life down the rabbit hole...

(headlines digest follows this article) 

Members of ISN,

Greetings and happy new year to everyone. The following information comes from DECOIN. Here's some context. After several months of intense struggle in Intag region, Ascendant Copper finds itself in a very tough position. We have long maintained that the company is run by people who have no idea about local dynamics as well as the people they choose to work with in Ecuador. Ascendant’s leadership has consistently and persistently misunderstood and misrepresented the nature of grassroots resistance in Intag, especially Junin. Their actions during the past few months has now turned Ecuadorian public opinion strongly against the company, and is contributing to strong public opinion against the concept of mining in Ecuador overall. Ascendant has also earned enemies within the Ecuadorian government, so much so that its strongest base of support in Ecuador--the Ministry of Energy and Mines--has been forced to take a position against the company: It ordered the stoppage of all of Ascendant's work in Intag region (something that Gary Davis insists never happened despite factual evidence to the contrary). In addition, the Ministry has rejected the company's environmental impact study, all of which is possibly Ascendant's death sentence in Intag. With the administration of President Correa coming into power January 15, many people in Intag are hopeful that Ascendant's days are limited.

We are enthusiastic that Correa has nominated some key people to his cabinet. These include a leading human rights activist to be minister of government (oversight of policing in Ecuador) as well as an economist who came up with the idea of ecological debt (what the first world owes the third for centuries of resource plunder and ecological destruction) to be Minister of Energy and Mines. We think it will be nearly impossible for Ascendant to get its environmental impact study approved under the new regime. Of course, anything is possible in Ecuador and many times in the past we have seen progressive politicians cave in under intense international pressure, led by the United States. The changing political context adds to the many weaknesses in Ascendant's presence in Ecuador. The following DECOIN document offers many key points of analysis and a useful summary for those of us engaged in campaigns to stop Ascendant.

************************************************************************
Ascendant Copper Corporation and its Troubles in Ecuador

Ascendant Copper Corporation has launched an impressive public relations campaign in an effort to make light of very serious problems it is facing with its Junin mining project. These are the facts:


VALIDITY OF THE CONCESSIONS. No matter how much the company invests in public relations, the truth is that the legality of its mining concession in Ecuador is still very much undecided. True, in 2003 the Constitutional Tribunal rejected- by one vote- the injunction that sought to declare the concessions unconstitutional, but the Tribunal ruled only on a technicality, and left the constitutional question pending. (The Tribunal basically ruled that the government of Cotacachi had taken too long to present the injunction.) The Constitution of Ecuador makes it mandatory for the state to consult with communities before it makes decisions that could impact the communities’ environment. Since this constitutional mandate was not observed prior to the government issuing the mining concessions, the concessions are unquestionably unconstitutional. It is only a matter of time before they are so declared.

STOP WORK ORDER. On December 19th, the company incorrectly told the public that the government had not ordered it to stop its activities within the Junin project concessions. Yet, the document from the Ministry of Energy and Mines dated December 8th 2006 plainly asked the company to stop its activities, until its Environmental Impact Study was approved, a process that could take many months or a year to complete. It’s important to highlight that the Ministry did not limit the stop-work order to just mining activities. This drastic step was taken principally because of the environment of violence and terror generated when Ascendant Cooper’s contractor, Falericorp--financed by Ascendant Copper Corporation--hired armed personnel to force their way, with guns and tear gas, into Ascendant’s concessions. They were unsuccessful. Ascendant has falsely claimed Falericorp is an agricultural company; in reality it sells communication equipment. The use of armed thugs and violence turned the press and public against the company. It also shattered virtually all the support the company had within the government, Intag and the rest of the country.

LOCAL OPPOSITION. One of the most troubling aspects about Ascendant’s distortion of information is how it has kept from Canadian regulators and its investors the facts about the nature of the local opposition it faces. Ascendant has continually claimed that it is just a few radical people—“ecoterrorists” in their parlance--and mainly one local organization, DECOIN, that oppose its project. Yet every single Township government in the Intag region, both Cotacachi County and the Provincial governments, not to mention most communities within and adjacent to the company’s mining concessions, have publicly expressed their opposition to the mining project. This makes local government opposition unanimous, something seldom achieved in Ecuador’s history of resistance to mining. In addition, approximately 90% of the NGOs working in Intag and Cotacachi County (where the Junin project is located) also have expressed their opposition.

VIOLENCE. One of the central themes of the company’s misinformation campaign is to lay blame on anti-mining forces for the violence in Intag. It was the company, however, through its contractor Falericorp, that in November used tear gas against defenseless local people. It was also Ascendant that hired an army helicopter and financed the hiring of the armed military and ex-military personnel who tried unsuccessfully to storm the company’s concessions on December 2nd of this year. And it was pro-mining forces, allegedly led by several Ascendant employees, who, on the 6th of December 2006, threw stones, Molotov cocktails and burning tires and fired shots at a anti-mining group. These were directed at the Mayor of Cotacachi and the Governor of the province of Imbabura, who, together with journalists and a large anti-mining group, were trying to reach the community of Junin. This violence came on top of the October 17th pre-dawn raid to the home of a well-known anti-mining activist by nineteen heavily armed police. The police came bearing arrest and search warrants as a result of completely trumped-up robbery charges made by someone supposedly working for Ascendant. They came in unmarked cars, some of which were identified as belonging to the company.


As a result of actions such as the above, national and international human rights bodies, including the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Amnesty International and Global Witness, are looking into the violence and human rights violations affecting individuals and organizations opposed to Ascendant’s project in Intag.


LAND PURCHASES. Many of the properties Ascendant purchased around the Junin site are illegal, either because the company bought land that is supposed to be used exclusively for agricultural purposes, they lie within protected forests (Chontal), or because government entities illegally adjudicated state land within mining concessions. Already several land titles have been declared invalid in this area and the authorities are currently looking further into corruption issues. Although DECOIN has been unable to confirm the persistent reports of kickbacks involving land deals, it is a very well known fact that Ascendant has paid up to 30 times the real worth of properties, and purchased some outside the mining concessions.

THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY. Ascendant’s publicity news releases have repeatedly stated that the EIS was finished, had been presented to the government, and that approval was expected in a matter of weeks (in the company’s 2005 annual report it stated that it had completed the EIS, and that it would be submitted in April of 2005 [it is interesting, to say the least, that the Terms of Reference for the EIS was approved in June 2006!!]) Yet, in the June 2006 Financial Statement the company stated that the EIS had not yet been submitted. On December 8, 2006, the Ministry of Energy and Mines informed Ascendant’s Ecuador General Manager that their Junin Environmental Impact Study was so flawed that they were unable even to process it. They pointed out, among other things, that the company had not socialized its content with communities most at risk. The company, they stated, will have to comply with (tough newly created) regulations controlling the consultation process with the communities.


If done properly, an EIS can take months and hundreds of thousands of dollars to complete. With the change in government, there will be new officials in the Ministry of Energy and Mines who will be more stringent in seeking complete compliance. No more friends in High Places for the company. It is also certain that the new progressive government will annul many of the country’s mining concessions, granted after Ecuador’s 1998 Constitution came into effect, which requires communities to be previously consulted.


ECOLOGICAL, SOCIAL, ARCHEOLOGICAL AND OTHER FACTORS. The Junin mining project is adjacent to two legally protected areas: the Chontal Bosque Protector, and the Cotacachi-Cayapas Wilderness Area. In spite of what Ascendant has been saying, most of the concessions encompass PRIMARY cloud forests, which are part of the Tropical Andes Biological Hotspot, the hottest of all Hotspots. The threatened forests protect dozens of pristine streams and rivers, are home to dozens of endangered mammal, amphibian, bird and plant species. These include Jaguars, Ocelots, Spectacled Bears, Pumas, the critically endangered Brown-headed Spider Monkey, and Plate-billed Mountain Toucan, to mention only some of the most prominent. The threat to the spider monkey, which requires mature forests, constitutes a major obstacle to the project, as was highlighted in the scientific work at the nearby Los Cedros Biologial Reserve in 2006. After reviewing all the information regarding the project’s environmental impacts, our organization concluded that there is no other mining project in the world that threatens so many endangered species.

ECOLOGICAL ORDINANCE. In April of 2000, Cotacachi County, where the Ascendant’s concessions are located, created a strict environmental ordinance that prohibits activities that threaten the County’s native forests, or to contaminate its water resources with heavy metals, such as Ascendant’s project threaten to do.

SOCIAL IMPACTS. The earlier Japanese Environmental Impact Study carried out for the Junin mining project, and based on four years of drilling, and a small portion of the total of the 2.3 million tons of copper they inferred they discovered, called for the relocation of four communities to make room for the mine (this is nearly 4X less than Ascendant’s estimate) All of these communities oppose the mining project, and they have stated they will not relocate peacefully.

ARCHEOLOGY. Parts of the mining area are rich in pre-Incan archeological sites--including earthen pyramids and thousands of tombs. This was confirmed in Ascendant’s own Environmental Impact Study. What possibly Ascendant has kept from you is that Ecuadorian law prohibits mining in archeological areas.

FUTURE CHANGES TO THE MINING LAW. For mining companies doing business overseas, modifications to mining legislation can be a company’s worse nightmare. The recent violence surrounding Canadian mining companies in Ecuador--including the violence of armed groups in Junin financed by Ascendant--not only shocked the nation, but led government officials to propose major changes to Ecuador’s mining legislation. The press has pointed out the serious flaws in the law that makes mining highly injurious to Ecuador’s national interests. A complete overhaul of the law is expected, which will do away with many of the pro-industry incentives that have made mining so attractive for the industry.

FINANCIAL ISSUES. If you still feel this is a viable project and company, consider the following: Ascendant has raised approximately 20 million dollars since its creation 30 months ago, with little to show by way of positive accomplishment. The company’s March 31st 2006 first quarter report stated that “The Company currently has approximately US $5 million earmarked this year for a 22 hole, 15,000 meter, drilling program for Junin once the EIS process is complete…..” (*see above for EIS irregularities). The report further noted that, “The work program will concentrate on the exploration and development of the Junin property. Maintenance fees will be paid and the Chaucha concession will be maintained in good order”, (p. 10; Outlook Section). The Company’s short-term objective is to gain access to the Junin property for commencement of exploration, through exploration to upgrade the existing inferred resource and demonstrate continuity of grade, to complete a pre-feasibility study to determine if the project is economically viable and, if warranted, prepare further work programs leading to completion of a bankable feasibility study on the project

(this same paragraph was repeated identically in the June 30th 2006, and earlier Financial (and Unaudited) Reports) (Taken from: Management’s Discussion and Analysis For the Three Months Ended March 31, 2006; and for June 2006).


Although 2006 has come and gone, The Environmental Impact Study has not been approved (nor has it any real prospect for approval). Ascendant has not been able to gain access to the Junin property (not even at gunpoint) There has been no exploration at the Junin property No pre-feasibility study has been carried out.

An investor might well question where the 5 million, or the other millions, went. Perhaps it went here. Ascendant Copper has carried out several questionable deals with other directors, either hiring them or their companies directly for management support or the like, or buying mining concessions outright on Ascendant’s home turf from companies owned by common directors. For example, on May 10th of 2006, Ascendant purchased the Magdalena mining property from Ascension Gold, a company partly owned by Paul Grist, for $ 25,000, and ceded a 2% net smelter royalty fee for Ascension. Grist was one of Ascendant’s directors at the time of the transaction. Had Ascendant itself done the concession paperwork, it would have cost a fraction of what was paid, and it would not have had to give up any royalty rights. In most parts of the world, these kind of deals would likely qualify as conflict of interest. Perhaps it helps that Ascendant’s quarterly financial statements are unaudited.

