relating to corruption and fraud?

Then the real problems started for Tanzania. Mafuru started to work for our Government. And he started to have positions of power. We all know how POWER can be the basis for CORRUPTION and FRAUD if a person with weak morals and ethics and integrity has the power.

Sadly, the power given to Mafuru in his jobs working in Government proved to the world what kind of person was Mafuru.

To this day, analysts still wonder how Mafuru became ex- President Jakaya Kikwete’s “blue-eyed boy” starting when Mafuru headed the Finance Department in the President’s Office.

 ​Mafuru (left) with ex-President Kikwete (right)

Unfortunately for Mafuru, when President Magufuli launched his war against corruption and fraud 2 years ago, we Tanzanian’s saw the light and the possibilities of a better life for us all. 

We realized, after the hard, unpleasant years living under Benjamin Mkapa and Jakaya Kikwete, suddenly here is a new broom to sweep our country clean of corruption, fraud, theft, negligence and more. We saw hope for a better tomorrow. 

Yet, Tanzanian’s were calling for investigations of corruption and fraud under Benjamin Mkapa and Jakaya Kikwete. The question is : Do we demand these investigations or do we better look ahead and use our resources and abilities to build the future and not re-create the past at the expense of wasting our future? That’s a separate debate all by itself.

Tanzanians know some (not all) of the failures of our past leaders. We know of the huge failure of Kikwete to appoint Lawrence Mafuru to the post of the Treasury Registrar. 
We know of the extra enormous failure of Kikwete to appoint Mafuru to the post of Statutory Manager of FBME Bank.

Mafuru’s close association with Kikwete protected him from prosecution over theft from Tanzania’s National Bank of Commerce when he was managing director. 

With the “glory” that Mafuru gave himself as head of the FBME Bank in Tanzania, the Lebanese brothers Ayoub-Farid and Fadi Saab, who were the owners of FBME, are said to have called him “our man.” What does that tell us?

Is it a surprise that Mafuru was one of Tanzania’s youngest bankers in a variety of positions at Standard Chartered Bank in Tanzania and they were accused of a string of banking offences during the previous decade – although somehow Mafuru’s name was not highlighted?

Is it a surprise that Mafuru was a close associate of the Kikwete, whose 10-year reign was characterized by massive corruption and the disappearance and murder of several journalists. 

Mafuru’s Protection
Mafuru’s close association with Kikwete apparently protected him from prosecution over the theft from the National Bank of Commerce (NBC) when he was managing director. Although he was suspended and re-instated for about 2 months only, somehow he was still “protected” after he left the NBC.

Kikwete appointed Mafuru the Treasury Registrar at Tanzania’s Ministry of Finance, and in addition, appointed him head of the Tanzanian operations of FBME, then the country’s largest commercial bank. 
Even whilst Mafuru was Treasury Registrar and head of FBME, he was hit by additional allegations of corruption when he refused a High Court order in May 2015, in a case brought by two businessmen, for Mafuru to deposit with the High Court, the amount of TSh 8 billion from FBME Bank. Mafuru’s contempt of court behavior was never explained, he was protected from punishment, and no reasons ever given why FBME Bank did not deposit the TSh 8 billion into the High Court. Needless to say, we know who was looking after the Saab brothers best interests at the FBME Bank.

Mafuru was reported to have launched controversial programs as Treasury Registrar that attracted the attention of authorities including accusing investors in privatized farms and businesses of being unsuccessful and threatening prosecution and confiscation.

However, Mafuru carried (maybe he still does?) Politically Exposed Person status (PEP) which has continued to protect him from prosecution although President Magufuli fired him as Registrar.  That was certainly no surprise from the new “Bulldozer”.

According to multiple reports by corporate investigation firms and others, Mafuru’s reputation and actions raised questions in turn over the honesty and integrity of the Tanzanian Central Bank for appointing him as head administrator of the FBME Bank. 
Mafuru was well-known to have a long history as a go-between (commission man) for organized Russian mafia gangs operating out of Russia and Cyprus, facilitating Russian laundered money in multiple Cyprus banks.

