Philippines: Mining or Food?

 

Philippines

 

 

Philippines: Mining or Food? Abbreviated Version by

Robert Goodland and Clive Wicks for

The Working Group on Mining in the Philippines

Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs The Brundtland Report, Our Common Future, UN World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987

 In a world overflowing overflowing with riches, it is i s an outrageous scandal scandal that more than 826 million peopl p eoplee suffer hunger h unger and malnutrition and that every year over 36 million die di e of sta starva rvation tion and related causes. We must take urgent urgent action now. Jean Ziegler UN Special Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, F ood, Ap April ril 2001 20 01

DEDICATION

The Working Group on Mining in the Philippines and the authors respectfully dedicate this report to all the courageous and dignified people who have been killed while protecting the environment and upholding human rights in the Philippine archipelago.

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the participating or supporting sup porting organizations. The autho authors rs have, however, don donee their utmost to reflect the views of the many people they met in the Philippines and the views and reports of the people and organizations who have commented on earlier drafts of this report.

 

 

© Copyright Working Group on Mining in the Philippines 2009

First Published in 2009 by the Working Group on Mining in the Philippines, 28 Redington Road, London, NW3 7RB, United Kingdom [email protected]

ISBN Numb Number: er: . 978-0-9560 978-0-9560616-7-6 616-7-6

Report authors: Robert Goodland and Clive Wicks Report editors: Cathal Doyle, Ellen Teague, Sarah Sexton and Frank Nally. Report layout and cover design Frank Nally and Cathal Doyle

Front Cover Photos: -Placer Dome Marcopper Mine Marinduque Island by Dr Catherine Coumans, MiningWatch, Canada; - Rice fields on Authors Field Trip to Midsalip

 

 

Map of the Philippine Archipelago

Case  S Study  L Locations  

5. MINDORO NICKEL PROJECT

6. SIBUYAN ISLAND

2. LIBAY SIBUTAD SIBUT AD

3. TAMPAKAN SAGITTARIUS COPPER & GOLD

1. MIDSA MIDSALIP LIP

4. MATI DAVAO ORIENTAL PUJADA BAY

MAPS associated with these 6 Case Studies are available at http://www.piplinks.org/maps  

Full version of the report available at www.piplinks.org/miningorfood.com

 

i

 

 

ii

 

The Working Group on Mining in the Philippines The Working Group on Mining in the Philippines was established in 2007, after the publication in January that year of the report,  Mining in the Philippin Philippines: es: Concerns and Conflicts. Based in Britain and chaired by the Right Honorab Honorable le Clare Short MP, MP, UK’s former Minister of International Development. It includes representatives from the Columban Missionary Society, the Ecumenical Council for Corporate Responsibility, Philippine Indigenous Peoples’ Links and IUCN- CEESP.

The Authors Robert Goodland is an environmental scientist specializing in economic development. developmen t. He advi advised sed the Worl World d Bank Group from 1978 throu through gh 20 2001. 01. He then became the technical director to H.E. Dr. Emil Salim’s independent Extractive Industry Review (http://www.ifc.org/eir) of the World Bank Group’s portfolio of oil, gas and mining projects projects.. He was elected president of the IInternation nternational al Associat Association ion of Impact Assessment, and Metropolitan Chair of the Ecological Society of America. He was awarded the World Conservation Union’s Coolidge medal in October 2008. ([email protected]) Clive Wicks   has 48 years of experience of working in engineering, agriculture and environment, specializing in the impact of extractive industries on the environment. He is a vice chair of IUCN-CEESP (IUCN’s Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy) and co-chairs SEAPRISE (IUCN-CEESP’s Working Group on the the Social and Environmen Environmental tal Accoun Accountabili tability ty of the Private Sector). He worked in the international environmental movement for the last 24 years, mainly with WWF UK UK.. He headed WWF UK’s African, Asian and Latin American programs, and represented WWF at G8, World Bank, International Finance Corporation, UNEP and UNDP meetings on extractive industries. ([email protected])

 

iii

 