Investors should also take note of the guesswork involved in Junin’s inferred mineral deposit. Under Canadian law, a ‘Qualified Person’ is obliged to undertake a site visit when preparing the technical report to determine a mining property’s inferred mineral deposit. In the case of the Junin property, the visit was to determine the amount of the inferred copper and molybdenum deposit. However, in a letter dated July 12, 2006 Ascendant’s CEO admitted to the Canadian Ambassador that the company had, to date, been unable to access its “legally-owned concessions” in the Intag region (the Junin property) Yet the supposed site visit, an obligatory part of the appraisal of the mineral deposit, allegedly took place more than a year prior to the letter being written.


Earlier this year, based on the above information, the Canadian Environmental Law Association presented a claim to the Ontario Securities Commission. The results of the ongoing investigation could seriously undermine the inferred amount of minerals at the Junin property.

RISKY BUSINESS? In June of 2006, RAB CAPITAL (UK) sold all of its 2.3 million Ascendant shares (amounting to 11.8% of Ascendant’s shares) The question begs itself: which one of the multitude of risk factors finally forced the prestigious investment firm to rid itself of Ascendant’s investments.

The above is only a sampling of the abundant examples of troubling financial information coming out of Ascendant. We hope it’s enough to motivate you to ask Ascendant Copper a few tough questions.

__________________________________
Prepared by DECOIN, Defensa y Conservación Ecológica de Intag, January 1, 2007. For additional information, please see: wwww.decoin.org, miningwatch.ca; ascendantalert.ca, intagsolidarity.org, ascendantcopper.com, and sedar.com

Dangerous projects slipping through cracks, groups say
Peter Gorrie, Environment Writer
December 18, 2006

Environment groups today are to file a formal complaint against what they call Ontario's lax and flawed system for approving new mines.

"Potentially destructive mining proposals" aren't required to undergo environmental assessments, the groups state in the complaint, to be submitted under the Environmental Bill of Rights.

The projects "are slipping through the regulatory cracks and are being approved without a thorough review," says their "request for review" of the current policy.

That could lead to "the destruction of pristine wilderness areas" and cause "serious air and water pollution problems."

"The environmental assessment system for mine proposals in Ontario is like buying a used car based solely on a few kicks at the tires and a quick peak under the hood," says Anna Baggio, of CPAWS Wildlands League.

Each project should undergo a full assessment of all its potential impacts, the groups say.

Mines have been exempt from full assessments since 1981.

The current version of the "holiday" dates from June 2003, when the environment ministry gave the ministry of northern development and mines a year to devise a new assessment system, says Justin Duncan, of Sierra Legal, which filed the submission on behalf of the Wildlands League and MiningWatch Canada.

When the deadline passed with no new policy in place, the mines ministry got a two-year extension. Last June, without public consultation, Environment Minister Laurel Broten granted a further three years.

That means continuation of a process, in which: "approvals of proposed mining projects occur with exemptions and piecemeal assessment of potential environmental harm under the assessment act," the submission states.

Most private-industry projects in Ontario are exempt from full environmental assessments, although individuals can ask the province to order one.

The ministry of northern development and mines issues permits for mines after other provincial departments have looked at potential impacts - for example, how a project will use water, dispose of sewage, or build access roads. The federal government is responsible for ensuring mines don't destroy fish habitat.

But the decision on whether a mine will have a significant impact - and, therefore, a full assessment is required - is left to a senior bureaucrat in the mines ministry, the submission states.

If the official rules there are no serious impacts, approval is given, the submission states.

"It is troubling that a decision maker in (the ministry) is assessing potential... impacts and determining whether (the environment ministry) should be involved in the assessment. Mining projects are always going to alter the ecosystem in dramatic ways and should be fully assessed."

The province should produce a better policy, which would involve thorough assessments of each project and a land-use plan for Ontario's far north, where new mines would be built.

In the meantime, all exploration and mining development in the area should be stopped, the groups say.

However, a statement last week by northern development minister Rick Bartoucci indicates the province is pushing ahead with mine development.

New survey results that found significant amounts of minerals in some areas, "should stimulate ... exploration activity," Bartolucci said. They "provide incentive for increased exploration and investment in this region and are another example of the unlimited mineral potential of Ontario.

"I am proud that the work of our world-class geological survey could spur new mineral development activity in Ontario."

Full assessments aren't required for all projects and wouldn't make sense, says Ramesh Mandal, the ministry's mine development adviser. Mines must comply with a variety of laws and regulations intended to control their impacts. Those impacts and requirements are discussed before projects are approved.

The submission states that the Victor diamond mine - the first in Northern Ontario - shows why assessments should be mandatory.

It was approved despite serious concerns among provincial officials about its impacts on water; caribou, wolverine, migratory birds and other wildlife; and Attawapiskat, a nearby native community on the Hudson Bay coast.

Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show government scientists were concerned about the project.

However, the mine, proposed by South African diamond giant de Beers, was approved without a thorough assessment, the groups state.

By Jeff Miller  Posted: 12/20/06 17:03

RAPAPORT... The Nishnawbe Aski Nation, which represents 49 First Nations (indigenous) communities, from northern Canada, wrote actor Leonardo DiCaprio seeking support in the group's campaign against diamond mining. Botswana's Bushmen appealed to DiCaprio ahead of the actor's Blood Diamond movie release in support of their cause, which centered around diamond mining-driven eviction from the Central Kalahari Game Reserve. (Subsequently, the Bushmen won their case December 13 and the high court determined that diamond mining had not come into play.)