Part 2 of Lawrence Mafuru’s corrupt career to follow tomorrow – including :
Proof that Mafuru opened bank accounts for Somali Pirates
Proof that Mafuru was secretly and illegally drawing out monies from FBME (of course taking his commission also)
And more to follow…..

(Our thanks to Asia Sentinel for providing some information included above)

OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT, DR. JP MAGUFULI – REF; BARRICK GOLD

By Samantha Cole of Tanzania Business Ethics

The Swahili version follows below

Dear Mr. President 

Following your brilliant negotiation with Barrick Gold a few weeks ago, you made a historic speech at the ceremony to award certificates to those special people who were involved in the Barrick Gold case during the past months.

In your historic speech, you promised to our People that when they do their business, then you will support them 100% whether it is mining, oil, and gas and anything they do, you will support our business people. 

In this spirit of your promise, Mr. President, we appeal to you to look at the following facts regarding how terrible our local business people suffer in the legal spider-web of Barrick Gold – Acacia Mining.   

THE FACTS FROM ACACIA MINING WEBSITE:

In the Acacia Mining website, there is a section with past financial information.  Here is the link
http://www.acaciamining.com/investors/reports/2017.aspx  

Let us look only from 2012:
 

2012

30 June 2012 – Financial Statements 
Total number of lawsuits        :  approx. 201 legal cases
Total amount of legal claims  :  US$ 31.5 million
These exclude legal claims from our TRA against Barrick Gold.

31 December 2012 – Financial Statements 
Total number of lawsuits        :  approx. 235 legal cases
Total amount of legal claims  :  US$ 30.3 million
These exclude legal claims from our TRA against Barrick Gold.  

2013  

30 June 2013 – Financial Statements
Total number of lawsuits        :  approx. 254 legal cases
Total amount of legal claims  :  US$ 73.3 million
These exclude legal claims from our TRA against Barrick Gold.

31 December 2013 – Financial Statements 
Total number of lawsuits        :  approx. 333 legal cases
Total amount of legal claims  :  US$ 142.8 million
These exclude legal claims from our TRA against Barrick Gold.

2014

30 June 2014 – Financial Statements 
Total number of lawsuits        :  approx. 316 legal cases 
Total amount of legal claims  :  US$ 163.6 million 
These exclude legal claims from our TRA against Barrick Gold.

31 December 2014 – Financial Statements 
Total number of lawsuits        :  approx. 289 legal cases
Total amount of legal claims  :  US$ 184.7 million
These exclude legal claims from our TRA against Barrick Gold
The following companies are listed amongst those fighting for their rights against Barrick:
Diamond Motors Ltd  :  US$ 17.2 million
MDM Engineering       :  US$ 15 million

2015

30 June 2015 – Financial Statements
Total number of lawsuits        :  approx. 333 legal cases
Total amount of legal claims  :  US$ 286.7 million
These exclude legal claims from our TRA against Barrick Gold.
The following companies are listed amongst those fighting for their rights against Barrick:
Diamond Motors Ltd  :  US$ 17.2 million
MDM Engineering       :  US$ 15 million

31 December 2015 – Financial Statements 
Total number of lawsuits        :  approx. 341 legal cases
Total amount of legal claims  :  US$ 280 million
These exclude legal claims from our TRA against Barrick Gold.
The following companies are listed amongst those fighting for their rights against Barrick:
Bismark Hotel Limited : US$ 115  million 
Diamond Motors Ltd     :  US$  17.2 million
MDM Engineering          :  US$   15 million

2016

30 June 2016 – Financial Statements 
Total number of lawsuits        :  approx. 255 legal cases
Total amount of legal claims  :  US$ 234.9 million 
These exclude legal claims from our TRA against Barrick Gold. 
The following companies are listed amongst those fighting for their rights against Barrick:
Bismark Hotel Limited : US$ 115  million 
Diamond Motors Ltd     :  US$ 17.2 million
MDM Engineering          :  US$  15 million