Acknowledgements

The Authors wish to thank all those who helped them, both during their trip to the Philippines and in the last year, for the substantial information provided to help them with their research. This report would not have been possible without the support of many people in all the areas visited, including Indigenous Peoples, who opened their hearts and shared their concerns with the authors about the environmental and human rights abuses caused by mining. They are the real authors of this report. However, in view of the vast number of extrajudicial killings that have taken place since 2001, now believed to be over 1,000, including a Bishop of the Independent Church, the authors are reluctant to name people or organisations in the Philippines. The authors admire the courage of the politicians, bishops, priests, sisters and pastoral workers of the Catholic Church and the leaders of many other faiths and none and human rights lawyers who have the courage to speak out against the destruction that mining is currently causing and will increasingly cause to their beautiful, fruitful and bio-diverse archipelago. It has been a great honour and a humbling experience for the authors to work with such brave and committed people. They would like to thank the Local Governments Units, the Catholic Church, especially Columban priests, sisters and communitiesthewho welcomedMissionaries them during and their the trip bishops, and provided accommodation, transport and food for the team. The best help the authors could provide was to apply their long years of experience and professional knowledge of the extractive industry around the world and their knowledge of environmental and human rights best practise, laws and conventions in an impartial and professional way. They would like to especially thank PAFID for their contribution to the mapping of the areas visited on their February 2008 Field Trip, LRC-KSK-Friends of the Earth for their expertise on the law and assisting Indigenous Peoples protect their rights, Professor Arturo Boquiren and Professor Ernesto Gonzales for their contribution and insights about the economics of mining versus environmental value and Cathal Doyle of the Irish Centre for Human Rights for input on the rights of Indigenous Peoples.l Peoples.l K. From The Working Group on Mining in i n the Philippines  (WGMP):

The Working Group would like to thank Robert Goodland and Clive Wicks for their dedication and passion for human rights and environmental justice, which has led them to generously give of their time and expertise to travel to the Philippines and answer the call of an ever increasing number of communities to help them protect their rights, their lands, their lives and livelihoods. We wish to thank Cordaid, the Holly Hill Charitable Trust, Paul K. Feyerabend Foundation, the Columbans, the IUCN-CEESP (Commission on Environmental Economic and Social Policy), for their fi financial nancial support to realise realise th this is report and maps.

 

iv

 

Executive Summary Table of Contents

Foreword to Second Mining Report.................................................................................vi Message from Senator Aquilino Pimentel Jr..................................................................vii Message from Bishop Zacarias C. Jimenez, DD...........................................................viii DD...........................................................viii    

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................x  RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................x   Summary recommend recommendations ations to the Phili Philippine ppine Governm Government........ ent............. .......... .......... .......... .......... ..........xv .....xv Summary recommend recommendations ations to Mining C Corpo orporations rations..... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... ........... ............ ............ ......xx xx Summary recommendations to Development Agencies, NGOs, World Bank.......xxii Summary recommend recommendations ations to the Investor Community ..... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... ........... .........xxiv ...xxiv Summary recommendations recommen dations to Mining-Imp Mining-Impacted acted Commun Communities ities ..... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......xxvi ..xxvi    

   

 

REPORT INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................1 ANNEX Full Report Table of Contents

 

v

 

 

