Petaquilla Minerals’ own version of its mining operations

According to Petaquilla Minerals, the Canadian company undertaking the gold extraction, “the Petaquilla mine, the biggest gold-mining project in Central America, has proven, in less than a year of social work, to be the most successful model of sustainable mining in existence”.[1] The corporate social responsibility (CSR) page of its website describes its social programmes as main production modules which serve as:

mechanisms to foster community productivity by promoting a more varied economy and sustainability. This is achieved by assisting people with ventures that will provide for a livelihood beyond subsistence farming, identifying more effective and efficient manners of production, and transferring the use of new technology.[2]

It should be noted that, apart from these very few small-scale programmes, the CSR page of the company’s website says nothing of the many other aspects of responsibility – pollution, pollution clear-up, forced evictions, land clearances, deforestation, the lack of compensation payments, and more.

At the crux of the purportedly ‘sustainable’ mining model is the notion of social and environmental compensation. Another of Petaquilla Minerals’ websites states “we are committed to being aware of the environmental impact the working of a mine can cause, but above all we are sufficiently capable of counteracting this impact with our actions”[3] Underlying this notion of sustainability is the acknowledgment that the mining will cause significant damage, and thus counterbalancing measures must be taken to enable the project to pass necessary government legislation and to gain support of the local communities. Such measures include reforestation, development of infrastructure, and education and social projects.


[1] Gold Exploration in Panama, Petaquilla Minerals Ltd, www.goldexplorationinpanama.com/mineria.htm (accessed 5 August 2009)
[2] www.petaquilla.com/petaquilla_corp_soc_res.aspx?IdCsr=3 (Accessed 14 December 2010)
[3] Desarrollo Petaquilla, Petaquilla Minerals Ltd, www.desarrollopetaquilla.com/mineria%20sostenible%2001%20ingles.htm (accessed 5 August 2009)

Costa Rica’s Supreme Court sends mining decision back to Executive and Legislature

Costa Rica’s Supreme Court ruled last week that “environmental policies” are the province of the Executive and Legislative branches, not the judicial, in a 343 page judgment on whether to rescind a concession to the Canadian gold mining company, Infinito Gold, Ltd. for the Crucitas mine. The Court said that the Executive branch has the right to rescind or change the concession “in the public interest” and that the two branches “have the final word.” The Supreme Court wrote its decision as part of a dismissal of a suit brought by environmentalists against the mining concession.

The Crucitas mine of Industrias Infinito, a Costa Rican subsidiary of Infinito Gold, has been met with a storm of opposition by environmentalists in both Costa Rica and Nicaragua who fear that locating the gold mine just three kilometers from the San Juan River, is a recipe for environmental disaster. The southern bank of the San Juan River forms the border between the two countries. Ornithologists spoke up last week saying that the mine would threaten some of the 70 species of birds that populate the region including Nicaragua’s national bird, the Guardabarranco [Mot Mot or Momotus momota], which lives only in the territory from Mexico to Costa Rica along the Pacific. The endangered Lapa Verde [Great Green Macaw or Ara ambiguous] also lives in the area. Environmentalists see the mine as a threat to nature preserves along the river.

Juan Carlos Hernandez, representing Industrias Infinito, expressed confidence that the government will not rescind the concession which he said the company has spent 15 years preparing to exploit and from which it expects to make US$80 million. The company could sue Costa Rica for what it expects to make from the mine under neoliberal trade rules if the concession is rescinded. Hernandez denied that the mine will cause any environmental damage. Costa Rican President Laura Chinchilla and her government are studying the Supreme Court decision and were expected to make an official statement, but none has yet been released. (Radio La Primerisima, July 23, El Nuevo Diario, July 25)


Nicaragua News Service July 27 2010.

The Marlin Mine, Guatemala

This topic is referred to in the book in Chapter 5 (Page 88)

The Marlin Mine, Guatemala, is given in the book as a case study in Chapter 5. The following text boxes add supplementary detail to the case study given there, and the reader is also referred to the Guatemala sub-section of the Interviews page of the website for further testimony from local people affected by the mine.

Presidential approval of mining damage

The following extracts are taken from: Eric Jackson (13 December 2008) ‘ANAM approves Petaquilla gold mine, people downstream are flooded out’, The Panama News, www.thepanamanews.com/pn/v_14/issue_23/economy_05.html

On November 26, about a dozen families in Nueva Lucha de Petaquilla, a Ngobe village down the Petaquilla River from Richard Fifer’s Molejon strip mine, were coping as best they could, on their own since the village was flooded out three days over when the Petaquilla River overflowed its banks. These people moved into harm’s way when men from Richard Fifer’s Petaquilla Minerals came and burned their old houses on higher ground, and help became more remote when this same company destroyed the roads and trails of traditional access to the riverside village and put up a gate to exclude environmentalists, reporters and Liberation Theology religious folks from a vast section of northern Cocle and western Colon provinces.

