World Bank support for extractives: complicity in human rights violationsPublished by MAC on 2005-09-12
World Bank support for extractives: complicity in human rights violations
12th September 2005
SUMMARY & COMMENT: World Bank-supported projects in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Chad illustrate how natural resource exploitation has social and environmental consequences that can contribute to human rights abuses, civil conflict and corruption. The World Bank's tactics to avoid addressing universal human rights in its policies are untenable in the light of the growing pool of institutional, academic and civil society analysis of the questions of development finance and human rights. The challenge is to comprehensively integrate social and environmental consequences in the Bank's management response to the Extractive Industries Review and on-going IFC safeguard policy review.
D R Congo mine questions due diligence
A recent letter from a coalition of Congolese and international NGOs to President Wolfowitz states that Anvil Mining's Dikulushi copper-silver mine has become a symbol of the Bank's failure to "uphold its commitments to protect the rights of people affected by extractive industry projects". The Dikulushi project is the first mine in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) to enjoy World Bank backing, and has been touted as a means of post-conflict recovery and to catalyse further private sector mineral investments.
However, the peace agreement in the country remains unstable, fighting continues in many areas, and rebels still finance themselves from the plunder of natural resources. Since 2000, a UN security panel of experts has produced a number of reports exposing a "vicious cycle of resource-driven conflict" in the country.
In September 2004, the board of the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) approved plans for a political risk guarantee for the stage II expansion of the mine. MIGA completed negotiations with Anvil in May 2005 and issued a guarantee for $13.3 million. MIGA assured its board that there were no serious security risks and the project would provide benefits to the community.
Since June 2004 civil society has raised concerns about MIGA's failure to fully assess the human rights and security dimensions of the project. The most recent letter says that MIGA did not take appropriate steps to ensure that Anvil Mining was complying with the voluntary principles on the use of security forces, and the UN Norms for transnational corporations. Anvil is now facing serious allegations regarding the company's role in a brutal massacre that took place in Kilwa in October 2004, approximately 50 kilometres south of the mine, and questions regarding the propriety if its relationships with senior Congolese politicians.
At Wolfowitz's request, the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO) is now conducting a compliance audit of MIGA's due diligence on the project. "A genuine commitment to human rights should be a precondition of World Bank financial backing" said Mr Meeran, a Melbourne lawyer who is representing several human rights groups that have raised concerns about Anvil's role. On 13 October the World Bank's board is due to consider the next 'economic recovery credit' for the DRC, which would include yet more funding for both the mining and forestry sectors. Chad-Cameroon: human rights 'contracted out'
A ground-breaking report by Amnesty International (AI) warns that the Chad-Cameroon oil pipeline "risks freezing human rights protection for decades to come for the thousands of people who live in its path". It argues that the IBRD and IFC- who have both lent money to the project- must share responsibility for the danger the project's agreements pose to human rights. AI further points out that the Bank's pre-lending assessment did not take into account the potential human rights impact of the legal agreements. It calls on the Bank and other stakeholders involved to revise the project agreements to include an explicit guarantee that nothing in the agreements can be used to undermine either the human rights obligations of the states or the responsibilities of the companies.
The report focuses on the framework of legal agreements, known as 'host government agreements' (HGAs) signed between the ExxonMobil-led consortium (which also includes Chevron Texaco and Petronas) and the governments of Chad and Cameroon. These agreements- designed to reduce financial and political risks posed to foreign investors by sudden changes in national law- may require the countries to pay large penalties if they interrupt the operation of the pipeline, even if making an intervention to enforce national laws and protect rights. The agreements could serve as a strong disincentive to the governments of Chad and Cameroon to implement their human rights obligations, given the potential penalty faced for taking any measures that would be seen to "destabilise the financial equilibrium" of the project.
The Chad-Cameroon pipeline is trumpeted by the Bank as a test case that will bring about economic development and poverty alleviation in both countries. Over 1,000 kilometres long, the pipeline transports oil from the Doba oil fields in southern Chad to the Cameroonian Atlantic port of Kribi and is one of the largest private-sector investment projects in Africa. The legal agreements were shrouded in secrecy until passed by law, with companies and governments claiming "commercial confidentiality". The investment agreements are enforceable only through international arbitration, under the International Chamber of Commerce in the case of Chad, and the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) (see Update 46) in the case of Cameroon.
Chad and Cameroon are in the bottom quartile of UNDP's Human Development Index. Both countries have a poor human rights track record, in addition to ineffective judicial systems and under-resourced police force, which are ill-equipped to uphold the human rights of the population from the adverse effects of large-scale projects for economic development. Safeguarding whose interest?
The IFC's current safeguard policy revision has been heavily criticised for failing to explicitly integrate international human rights, environment and labour standards, and for allowing significant discretion to its private sector "clients" (see Update 46). AI points to the shortcomings of the Bank's environmental and social safeguards to ensure that the legal framework governing these projects respects human rights. It refers to the relevance of the UN Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations, which whilst not legally binding, are the most comprehensive attempt at filling the gaps in framing the private sector's human rights responsibilities. It suggests that the HGAs, and by implication Bank safeguard policies, could be framed in a way that is consistent with these norms.
Inside the institutions:
Citizen complaint mechanisms in the World Bank Group What they do and how they work 25th May 2003 A brief outline of the workings of the Inspection Panel and the Compliance Adviser Ombudsman, the two principal complaint mechanisms of the World Bank.
Chad-Cameroon pipeline: Corruption and double standards 15th November 2004 The Bank's claim that the Chad-Cameroon oil and pipeline project proves that petro-dollars can benefit the poor is undermined by the claims of local communities and NGOs who cite numerous examples of violations of social and environmental safeguards.
World Bank in the DRC, update by Environmental Defense Fund 16th September 2005 - An update by Environmental Defense Fund on the activities of the World Bank in the Democratic Republic of Congo, July 2005
Civil society resource on mining in Guatemala Communities, ecology and mining in Guatemala 12th September 2005 A repository of information on mining in Guatemala with contributions from a number of Guatemalan and international civil society organisations.
CAO assessment on the Guatemala Marlin mine 16th September 2005 CAO assessment of a complaint submitted in relation to the Marlin mining project in Guatemala
Chad-Cameroon pipeline: Contracting out of human rights Amnesty International report on the Chad-Cameroon pipeline 9th September 2005 A new report claims that the oil companies will violate human rights by providing disincentives for the host governments to protect the thousands of people that live in the path of the proposed pipeline.