31 December 2016 – Financial Statements 
Total number of lawsuits        :  approx. 185 legal cases
Total amount of legal claims  :  They did not disclose.  What are they hiding?
These exclude legal claims from our TRA against Barrick Gold. 
The following companies are listed amongst those fighting for their rights against Barrick: 
Bismark Hotel Limited :  US$ 115  million 
Diamond Motors Ltd     :  US$  17.2 million
MDM Engineering          :  US$   15 million
Petrolube                          :  US$ 35.1 million

2017

30 June 2017 – Financial Statements 
Total number of lawsuits        :  They did not disclose.  What are they hiding?
Total amount of legal claims  :  They did not disclose.  What are they hiding? 
These exclude legal claims from our TRA against Barrick Gold – Acacia Mining.
The following companies are listed amongst those fighting for their rights against Barrick:
Bismark Hotel Limited  : US$ 115  million 
Diamond Motors Ltd      :  US$ 17.2 million
Petrolube                            :  US$ 35.1 million

Every financial report they write the same story that Barrick-Acacia Management  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  claims  do  not  have  substance  and  that  they  will  be  successfully  defended. 

In other words, Mr. President – in the eyes of Barrick Gold, all these hundreds of legal claims against Barrick are all invalid and our People will all lose. 

How can it be that every Tanzanian with a legal claim against Barrick is wrong? 

We urge you, Mr. President, on behalf of the hundreds of Tanzania people who are stuck inside Barrick Gold’s legal spider-webs – they are stuck because Barrick Gold’s lawyers know how to “play the legal game” and how to cause more damages and disappointments for our Peoples. 

They know how to extend legal cases for years and years (as you see in the facts above).

They know how to do tricks to cause our People more damages so that our Peoples will eventually be forced to accept small settlements because the legal fees are killing our people. 

Please Mr. President – let us all begin (Tanzania and Barrick Gold) with a clean plate, with peace and understanding, and with no legal cases. 

Your promise to support our people is not to interfere with Justice but at least to make Barrick stop their legal tricks and focus on gold mining and they must stop hurting our Brothers and Sisters trying to do honest business with Barrick.

Thank you, Mr. President. 
God Bless you, and God bless Tanzania and God bless our Nation.

SWAHILI VERSION

BARUA YA WAZI KWA RAIS MAGUFULI

Mpendwa Mheshimiwa Rais,

Mheshimiwa Rais, kutokana na mafanikio makubwa katika majadiliano na Barrick Gold wiki chache zilizopita, ulitoa hotuba ya kihistoria katika sherehe za kukabidhi vyeti maalum kwa wazawa (wazalendo) walioshiriki kwenye majadiliano na Barrick Gold kwa miezi kadhaa.

Katika hotuba yako ya kihistoria, ulihaidi kuwasaidia na kuwaunga mkono wazawa ambao wanafanya ama wanataka kufanya biashara kubwa kubwa, kwa mfano madini, mafuta na gesi asilia n.k.

Mheshimiwa Rais, tumefanya tafiti na kuandaa ukweli ufuatao hapo chini ambao unaonesha ni jinsi gani biashara za wazawa wa kitanzania zinaumizwa na Acacia Mining/Barrick Gold.

THE FACTS IN ENGLISH FROM ACACIA MINING WEBSITE:

In the Acacia Mining website, there is a section with past financial information.  Here is the link
http://www.acaciamining.com/investors/reports/2017.aspx

Let us look only from 2012:

(Please see above all the facts from 2012)

Every financial report they write the same story that Barrick-Acacia Management  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  claims  do  not  have  substance  and  that  they  will  be  successfully  defended.

In other words, Mr. President – in the eyes of Barrick Gold, all these hundreds of legal claims against Barrick are all invalid and our People will all lose.