When Nueva Lucha was flooded, the community sent Merardo Morales and Martín Rodríguez out on foot to summon help. Two days later, after fording several dangerously swollen streams, Morales reached Coclesito and Rodríguez arrived at La Pintada.

There would be no presidential visits, there was no Panamanian government request for US military help … President Torrijos has for years, even when Fifer was a fugitive from embezzlement charges, even when Fifer was openly defying the nation’s environmental laws, supported Fifer’s gold mine project. …

Meanwhile in Panama City, as the people of Nueva Lucha awaited help, … and a week after the National Environmental Authority (ANAM) had fined Fifer’s Petaquilla Gold $1 million for starting the Molejon gold mine without an environmental permit and assessed it $934,694 in damages for the deforestation caused by its road and strip mine site, ANAM director Ligia Castro had a political statement to make. She approved an environmental permit for the gold mine. …

The permit granted by ANAM’s acceptance of Petaquilla Gold’s environmental impact statement requires the company to post two bonds, in the amount of $14,374,000 to cover future environmental damage. It doesn’t appear that driving people in western Colon province from their homes, either directly by sending in goons to burn their houses or slightly less directly by ruining water supplies or fisheries upon which they depend or by increasing the risk of flooding by destroying the ability of ecosystems to retain water, are among the damages that the Torrijos administration would have the company cover.

Collecting orchids and conning the locals

The following are extracts from testimony taken in San José Ixcaniche, San Marcos department, Guatemala, in July 2009. The testimony relates to the introduction of gold mining activities to the area around the Marlin Mine which is owned and run by Montana Exploradora de Guatemala S.A., a wholly owned subsidiary of Canada’s Goldcorp.

“When the company came into San Miguel, all their personnel who arrived had the idea that they had to work smoothly with the people who live here. … Also they did many things such as making meals for the people to get them on their side. They also started games of football, buying the balls and getting all the neighbours around for lunch. They also held raffles for bicycles, radios and many other things to attract people. …

They said they were going to generate some work here collecting orchids from the trees. … A little more than a year later, they came and it wasn’t for collecting orchids, but for exploring, to collect samples of rock; but they didn’t say anything about gold or silver, only that we are going to do some work here. … Then suddenly there was something about minerals. …

This was 1996 when they came. A year after that they began to collect rocks. They talked to the locals about selling a part of the land. The local people were certainly excited by the money. Then more people started arriving, including gringos, and then the machinery. Seventeen people met to talk about if they could sell their land or not. They agreed that it would be better not to sell the land. It would be better to go first to the Mayor of San Miguel to make an agreement which would prevent the sale of the land. But the Mayor said ‘you are free to sell your land; if you want to sell, you can sell. Better to have a good job there [at the mine] and a source of work. …

The Mayor was going to get together with this group to value their land, but he didn’t turn up. So from that time the group got a bit downhearted, and each took their own decisions about giving up their land or not. Of the seventeen people, one by one they gave up their land.”


Source:
Testimony taken from Don Pedro (a pseudonym), a former worker in the Marlin Mine in San José Ixcaniche, San Marcos department, Guatemala, 24.07.09

Case study: The San Martín Mine, Siria Valley, Honduras

Another notorious Central American example of gangster-like behaviour on behalf of transnational mining companies comes from the Valle de Siria in Honduras which is featured in the items below. Carlos Danilo Amador, the General Secretary of the Regional Environmental Committee of the Valle de Siria, refers to Goldcorp, operators of the San Martín mine in the Valle de Siria as “these environmental assassins”[1]. In an interview with Todd Gordon and Jeffery R. Webber, two Canadian writers for The Bullet, Amador also supports this idea that the mining companies enter new areas with sweeteners and lies for the local population:

These companies create a false image of what they want to do in our territories – hiding the fact that they disrespect the dignity of our peoples, disrespect our human rights, impose cultures that are not ours, and rob our natural resources.[2]


[1] Carlos Danilo Amador, email communication with the author, 4 June 2009.
[2] Todd Gordon and Jeffery R. Webber (2010) ‘Canadian Mining and Popular Resistance in Honduras’, The Bullet, E-bulletin no.301, 29 January 2010.

Testimony against the Marlin Mine, Guatemala

The following testimony was given in interview by:

[1] A number of residents of Agel, a small village very close to the Marlin Mine in the municipality of San Miguel Ixtahuacán, department of San Marcos, Guatemala, 24 July 2009 – identities protected;

[2] Several residents of a number of other villages attending a meeting in The People’s House, San Miguel Ixtahuacán, 24 July 2009 – identities protected;

[3] Gregoria Crisanta Pérez, a single mother also from Agel who is the subject of an arrest order along with seven other local women, interviewed by James Rodríguez, 22 May 2009 – published in NACLA Report, vol.42, no.5, Sept/Oct 2009, pp.16-17.