The issue at the heart of Nishnawbe Aski Nation's plea involves protecting North America’s largest undisturbed forest ecosystem, Ontario’s Boreal Forest, or the area known by the First Nations people to support their traditional culture and livelihood.

In February 2006 the government of British Columbia ruled to protect the Great Bear Rainforest on Canada’s West Coast. "Now we are turning our attention to a forest in Ontario, where some of the largest undisturbed areas of forest remain on the earth," the group wrote in a letter to DiCaprio on November 29, 2006.

One of the largest and current threats to these communities and their livelihood is diamond mining.

"We...are writing to ask that you consider being a spokesperson for the Indigenous communities whose way of life is being threatened by De Beers diamond activity in Canada, and for this ecological jewel," the group appealed to DiCaprio.

The Boreal Forest, which circles the northern hemisphere south of the Arctic Circle, spans across most of Canada, Alaska, Russia, and Scandinavia.

Characteristics of the boreal region include fresh water bodies, bogs, marshland, shallow lakes, rivers, wetlands, and diverse landscape of trees, ferns, and wildlife.

Canada's Boreal Forest is home to wolverines, bears, and woodland caribou, as well as half of North America's songbirds. Canada is also home to numerous diamond mining projects including those operated by De Beers, BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto, Aber Diamond, Shore Gold, Tahera, Stornoway (Ashton and Contact,) Dianor, Vaaldiam, SouthernEra and more than one-dozen juniors.

"Experts tell us that developments such as De Beers diamond mining are driving these species to extinction," the group stated.

The Nishnawbe Aski Nation told DiCaprio that massive open-pit diamond mining in the Boreal Forest threatens to disrupt the fragile environment.

"For thousands of years the pristine Boreal Forest has sustained the remote indigenous communities of the Cree and Ojibway Nations. Now De Beers plan to develop a massive open pit diamond mine in this sensitive ecosystem threatens to disrupt the balance of life in our continent’s largest remaining intact forest," the group contended.

De Beers Canada's Linda Dorrington told Rapaport News that the diamond major has signed agreements with aboriginal communities across Canada, "including Nishnawbe Aski Nation communities, which cover early and advanced exploration, mine construction and production. These agreements set out the work to be undertaken, our environmental and cultural commitments as well as how communities can participate in, and benefit from, our projects."

According to Dorrington, De Beers received ISO 140001 certification for the environmental management systems at each of its projects and operations in Canada. "Our Snap Lake and Victor projects have undergone very thorough environmental assessment processes, which included extensive community consultation," she said.

De Beers also built an $800,000 training center in Attawapiskat, northern Ontario, which is being used to prepare locals for employment opportunities offered by the Victor Mine. "In the Northwest Territories we provided $500,000 for the initial development of the Kimberlite Career and Technical Centre in Yellowknife and we have partnered with our contractors at the Snap Lake project to provide a further $750,000 for the expansion of this successful training center," she said.

Jim Gowans, president and CEO of De Beers Canada, added that local communities were considered to be vital in projects underway. "To this end, we are committed to working with communities to maximize opportunities for local employment and the development of local aboriginal businesses as suppliers and contractors to our mining projects."

DiCaprio's publicist in New York would not confirm or deny to Rapaport actor had been given the letter. As of press time the Nishnawbe Aski Nation had not received a response from DiCaprio.

Canadian Diamonds Not Conflict-Free
Many issues to be addressed, says First Nations leader
By Joan Delaney, Epoch Times Victoria Staff
Dec 15, 2006

An Ontario First Nations group is launching a campaign to persuade Americans not to buy diamonds mined in Canada. The group maintains that because of ongoing  aboriginal rights and environmental concerns, many Canadian diamonds come with a hidden cost.

Alvin Fiddler, Deputy Grand Chief of the Nishnawbe Aski Nation who represents 49 First Nations communities in northern Ontario, said De Beers Canada plans to develop massive open pit diamond mining projects on their traditional lands without honouring treaty rights or undertaking consultations.

Legal Victory for Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation
What's Mine Is Theirs
Kim Petersen
September 03, 2006

(The blockade against Platinex began in February.)

On July 28, Justice G. P. Smith of the Ontario Superior Court resided over the decision hailed as one of the most important victories for Original Peoples in the Ontario justice system. The decision requires the publicly traded Ontario mining exploration company Platinex Incorporated to cease drilling operations in the territory claimed by Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug (Big Trout Lake) First Nation (KIFN) in northwestern Ontario. The ruling obviates the
$10-billion damage suit Platinex filed against KIFN for opposing drilling on territory that KIFN claims.

The decision could be a bellwether for First Nation rights and may have major ramifications in the manner in which mining and exploratory operations are carried out in Ontario.

"Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug are excited and pleased that we have been heard," says KIFN Councillor John Cutfeet. Cutfeet believes the ruling is good news for the approximately 1,000 people in KIFN. "This land was given to us by the Creator; it is our past, present and future. Now the Ontario Superior Court has indicated it understood our spiritual, physical, emotional and mental dependence on the land when Justice Smith said, 'The land is the very essence of their being. It is their very heart and soul.'"

"The land not only provides for us, it nurtures us; it is our teacher," continues Cutfeet. "However that gift does not come without obligation; it is our job to stand together to protect the Creator's gift so that the land will continue to be there for all of us. That is what we have done for generations, what we did in signing the Treaty, and what is required of us if we are to live in balance and harmony."

In his statement, Justice Smith concurred:

It is critical to consider the nature of the potential loss from an Aboriginal perspective. From that perspective, the relationship that aboriginal peoples have with the land cannot be understated. The land is the very essence of their being. It is their very heart and soul. No amount of money can compensate for its loss. Aboriginal identity, spirituality, laws, traditions, culture, and rights are connected to and arise from this relationship to the land. This is a perspective
that is foreign to and often difficult to understand from a non-Aboriginal viewpoint.

