Complainants against a UK mining company licensed to run the controversial Phulbari open pit mine, say a narrowly defined UK government ruling on complaints against the firm has failed to allay fears about its practices.
Christine Haigh, campaigner at the World Development Movement, said: “The UK government’s investigation is right in pointing to the company’s failures to date. But by omitting to consider the inevitable effects this mine would have on the region’s population, the investigation does little to ensure that their rights are protected. If it goes ahead, the Phulbari coal mine will be a human rights disaster. Local people have repeatedly made it clear that they don’t want it and GCM should expect continued resistance if it pushes ahead against their wishes.”
The agency that made the ruling, the National Contact Point (NCP) for the OECD, is charged with upholding guidelines for multinational corporations of Organisation for Economic Development countries to adhere to the values and rules of the organisation.
The NCP Final Statement, published on the UK government website on Thursday, itself acknowledges the narrowness of its remit and limitations in its methods in its ruling on Global Coal Management Resources plc (GCM).
GCM Rescources plc is a UK registered company incorporated in 2003 under the name Asia Energy plc. It changed its name in January 2007 to Global Coal Management plc and in December 2007 to GCM Resources plc.
In 2006, the company was embroiled in controversy when Bangladeshi protesters opposed its bid to start open pit mining in Phulbari. The Guardian reported on August 30, 2006 that during protests by 30,000 people against the firm, security forces opened fire injuring 300 and killing six.
“GCM is a British company so government has a soft corner for it. It is a simple mater. There is no legal basis for GCM in the Phulbari coal project,” National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Minerals Power and Ports Member-Secretary Professor Anu Mohammad told the Dhaka Tribune yesterday. His organisation opposes the project and has been involved in protests against it.
“The UK government is in favour of GCM but our people is against the project and have rejected it,” he said.
On December 21, 2012 the International Accountability Project (IAP) and the World Development Movement (WDM) claimed the Alternative Investment Market-listed company had breached OECD guidelines for multinational companies.
The complainants claimed that human rights violations against 23 different tribal groups and the destruction of 12,000 hectares of prime agricultural land would result from the GCM pit mine.
The IAP is a civil society organisation based in the United States and WDM is a UK civil society organisation.
In its Final Statement, the NCP concluded the company had not breached most OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises but included significant qualifications to its findings.
While the NCP found one partial breach in GCM’s failure to properly communicate with and foster trust with local communities, it absolved the company of actual breaches of human rights during this time.
But the NCP admitted that it did not visit the country, let alone the site of the disturbance, saying “it did not consider a visit an effective use” of its resources, despite appeals by both complainants to do so. It admits that it did not speak to representatives of the Bangladeshi government either.
One of the ways in which GCM failed to communicate properly is found in an admission by the company that the Resettlement Plan for those displaced by the mine was not available in Bangla at the time of the protests in August 2006.
When it was made available in Bangla after the shootings, the company opted against distributing it and made it available online instead.
Yet the efficacy of an online disclosure, requiring literate people with access to computers and the internet in order for it to be effectively communicated, is doubtful.
In fact it is undermined by the NPC’s own admission that “its ability to verify information and sources were limited by the lack of UK government contacts in the Phulbari area,” indicating it remoteness.
Fears of the real implications of open pit mining, and the lack of any written resource from the company in Bangla spurred the residents’ agitation, the report records.
The NCP report recognises there was an ongoing debate regarding the impact of open-pit mining and of a foreign-owned company’s involvement in such a project.
Kate Hoshour, of International Accountability Project, says: “There are grave concerns about the high risk of further violence in Phulbari if GCM persists in its efforts to force this project forward despite massive local opposition. The UK government should be taking all possible action to avert further harm, rather than restricting its assessment to harm that has already been inflicted. The government should also recognize and condemn the ongoing violation of the rights to self-determination and to free, prior, and informed consent for indigenous peoples who have been fighting to halt this project since 2006.”
Crucially, the NPC report acknowledged that its narrow reading of its remit in the complaint precluded it from commenting on the key issue of potential impacts of the open pit mine. It acknowledged the limitation, saying an independent assessment of the impacts fell outside its remit and that it could only consider whether GCM’s assessment was properly conducted.
The Bangladesh government’s policy on extractive mining procedures has undergone several changes, contributing to uncertainty for all parties. The ADB withdrew consideration of the Phulbari project in 2008 over a lack of certainty regarding the country’s coal policy.
“There is no gain for the country in not extracting from the coal mine. Many fear that following an open pit system will bring disaster in 30 years. I think, if during extraction proper techniques are followed, no disaster will happen,” Ijaz Hossain, professor at Buet, told the Dhaka Tribune yesterday.
“But the government has to come to a concrete decision about coal, as without it we will face shortages in electricity production,” he said.
GCM chief operating officer and chief executive officer of its Bangladesh subsidiary Gary Lye said: “The OECD report is a timely reminder for the people and Government of Bangladesh of the high quality work done for the Phulbari Coal Project. This project is ready to start now and will provide Bangladesh with the most efficient and fastest way to access new and affordable large scale commercial energy and electricity.”
The fate of the GCM project at the Phulbari coal mine, with 572 million tonnes in reserve, has been hanging in the balance after the government suspended it in 2006.