[Sources identified as 1, 2 or 3, as above.]

On land purchase

[3] Montana is buying more land, extending its territory. … If these people [from the mining company] continue buying up our lands, where are we to go? As indigenous peoples, we live here. … We ask the government to please listen to our demands, because we are the legitimate owners of those territories. We are indigenous people, we were born there, and we should die there.

On water sources

[1] There are problems with the drying of the wells. There are eight wells that have dried up.

[2] They had installed the machinery close to the well, around 4 metres from the well. The water that they were using to wash the gold that they were extracting, they were dumping it near the well. There were two children who went to take water from the well … the workers told them, and the operator of the machine said, “you mustn’t carry water from this place because it’s contaminated.” … From where are the people going to drink water?

[2] One woman chatted to us; she has young sons who were bathing in that river, and now they are covered in spots, their hair is falling out.

On health problems

[2] … animals have died, cattle. I had a friend who lived here on this side; about two months ago he died. He worked for the company. They say that he was taken to the doctor [of the mining company] and the doctor told him ‘you don’t have anything wrong with you, you are fine’. So he turned to another private doctor, and they told him that he had a damaged liver and had only a few days left to live, that there was no cure, nothing. And he gave a testimony … where he spoke about how he had been contaminated by the mine; and he died.

[1] Also the problem with the skin – the people that live near the tailing pond, there we have seen children that have red swellings on the skin.

[2] … the presence of heavy metals in the blood is strong. If it is not treated in time, the person can die, because the heavy metals accumulate in the blood.

[2] Two years ago my nephew died at the age of 18. It just started with a cough, and he died. Four months ago my cousin died; he also worked there in the tailing pond. He vomited blood. His mother told me, ‘tell your husband not to carry on working there, because he’s going to die; you’re going to lose him’.

[3] … many people suffer from skin diseases, particularly welts, and some of the people who have worked for the company have died mysteriously.

On the state of their houses

[2] And all the houses, like 120 houses, are cracked. There’s one house, my daughter’s, which is totally cracked. It’s only three years old. When the explosions start, you feel the movement of the earth.

[3] Dozens of homes have large fissures along the walls due to the explosions from the mine.

On divisions within the communities

[3] Montana is a very big company and has paid off many community leaders, as well as local auxiliary mayors. Also, there are the few who work for the company; obviously they and their families support the company. Lately, Montana has also been paying off some key neighbours in order to divide us. In my community of Agel, I know for a fact that the company has paid them 35,000 quetzals [about $4,300] in exchange for supporting the company’s operations.

[2] We are few, not many, because in the community of Agel, nearly everyone is working for the company. We are divided. … But we are not here for the work. We are here to defend our life, our health, and the health of our children and our grandchildren.

[1] The people who work for the company say nothing because the company would then fire them. … they say that the company is going well, but this makes us very concerned.

[2] Here in San Miguel Ixtahuacán, that monster [the company] has been buying up good will; it’s been keeping the leaders of some communities quiet.

[2] More than ten communities have already carried out their consultation and gave a very round ‘No’ to mining.

Calgary based Infinito Gold suing Costa Rica at the World Bank’s ICSID

From the LeadNow petitions site, 19.11.13

Infinito Gold is suing Costa Rica at the World Bank international arbitration court (ICSID) for $1 billion +. Infinito is holding its AGM at the Ranchmen’s Club in Calgary on November 21 [2013], and the idea is to deliver the message (to Infinito shareholders et al) now up on the LeadNow site backed by as many signatures as possible. We would then also be able to fashion a press release and likely get significant Canadian organisational buy-in.

A Spanish version of the text will be up on the LeadNow site soon – see below – which will open up the possibility for Costa Ricans to sign on to this campaign as well, making it a somewhat unique bi-national action.

Also please note that this Canadian mining company put two Costa Rican professors through six trials for having spoken out against the proposed open pit mine. Also the company attempted to intimidate the University of Costa Rica demanding they be given the curriculum of an upcoming course in the Biology department so that the company could vet its contents ahead of time.


http://you.leadnow.ca/petitions/costa-rica-said-no-to-this-canadian-mining-company-3-times-let-s-make-sure-it-listens-this-time

Assassinations and other human rights violations of anti-mining activists

June 2009 Marcelo Rivera tortured and murdered
June 2009 Radio Victoria received death threats
July 2009 Father Luis Quintanilla (after speaking on Radio Victoria) kidnapped but escaped
August 2009 Ramiro Rivera shot 8 times; survived
December 2009 Ramiro Rivera murdered
December 2009 Felícita Echeverría murdered
December 2009 Dora Alicia Sorto Recinos murdered
December 2010 1 youth involved in the murder of Marcelo Rivera was himself killed.
July 2010 CEICOM employees kidnapped, robbed and left tied up in Guatemala
January 2011 Abrego León, a witness in the trial of the murderers of Marcelo Rivera, killed
January 2011 Radio Victoria receives more death threats
January 2011 Hector Berrios receives death threats
June 2011 Juan Francisco Durán Ayala killed

Testimony regarding Montana’s persecution of former employees

Testimony collected in the village of San José Ixcaniche, 24 July 2009. Names have been deliberately omitted.