Smith found that there had been inadequate consultation by Platinex with KIFN. For KIFN, consultation is a community process.

Justice Smith faulted Platinex for gambling that KIFN would do nothing to oppose the company's drilling. For this reason, Smith concluded that Platinex, saddled with a challenging debt burden, is largely to blame for its predicament.

KIFN holds that exploiting the land for resources without planning for the future is irresponsible. "We must look at the bigger picture and look to what this land offers," says chief Donny Morris. "Our resources have been taken from us and we have not benefitted from what has been extracted from our lands to be sold to the rest of the world. Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug signed a Treaty and that Treaty must be honoured by the Crown. In sharing our land, our views and rights must not only be heard, but be understood so that the land is available to help us, not just those who grow rich at our expense."

"This decision is a huge victory for the Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug and for the rights of Aboriginal communities throughout the province," says Sierra Legal lawyer Justin Duncan.

As laid out under previous Supreme Court decisions, among them Delgamuukw v. British Columbia and Mikisew Cree First Nation v. Canada (Minister of Canadian Heritage), governments must consult with Original Peoples before moving onto and extracting resources from territory claimed by an Indigenous community.

"The Court has clearly stated that companies like Platinex must respect community interests and cannot steamroll over the rights of Ontario's Aboriginal communities," says Duncan.

Justice Smith noted the absence of the Ontario government, not only during the court proceedings, but also from much of the consultation process with KIFN. Smith stated that the Ontario government has a fiduciary responsibility to KIFN that is not to be delegated to third parties. The Ontario government, nevertheless, determined that Platinex's exploratory activities near KIFN would have inconsequential environmental impact.

The Ontario minister of Northern Development and Mines, Rick Bartolucci, says the judicial decision is still being reviewed. Bartolucci stresses, however, that this particular decision "does not impact the legitimacy of other mining claims in Ontario."

Critics question the legitimacy of this statement, considering that Justice Smith pointed out that the Ontario government has failed to abide by its own laws. "Despite repeated judicial messages delivered over the course of 16 years, the record available in this case sadly reveals the provincial Crown has not heard or comprehended this message and has failed in fulfilling its obligation."

Meanwhile, negotiations are expected to resume between KIFN and Platinex. Both parties are scheduled to meet with Justice Smith in five months to report on their consultations. 

---

Mining firm wins injunction to stop native blockade near Dease Lake
Maurice Bridge and Heather Travis, Vancouver Sun
Saturday, September 02, 2006

A B.C. Supreme Court judge granted an injunction and an enforcement order Friday to a Vancouver-based mining company whose development near Dease Lake has been halted by first nations protesters.

Vancouver-based gold-mining firm BCMetals told the court it has all the necessary provincial and federal permits to conduct an exploration program in northwestern B.C., but is being stymied by a roadblock set up by small group of aboriginal elders.

The company was seeking an injunction to stop the blockade, which it painted as the work of a small faction outside local first nations government.

The blockade is preventing the company from moving heavy equipment into the Sacred Headwaters region about 300 kilometres northeast of Prince Rupert, where the Skeena, Nass and Stikine river systems -- critical to West Coast salmon runs -- rise.

The blockade was set up a year ago by the Klabona Keepers Society, an independent organization of elders and other members of the Iskut First Nation who say hauling heavy equipment through Coyote Creek will damage fish-spawning habitat.

But despite Friday's court ruling, the Tahltan are resolved "to stick to their guns," said Ivan Thompson, a community supporter.

Governments Agree to a Renewed Mining Action Plan for Canada
Natural Resources Canada, Government of Canada
Transmitted by CNW Group on : August 30, 2006 06:30

WHITEHORSE, Aug. 30 /CNW Telbec/ - Mines ministers from the
Government of Canada, the provinces and the territories concluded the 63rd Annual Mines Ministers' Conference yesterday by agreeing to a mining Action Plan for Canada.

The federal-provincial-territorial Action Plan will guide intergovernmental initiatives that are critical to the long-term
future of the industry. The goals of the agreement are to strengthen the competitiveness of the minerals and metals industry and to deliver benefits to mining communities across the country.

The ministers pointed to the importance of focussing on clear priorities: advancing the Cooperative Geological Mapping Strategies and improving the regulatory process. The ministers agreed that work be undertaken to improve the efficiency of the regulatory process and the addition of specific timelines for project approvals, while recognizing that environmental protection must continue to be pursued in a rigorous manner.

The ministers issued the following statement: "Mining is a driving force in the Canadian economy. It powers the financial sector and provides significant employment across the country in rural, remote, Aboriginal and northern communities, as well as in large urban centres. It also drives export growth, not only in the minerals and metals sector but also in the service, supply and equipment industries. For Canada to remain a competitive world leader in mining, we need to focus our priorities on innovation, capacity building, improving the taxation and fiscal climate for investment,and branding Canada in international markets. To do this, we are working collaboratively, so that communities in every province and territory can prosper."

The ministers agreed that governments have an important role to play in setting the foundation for a competitive industry. The three themes of the Action Plan are essential to the industry's competitiveness, building on the 2005 Conference, which focused on taking steps to advance viable mining communities.

The annual Mines Ministers' Conference allows industry representatives, stakeholders and governments to continue the dialogue about the minerals and metals industry in Canada. It helps ensure that there are opportunities for Canadians now and in the
future.

The great part about "improve the efficiency of the regulatory process and the addition of specific timelines for project approvals" is that it will no longer be an option to do more in-depth investigation of poorly-planned (never mind poorly-conceived) projects, much less reject undesirable projects. And of course "recognizing that environmental protection must continue to be pursued in a rigorous manner" implies that environmental protection is currently being pursued at all... (Jamie Kneen, Mining Watch Canada)

---

Partners Deliver Mining Kit for Aboriginal Communities
Government of Canada
August 29, 2006

WHITEHORSE - A new educational tool will help Aboriginal people make more informed decisions and take advantage of opportunities offered by the mining industry in Canada. Released today in Whitehorse, the Mining Information Kit for Aboriginal Communities describes the mining cycle and identifies the many opportunities that exploration and mining can bring to Aboriginal people.