How can it be that every Tanzanian with a legal claim against Barrick is wrong?

Tunakuomba Mheshimiwa Rais, kwa niaba ya mamia ya watanzania wazalendo ambao wanamadai yao kwa Acacia Mining/Barrick Gold ambapo wanasheria wa kampuni hii ya kibepali (ambao wengi wao ni kutokea nchi za kibepali) wanatumia mabavu na mabilioni ya pesa kuwadidimiza wananchi wetu.

Wabepali hawa wa Acacia Mining/Barrick Gold wameishika mifumo ya kisheria ya kimataifa na hivyo wanadharau watanzania na mifumo ya sheria ya kitanzania.

Mheshimiwa Rais, tunashukuru jitihada zako katika kusimamia rasilimali za nchi ya Tanzania. Tunaomba uangalie mifano hapo juu ya jinsi Acacia Mining/ Barrick Gold wanavyowaminya wazawa wa Tanzania kwa kutumia mabilioni kulipia wanasheria wa kimataifa ili kuminya haki na sheria kwa watanzania. Hivyo wazawa wanaishia kudhulumiwa haki zao sababu hawana uwezo wa kifedha kushindana na wabepali wa Acacia Mining.

Mheshimiwa Rais, tunaomba huu ndio uwe mwanzo mpya kati ya nchi yetu ya Tanzania na Barrick Gold, katika kufanya kazi kwa kuheshimiana na kuelewana, na inabidi Barrick waweze kumalizana na wananchi wa Tanzania walionyanyaswa na Acacia Mining kwa muda mrefu. 

Ahadi yako ya kuwajali na kuwasaidia watanzania wanaonyanyaswa ni ya ujasili mkubwa sana na inabidi Barrick waendelee kufanya biashara ya madini wakiwa wameshamalizana na wazawa wanaowadai. 

Ahsante sana Mheshimiwa Rais.
Mungu akubariki, na Mungu aibariki Tanzania

 

BARRICK’s ACACIA MINING’S LEGAL PROBLEMS GO UP, UP, UP, UP >>>

By Samantha Cole of Tanzania Business Ethics

 

Acacia’s Adv. Karel Daele’s slap in the face of the Tanzania legal system

In our Holy Bible:  Ecclesiastes 1:9
That which has been, is that which will be, And that which has been done, is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun.

Last year, on June 02, 2016, the local newspaper, RAIA TANZANIA, on page 4, published an article in which it was reported that Adv. Karel Daele must remove himself as Adjudicator in the matter between Bismark Hotels and Acacia Mining because of his conflict of interest.
Our anti-corruption group decided to research and report on this to our readers.

We published our full results in this report called:
ACACIA MINING – BISMARK HOTEL: DID ADV. KAREL DAELE ACT UNETHICALLY?https://tanzaniabusinessethics.wordpress.com/2016/06/02/acacia-mining-bismark-hotel-did-adv-karel-daele-act-unethically/ 

This month, we found that Karel Daele is back in the news relating to the case here in Tanzania of the small family business in Mwanza called Bismark Hotel.

To remind our readers:  In July 2015, Bloomberg News was first to expose the story of the legal dispute between the giant Barrick Gold – Acacia Mining and the Mwanza family business.
Bismark lost its land and mining license through negligence and inefficiency on Barrick-Acacia’s side in 2011 and then almost four years later, Acacia Mining’s attempts to upset the legal processes of the Mining Act of 2010 by collusion with dishonest officials of the Ministry of Energy and Minerals.

Adv. Karel Daele was selected as Barrick Gold – Acacia Mining’s adjudicator in the legal dispute.  Of course, he jumped at the opportunity (big $$ fees in his pocket) even though there was a conflict of interest.

Later, Bismark applied to the High Court in Dar es Salaam to force Barrick – Acacia to change Karel Daele for a new Adjudicator who is NOT conflicted.