In 2003, I was a worker in the campo. One day we went to repair the road, the one which they are now surfacing with asphalt; and an engineer said to me, “I’ve got eight days of work for you; come with me.” Well, I certainly need work. …

At the same time as I started work there, a Costa Rican man arrived. He was looking for people who could read and write and who were very active. They chose me to go as his personal assistant.

What was the work that they gave me? It was the job of providing information to the local people. I didn’t know what it was that I was supposed to do, but they taught me about it and told me that I had to tell people what was going to happen here, namely that they were going to extract gold and silver. That’s when I first discovered that gold and silver were going to be extracted. Before that, they hadn’t talked about that at all.

I worked for two and a half years when suddenly they wanted me to tell them what the people outside were saying. … I realised that they were using me as a tool. … I wanted to say things about what we were suffering, but every time that there were meetings all they wanted to talk about was the development of the local area. …

We began to have contacts with many people about what the company was doing, although they gave me a payment so that I would keep quiet about the company with the people. … they suspected that I had contacts with many local people, so they controlled my work much more tightly.

In 2007, people tried to form a union … Out of respect for our people I could not be in this work. It was when they took advantage of me for respecting the people that they started obstructing me. It was then when they could take the opportunity of throwing me out of work. … They accused me of committing an offence, of coercion, of threatening behaviour … It took us a lot to get out of that, but they made a mess of my life, although it wasn’t just me. There were seven other people charged although those people were leaders of the group of five communities which had got themselves organised. …

The company tries to provoke the people. … We saw that the authorities give more consideration to those people who have money, and if the campesinos die, well they die. We saw that clearly.

For almost a year we were in this issue. The company tried to plead again, but the issue would be better reconciled with us so that it doesn’t continue as a problem. … If they could declare us guilty they would even be able to get us put in jail. If we say please forgive us, then that would mean we were guilty of all the damage. …

That’s my case. But there is another case. There is another group of women who were affected in Ajel, also for claiming their rights because of all the driving activity that was crossing their lands. They [the company] did what they liked and they installed whatever they liked on their lands. These eight women faced an arrest warrant. …

They sent two people here and what they wanted from me was a testimony in favour of the company. “We want you to talk with us here confidentially, not about individuals.” … despite all the bad things I had seen of the company, they wanted me to speak in favour of the company. But no way could I give testimony in favour of them because I knew what they had already done to me. But it’s the courage of all the communities that is with me now. But right now there is a serious problem in the community. There are divisions, there are pressures on the committees. Yesterday a certificate in favour of the company was promoted. The company insisted, obliged the people and the workers and even those who aren’t workers to sign the certificate.


Testimony taken by Martin Mowforth, Alice Klein, and Karis McLaughlin, 24 July 2009.

Testimony regarding health problems caused by and property rights abused by the Marlin Mine

Testimony taken 24 July 2009 in San José Ixcaniche, close to the Marlin Mine, from Doña Marcela (a pseudonym), wife of a worker at the mine.

My husband … is ill because he works for the Montana company. He works with the chemicals and the heavy metals and we have written proof which states that he has contaminated blood. Now we want to get another examination done by an external authority to see if it coincides with the company’s readings.

Also, she [points to her daughter] is very ill because my husband was working with the company when she was born. Every fortnight I have to take her to a doctor. Three days ago I saw a child specialist who told me that it’s really very serious. She doesn’t have much of a defence system, probably because of the heavy metals.

Right now we are suffering – my husband is ill; she’s ill; and I’ve got problems with Montana because they invaded my property in San José Nueva Esperanza, over there, and fenced it off, and now I can’t get into my own land. … I have documents to show that I am the owner. They don’t even ask my permission. They pass by on a road right through the middle of my land without asking permission – there’s no consultation.

Two years ago I made a claim against Montana. They came to surface the road which had been built through the middle of my land. They felled the pines. They caused a landslide in the land because they moved so much earth. They also drilled into the ground.

I believe this is unfair – what they are doing is an injustice. Many people are in favour of them, but I don’t know why because the reality is that the company is causing great damage. …Many of them do it for the money; many do it because they have a business, and so they tend to support Montana. I think that you shouldn’t behave like this for the sake of a business. You should do it for the sake of your life, for your children and for their children. I don’t want to let my child die just because of the mine.