The information kit is the product of a partnership among the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada (PDAC), the Mining Association of Canada (MAC), the Canadian Aboriginal Minerals Association (CAMA) and the Government of Canada (Natural Resources and Indian and Northern Affairs).

"This is an excellent tool for Aboriginal people, industry and governments. It ensures that Aboriginal communities have the knowledge they need to participate fully in all aspects of mining," said the Honourable Gary Lunn, Minister of Natural Resources.

"This valuable information kit demonstrates how partnerships between government, industry and Aboriginal organizations play a key role in responsible development of the North," said the Honourable Jim Prentice, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, and Federal Interlocutor for Metis and Non-Status Indians.

"Canada's mining industry has become the largest private-sector employer of Aboriginal Canadians. This information kit is designed to help Aboriginal communities prepare for, and effectively engage in, new opportunities offered by our sector," stated Gordon Peeling, President and Chief Executive Officer of the MAC.

According to Patricia Dillon, President of the PDAC, "The mineral industry offers excellent employment and business-development opportunities for Aboriginal people, including youth, particularly those in the northern regions of
Canada. The kit contains details about training and the wide range of jobs this industry offers."

Aboriginal communities are increasingly becoming recognized as key contributors to the minerals and metals sector for labour and supplies. This kit was developed to respond to the increasing needs of Aboriginal communities for information products on minerals and metals activities. Approximately 1,200 Aboriginal communities are located within 200 kilometres of 190 producing
mines and 2,100 active exploration properties across Canada.

"A mining project can be a catalyst for positive economic development in an Aboriginal community," said Jerry Asp, vice-President of CAMA. "This information kit will help us better understand mining activities, so that we can make more
informed decisions about our participation in the mining industry."

This project reaffirms the commitment of the partners to work with Aboriginal communities to increase the contribution of the minerals and metals industry to the well-being of Aboriginal people.

The information kit will be available in both English and French, and will be distributed to interested Aboriginal communities across Canada. It is available on each of the partners' Web sites.

i'm sorry, but to me, this just sounds like complete brainwashing propaganda. it seems like it assumes that the aboriginal communities are not capable to make decisions on thier own. 'more informed decisions' is repeated twice in the article, which implies that until this kit was released, the indigenous of canada were 'ignorant' to the 'benefits' of the mining industry, that 'more informed' simply means that mining is the right, civilised thing to do and they need to be swayed to align with our accellerating modern world. terms like 'excellent tool' and 'valuable information kit' as well as 'new opportunities offered by this sector' are all based on the premise that mining is good, in fact, necessary. i want to see a similar excellent valuable information kit sent to the mining companies and the canadian governments to inform them of the often irreversible damage to the environment and cultural conforming which the mining industry directly produces.

... or, better yet, i want to see industry stop, now.

Wednesday, 16 August 2006

Platinex Inc. v. Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation, [2006] O.J. No. 3140 (QL), 2006 CanLII 26171, Ontario Superior Court of Justice (G.P. Smith J.), 28 July 2006

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice granted an interim injunction to a First Nation in northwestern Ontario enjoining a company from engaging in any mining exploration activities for five months. The Court also ordered the First Nation to establish a "consultation committee" to negotiate with the exploration company and the provincial government. The Court dismissed the injunction application brought by the exploration company to prevent the Aboriginal community from interfering with its activities.

The case concerned what the Court described as a "clash" between a desire for "the economic development of the rich resources located on a vast tract of pristine land in a remote portion of Northwestern Ontario" and the First Nation's fight to "safeguard and preserve its traditional land, culture, way of life and core beliefs".

The Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation (the "KI First Nation") was described as an Ojibwa/Cree First Nation. It was a signatory to the 1929 adhesion to Treaty 9, and occupies a reserve near Big Trout Lake, approximately 380 miles north of Thunder Bay. In May 2000, the KI First Nation filed a Treaty Land Entitlement Claim on the basis that the
calculation of the area of its reserve was improper. It sought further land in its traditional territory.

Platinex Inc. is a junior exploration company in Ontario that is in the business of exploratory drilling. Its main asset is a 100% interest in unpatented mining claims and mining leases near Big Trout Lake. Platinex was granted a number of extensions on these mining claims by the Ontario Ministry of Northern Development and Mines since 1999.

The area of land at issue in the injunction application covers 19 square kilometres of boreal forest near Big Trout Lake. It is not part of the KI First Nation's reserve, but the KI First Nation asserts that this area falls within its "traditional territory" and is therefore part of its Treaty Land Entitlement Claim.

Platinex and the KI First Nation had ongoing discussions since 1999 about the intended exploration and development of the area. In February 2001, the KI First Nation advised Platinex that it wanted a moratorium on all development until proper consultation had taken place. The KI First Nation stated that it was not opposed to development, but wanted
to be a "full partner" and to be fully consulted.

Further discussions were held, but they did not comply with the KI First Nation's consultation protocol. In August 2005, the KI First Nation advised Platinex that all previous agreements were now "null and void". Nevertheless, in October 2005, Platinex made public its mining application on the TSX Venture Exchange and represented that the KI First Nation had "verbally consented" to low impact exploration. By December 2005, Platinex had raised over $1 million in private
placements.