Foreword to Second Mining Report  By the Right Honorable Clare Short Short MP

When I led a Fact Finding Mission to the Philippines in 2006, I was deeply shocked by the negative impacts of mining on the environment and people’s livelihood. li velihood. These were documented in the report  Mining in the Ph Philippines: ilippines: Concerns and Conflicts, which was published in January 2007 in both the UK and the Philippines, receiving extensive media coverage in Philippine newspapers. This second report Philippines: Mining or Food? highlights the threat that mining poses to food security. Once self-sufficient self-suffici ent in rice, the Philippines is now the world’s biggest biggest importer and, with world rice prices prices tripling this year, it has had to pay record prices. In a country where where two-third two-thirdss of the population live on only $2 a day, this means that more Filipino families are being forced into poverty. The problem is rooted in the failure of the Philippine Government to maintain the health of its agricultural sector and to conserve vital natural resources, such as tropical forests and water, which contribute to national rice output. output. Th Thee loss of o f watersheds, watersheds, for example, example, has a direct impa i mpact ct on the water supply supp ly for irrigation that that is so vital for rice farmers. Yet, the Government Government seems seems to regard forests purely as a source of timber and as potential areas for mining. The Working Group on Mining in the Philippines, which I chair, was established after the publication of the first report. report. We are delighted that the authors, two British Bri tish environmental environmental experts, were able to visit the Philippines in February this year in order to investigate more fully, document and map some key sites targeted for mining. This report is the fruit of their excellent work and makes clear how food production productio n will be damaged irreparably irre parably if the mining projects project s on the drawing board go ahead. One of the authors, Robert Goodland, worked for the World Bank for 23 years, latterly as senior environmental advisor and as the technical director to the independent Extractive Industry Review (EIR) of the World World Bank Group chaired chaired by Dr Emil Salim. He is very criti critical cal of internatio international nal investor support for mining expansion in the Philippines. Philippin es. Clive Wicks worked in the corporate sector for many years, then for the Worldwide Fund for Nature, and now as the co-chair of the IUCN CEESP (Commission (Commissio n on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy). Clive has become increasingly concerned conce rned about mining activities failing to meet sustainability criteria and their increasing propensity propensity in some places – many of them fertile but fragile environments environments – to unde u ndermine rmine food production. These two men traveled the length of the Philippines visiting a range of communities from those dependent on the remaining forested mountains to those who rely on the tropical seas, observing and cataloguing catalogui ng the preci precious ous natural resource capital being put put at risk. We thank them for their d dedicati edication on on behalf of poor Filipinos whose still beautiful and fruitful environment is their health and wealth. This report, and the accompanying illustrations and maps, have been prepared by them and their dedicated Philippine team, with support from members of the Working Group in London. The report calls for more responsibility from mining companies, foreign chambers of commerce, western governments, development agencies, international financial institutions and investors, in the way they promote and support mining in the Philippines. It points to serious reservations about the practices of the big mining companies, many of which have headquarters in Britain and are listed on the London London Stock Exchange. It also highlights the clash between the Philippine Phili ppine Government’s rhetoric about supporting agriculture agricult ure and the crises on the ground. The W Working orking Group Grou p w woul ould d like to express continuing admiration admiration for and solidarity with the Catholic Bishops’ Confer Conference ence of the Philippines and all those local campaigners who have challenged the country’s 1995 Mining Act and current plans for mining expansion. The following words from the report are worth repeating repeatin g here: The stark choice facing the Philippines is between a few years of mining and thousands of  years of irrigated rice and fisheries production. Mining reduces the options for future generations. The lessons learnt from the ((2002-2004) 2002-2004) independent World Bank-funded Bank-funded  Extractive Industry Review have not been followed in the Philippines. 

Clare Short MP House of Commons, December 2008

vi

 

 

Message from Senator Aquilino Aquilino Pimentel Jr. Jr.

Senator AquilinoLeader Aquilino Pimente Pimentell Jr. Senate Minority I have read the Report of the visit to the Philippines by the team headed by Robert Goodland and Clive Wicks and found it not only accurate but comprehensive. The maps prepared by Clive Wicks with Pafid show the location of deleterious mining operations in various parts of the country and graphically portray the destructive aspects of the industry on food farms and the water supplies of the hapless districts concerned. As the only Senator from Mindanao and as the author of the Local Government Code that is cited in the Report, I can attest to the veracity of the complaints of the tribal groups in Mindanao and throughout the Philippines who are being oppressed by government policies relating to two extractive industries, Mining and and Logging. The scarred landscapes of the barangays and t he municipalities municipalit ies are obscene reminders of the devastation devastatio n that loggers and miners have caused cau sed to the islands and especiall y to the people of Mindanao. Since the date of the first visit of Clare Short Since Short MP in 2006, foreign mining interests, in comp complicity licity with their powerful local allies, have widened the areas of their greed, apparently abetted by loose government controls over their industry. In four towns in the Luzon, province of Zambales alone, at least ten mining companies are - as I write this - competing to level mountaintops in their ravenous search for nickel, copper, gold and chromite. Because the companies are going for massive open-cast mining in upland communities, they are denuding the already depleted forests and exacerbating the problems in lowland agricultural lands which suffer increasingly from erosion, siltation and flooding. More specifically, three mayors I have spoken with, say that the rice fields of farmers at the foot of the mountains concerned have been ruined. Th Thee may ma yors told tol d me that t he mining companies began their operations even without the legall y required environmental clearance certificates (ECC). They spoke of their inability to stop the mining operations because mining companies hauled the ores by trucks “secured by higher” government armed elements. Moreover, the haulers usually had in their possession “permits” signed by “higher” local and national government authorities. Incidentally, since the Marcos years, I have denounced and will continue to condemn the use of force – now mainly done through the civilian paramilitary units – to intimidate tribal groups that oppose the entry into their ancestral domains of mining and logging interests, without engaging them in honest-togoodness consultations. No country claiming to be democratic should allow that to happen within its territory.