Our sources tell us that the High Court Judge set dates earlier this year for the sides to present their cases.  Bismark went to court as required.  Karel Daele did NOT go and he did not even send applications for extension or to apologize for being absent.  Finally, the Judge instructed a written “warning” to Karel Daele to be published in public.

A few weeks ago, the High Court notice against Karel Daele was published in the UK Gazette :
See:  https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/2885506  (Text included below)

Once again, we see the arrogant, controlling, self-superior attitudes of Barrick Gold – Acacia Mining against our Tanzania People and moreover, our Tanzania legal system.  Do they have no shame?

Can anyone imagine Karel Daele ignoring the High Court in London?

There is nothing new under the son with anyone or anything connected to Barrick Gold and Acacia Mining.  As the British say : “same old, same old”.

BUT – Came along President J.P. Magufuli, and day after day, we are seeing improvements for our country.

Maybe Karel Daele will continue to ignore the High Court warning and maybe he will NOT appear before the judge later this month as instructed in the UK Gazette.  Maybe he knows that he is conflicted and Acacia Mining does not want to face more failure and embarrassment?  Maybe Acacia Mining will foolishly dig in their heels deeper and continue to fight our Mwanza Brothers?

One thing is for certain under God’s blue skies.  Everything must improve soon because we will own 16% of Acacia Mining    🙂 

GAZETTE NOTICE AGAINST KAREL DAELE
https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/2885506

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA
(DAR ES SALAAM DISTRICT REGISTRY)

AT DAR ES SALAAM

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 21 OF 2017

BISMARK HOTELS………………….APPLICANT

VERSUS

KAREL DAELE……………………………………1ST RESPONDENT

PANGEA MINERALS LTD……………………2ND RESPONDENT

BARRICK EXPLORATION AFRICA LIMITED…………………………………3RD RESPONDENT

ACACIA MINING PLC…………………………..4TH RESPONDENT

JOSEPH .S. WARIOBA…………………………..5TH RESPONDENT

SUMMONS FOR PUBLICATION

TO:

KAREL DAELE
MISCHON DE REYA,
SUMMIT HOUSE,  12 RED LION SQUARE
LONDON WC1R 4QD
UNITED KINGDOM

WHEREAS, the above mentioned applicant has instituted an application against you at the High Court of Tanzania (Dar es salaam Registry) the facts of which may be found on request in the Court file, you are hereby summoned to appear in this Court in person or by a pleader duly instructed and able to answer all material questions relation to the application or who shall be accompanied by some person able to answer all questions on 30th day of November, 2017 before Hon. A. Munisi, Judge to answer the claim. You must be prepared to produce on that day all the documents upon which you intend to rely in support of your defence.

TAKE NOTICE that in default of your appearance on that day aforementioned, the application will be heard and determined in your absence.

GIVEN under my HAND and SEAL of the Court this 2nd day of OCTOBER 2017.

DEPUTY REGISTRAR
HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA
DAR ES SALAAM
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA
AT DAR ES SALAAM

MISC/CIVIL APPL. NO. …..21/2017

BISMARK HOTELS…..APPLICANT

VERSUS

KAREL DAELE and OTHERS……..RESPONDENT

NOTICE OF DATE OF MENTION

TAKE NOTICE that, the above mentioned case has been fixed for mention on the 30th day of November 2017 at 9:00 AM, before Hon Munisi ……Judge

YOU ARE required to appear in this Court without fail and must produce on that day all the documents upon which you intent to rely in support of your case.

GIVEN under my HAND and the SEAL of the COURT this 27TH day of SEPTEMBER 2017.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR
DAR ES SALAAM

TO BE SERVED UPON:
Hon JOSEPH .S. WARIOBA
NYALALI, WARIOBA & MAHALU LAW ASSOCIATES
HAILE SELASSIE/GHUBA ROAD, HOUSE NO. 501/13 OSTERBAY
DAR-ES-SALAAM

 

https://www.facebook.com/sam.cole.ethics