In February 2006, the Chief and Council of the KI First Nation wrote to Platinex advising that members of the community were committed to take any measures necessary to stop exploratory drilling in the area. A number of individuals from the community went to the drilling camp to protest. As noted by the Court, there is a large discrepancy between Platinex and the KI First Nation as to what happened next. Platinex alleged that the protest by the KI First Nation was hostile and threatening, and involved the seizure of equipment and the ploughing of an airstrip. The KI First Nation alleged that the protest was peaceful and involved elderly members and children. Members of the Ontario
Provincial Police were present.

Platinex and the KI First Nation both sought injunctive relief. The Court reviewed the applicable RJR MacDonald test for injunctions as well as materials on the use of injunctions in the Aboriginal context. Justice George P. Smith noted that an injunction is "often not suited" to situations involving Aboriginal issues.

The Court held that both parties were able to satisfy the first prong of the RJR MacDonald test, as there was a serious issue to be tried.

The Court did not agree that Platinex would suffer irreparable harm. The Court found that Platinex had known as early as 2001 that the KI First Nation was not consenting to further exploration. The Court stated:

It is inconceivable that Platinex did not know that KI was strongly opposing any further drilling on the property.

Platinex decided to gamble that KI would not try to stop them and essentially decided to try to steamroll over the KI
community by moving in a drilling crew without notice.

While I accept the evidence of Platinex that it will face insolvency if it cannot complete its drilling by the end of this
year or shortly thereafter, Platinex is, to a large degree, the author of its own misfortune.

The Court held that the "unilateral" actions of Platinex were "disrespectful" of the First Nation's interests and were interpreted as an insult. Such actions were likely motivated by the "severe financial pressure" being felt by Platinex. The Court continued:

For Platinex to now say that it will suffer irreparable harm if an injunction is not granted flies in the face of the equitable basis upon which injunctive relief is premised. The circumstances giving rise to the economic harm that will be potentially suffered by Platinex relate directly to decisions and choices that it made after KI had said that further exploration would be resisted. In making those choices, including the choice to raise funds by means of flow-through shares, and in understating its problems of access to the property, it ignored or was wilfully blind to the concerns and position of the KI community. The financial and time pressures Platinex is now experiencing are self-created and are based on an unreasonable belief that KI would not defend its interests when push came to shove. Platinex had the choice to continue with the process of consultation and negotiation with KI and the Crown and chose not to do so.

The Court held that the KI First Nation satisfied this prong of the RJR MacDonald test for an injunction. The Court stressed that the loss of traditional lands could constitute irreparable harm. The issue of "loss" must be considered from the Aboriginal perspective. The Court was satisfied that, for the KI First Nation, land was important from both a
cultural and spiritual perspective, as it was "the very essence of their being" and their "very heart and soul". He stated:

No amount of money can compensate for its loss. Aboriginal identity, spirituality, laws, traditions, culture, and rights are connected to and arise from this relationship to the land. This is a perspective that is foreign to and often difficult to understand from a non-Aboriginal viewpoint.

The Court also found that the KI First Nation satisfied the "balance of convenience" prong of the RJR MacDonald test. There were two "very unique" aspects in this case: (1) the exploration may take place on lands subject to an ongoing treaty claim; and (2) both Platinex and the provincial Crown chose to ignore the concerns of the KI First Nation. If the exploration were allowed, the KI First Nation's treaty claim could be adversely affected. In regards to the public interest, the Court found that there would not be a loss of employment for a large number of citizens. On the other hand, the public interest favoured the "integrity of the consultation process itself". The Court stated:

A decision to grant an injunction to Platinex essentially would make the duties owed by the Crown and third parties meaningless and send a message to other resource development companies that they can simply ignore Aboriginal concerns.

The grant of an injunction enhances the public interest by making the consultation process meaningful and by compelling the Crown to accept its fiduciary obligations and to act honourably.

Balancing the respective positions of the parties, I find that the balance of convenience favours the granting of an injunction to KI.

In light of Platinex's claim for $10 billion in damages, the Court also considered whether the KI First Nation must provide an undertaking to pay damages in order to obtain an injunction. After reviewing various sources, the Court waived this requirement. Justice G.P. Smith stated:

Large wealthy corporations issuing law suits for many millions of dollars could disentitle First Nations from qualifying from
the right to claim injunctive relief. This result cannot be deemed to be in accordance with the principles of equity.

To disentitle KI to a grant of an injunction in these circumstances cannot be fair or just.

The Court also rejected the argument that the KI First Nation did not have "clean hands" due to the nature of the protest at the drilling camp. The actions of the community members were "understandable", and no violence occurred. There was also no evidence that the KI First Nation had failed to make good faith efforts to consult.

The Court also made strongly-worded comments regarding the glaring absence of the Ontario government in the consultation process. The comments of the B.C. Court of Appeal in the Halfway River First Nation case, concerning the content of the duty to consult, were approved. Justice G.P. Smith stressed that the Crown must make good faith efforts
to negotiate an agreement, and cannot delegate this duty to third parties. The evidentiary record in this case shows that Ontario "abdicated its responsibility", while also granting extensions to Platinex's mining leases despite the KI First Nation's treaty claims. There was no evidence that Ontario "maintained a strong supervisory presence in the negotiations". The Court commented that Ontario ignored its fiduciary role despite the "repeated judicial messages" since the Sparrow decision of 1990. He stated: "this case sadly reveals that the provincial Crown has not heard or comprehended this message and has failed in fulfilling this obligation". One of the unfortunate consequences of the Crown's failure was the resulting "industrial uncertainty".

The Court reviewed the options for the appropriate remedy in this case, such as ordering the creation of a consultative committee (as was the result in the Cheslatta Carrier Nation case), or an injunction. The promotion of "reconciliation" is the ultimate goal. The Court held that the possibility still exists in this case for a negotiated settlement.

The Court ordered that Platinex be enjoined from engaging in exploration at the Big Trout Lake site for five months, at which time the parties will re-attend at the Court. The granting of the interim injunction was conditional upon the KI First Nation releasing any property that had been removed from the drilling camp, and immediately setting up a "consultation committee" to meet with Platinex and the provincial Crown with the objective of developing an agreement with Platinex.

July 14, 2006

I have been requested to inform people of a medical emergency happening to a Native activist right now. The information is still limited but here is what I have been told so far.

A Native delegation, from the community of Six Nation, Ont, traveled by van, to an anti-logging protest organized by non-native environmentalist located near Grassy Narrows, Ont. This delegation traveled there to show their support for the environmental issue and against the devastating actions of a corporate state.

The environmental activists conducted a peaceful protest action to raise the awareness around the issue of clear-cutting and de-forestation. As is always the case in these situations the protestors were met with a police presence. The Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) responded to the protest by using the tactics of subterfuge and force. Since it was a peaceful protest the OPP assured the protestors that there will be no use of force and that no one will be arrested. This was a lie.

Shortly after the protest the OPP followed and pulled over the van containing the delegation from Six Nations. The Natives were violently arrested. OPP used excessive force in the act of detaining the group. This use of excessive force to arrest the Native protestors had a traumatic result. One member of the Six Nation’s delegation, a Native woman named Nisha, was pregnant at the time of the arrest. Her pregnancy did not deter the OPP officers from using force to arrest her. She was roughed up and mistreated. The OPP’s physical attack on Nisha’s is causing to suffer through a traumatic miscarriage. The OPP’s attack has just caused the death of Nisha’s child. There is no clearer way to say this.

Nisha is a dedicated young activist who turned to political activism out of a deep compassion for her people and to stop the injustices we, as Native people face. She, as well as her unborn child, are being violently persecuted by the OPP for her noble passion for freedom from colonial oppression. This tactic of police violence directed at Native activists, who are courageous enough to stand up for their people to right the horrible wrongs of 500 years of colonialism, is obviously used to inspire fear from our people to force them to remain silent in their oppression. This tactic of police violence against Native activists to suppress their voice has to stop immediately! This act of police violence cannot go unnoticed or unpunished leaving Nisha to suffer alone. As I write this letter Nisha is still incarcerated in an OPP jail in Kenora, Ont. She still has not received medial treatment. Others accompanied Nisha in the van are also still incarcerated and their van has been confiscated as well. A second van was also pulled over with the occupants arrested and van confiscated. The total number of activists arrested is still yet undetermined, as is the charges that they may face. There has not been any answer from the OPP concerning anyone being charged or what kind of charges they will be. Keep in mind this was a short peaceful protest with no acts of violence from any protestor.
This deplorable act by the OPP raises some very important questions for Native people.

Was the use of OPP violence to conduct an arrest justifiable when all that the Six nation’s delegation did was attend a peaceful protest? Considering the Native protestors did not commit any violence or any criminal offences, these possible charges (if any) cannot be of any great importance.

Could the OPP just have peacefully served a warrant at the Native protestors homes to show up in court to instead?

Were the Six Nation’s delegation “Targets of Opportunity” for the OPP to grab, harass and persecute when they had a chance?

Will more key members of the Six Nation’s protest be subjected to continued violent police persecution and harassment?

Knowing they have just caused a death, will the OPP trump up charges against the Native protestors as a way of “justifying” their arrest and the police use of excessive force?

Is the tactic of police violence utilized against Native people to suppress our promotion of the truths of colonial oppression justifiable?

Do we allow these government sponsored and directed acts of violence against are people to continue?

Do we continue to accept the illusion that the Canadian police forces are here to protect and serve Native people too?

Why is it so necessary for the Canadian government to ensure that Native people suffer under the conditions “over-policing” and “over-enforcement”? From the highest rates of violent arrests? From the highest incarcerations rates? From the longest prison terms? And from the highest death tolls caused by the Canadian police forces?

I encourage everyone to look into the history of Canadian police forces in particular the history of their relationship with Native people and draw your own conclusions.

I ask of you to support Nisha in her time of suffering. An update to this letter will be sent out with possible points of contact for anyone who wishes to help Nisha.

Don’t let Nisha and her unborn child be forgotten and forsaken.

Imsit Noolgama (All my Relations),
Sakej
Wolf Clan, Mi’kmaq Nation

i've sent out a number of emails to find out how nisha is doing two weeks later, i'll post her situation when i hear a response.

---

Quebec anti-terror squad probes oil exec's car blast
CBC News, Tuesday, August 8, 2006 | 3:44 PM ET

The anti-terrorism unit of the Quebec provincial police is investigating the apparent firebombing of a car owned by a prominent oil-industry executive after an obscure group claimed responsibility for the attack on Friday.

full article here.

 

---

the IRI was last heard from in december 2004, they seem to be doing a good job at eluding the police. i dont know, from my perspective, the lack of deaths makes this bold example of direct action applaudable. the media was very quick to pin the 'terrorist' label onto this, and observe how it will downplay this by brushing it under the rug. ive been comparing this mainstream information to the info reported on more independant media networks, i'll discuss this in a later post.

---

Group claims responsibility for hydro tower bomb
Last updated Dec 6 2004 09:01 AM EST
CBC News

A mysterious group known by the initials IRI is claiming responsibility in a communiqué for damaging a Hydro-Québec tower in the Eastern Townships.

The tower near Coaticook is part of a line that carries James Bay power to the Boston area. Police say it appears the tower was damaged by an explosive charge.

The group says it set the charge at the base of the St-Hermenegilde tower to denounce the ''pillaging'' of Quebec's resources by the United States.

full article here.

---

Ontario First Nation wins injunction to halt mining company
Monday July 31, 2006 10:39 AM

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug (KI) - In the absence of adequate consultation, Justice G. P. Smith, on Friday, July 28, ruled against Platinex continuing its exploration activities on Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug traditional lands at this time.

---

http://www.wheresmcguinty.ca/