Senator Aquilino “Nene” Pimentel Jr Senate of the Republic of the Philippines Senate Minority Leader 22 October 2008

vii

 

 

Message from Bishop Zacarias C. Jimenez, DD Episcopal Commission on Indigenous Peoples-Mindanao Bishop's House, Butuan City, Philippines 24 October 2008 Reading this Report,  Philippines - Mining or Fo Food? od?  I deplore and lament with the prophets of old what what is happen happenii ng to our beloved land. Our own experiences here in Mindanao validate the report. “Remember, O Lord, what has come upon us; u s; look, and behold our reproach! Our inheritance has been turned over to aliens, and our houses to foreigners. We have become orphans and waifs, our mothers are like widows. We pay for the water we drink, and our wood comes at a price. They pursue at our heels; we labor and have no rest. We have given our hand to the Egyptians and the As Assyrians, syrians, to be satisfied with bread. Our fathers sinned and are no more, but we bear their iniquities.” (Lamentations 5:1-5)

I chair the Episcopal Commission on Indigenous People – Mindanao and have been to many workshops with our indigenous peoples representatives all over Mindanao in recent years. I heard their stories of anguish, saw them cry as they narrate their deplorable state, and I feel their anger against the game tthat game hat our power-hungry power-hungry national and local government government officials are playing with them in alliance with greedy corporations. corporations. The situation is at its worst at the t he present present momen moment. t. The very government that is supposed to protect their rights is the very one abusing them, manipulating them, turning many of their leaders into “Tribal Dealers”. The very people, save a few, we elected to supposedly ensure their basic need of food, shelter and clothing, created laws that instead further the interests of foreign fo reigners, ers, iinvestors, nvestors, multi-national corporations corporations and have turned t urned these laws into a “machiner “machinery y of death” for our indigenous peoples and their precio precious us culture. What is worst is their deception. They are the modern Trojans bringing gifts of empty promises of progress and development. Timeo Danaos Dona Ferentes! I fear the Greeks bringing gifts to our people. I also condemn all forms of harassment by government agencies against the people, foreigner and local, who are working in whatever way to help the situation of our indigenous peoples. I would like to remind readers about and strongly endorse the 2006 Statement on Mining Issues and Concerns of our Catholic Catholi c Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) President: o

o

o o

To support, unify and strengthen the struggle of the local Churches and their constituency against all mining projects, and raise the anti-mining campaign at the national level; To support the call of various sectors, especially the Indigenous Peoples, to stop the Priority Mining Projects of the government, and the closure of large-scale mining projects. To support the conduct of studies on the evil effects of mining in dioceses; To support all economic activities that are life-enhancing and poverty-alleviating.

God help our indigenous brothers and sisters …. Our precious land … all of us! Bp. Zacarias C. Jimenez, DD Chair, Coordinating Team, ECIP - Mindanao

viii

 

  art a

st o

cron crony yms an

rev rev at on onss

ADSDPP

Ancestral Ancestr al Domain Sustainable Sustainab le Development Protection Prote ction Plans

AMD

Acid Mine Drainage

ASEAN

Assoc iation of South East Asian Nations

CADT

Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title

CAFGU

Citizens Armed Forces Geographical Unit

CALT

Certificate of Ancestral Land Title Title

CBCP

Catholic Bishops Confere nce of the Philippines

CEDAW

Convention on the Eliminat Elimination ion of all forms of Discrimination Discriminati on Against Women

CERD

Convention on the Eliminat Elimination ion of all forms of Racial Discriminati Discrimination on

CHR

Commission on Human Rights

CRC

Convention on the Rights of the Child

DENR

Department Depa rtment of Environment and Natura l Resources

ECC

Environmental Environmenta l Cleara Clearance nce Certificate

ESIA

Environmental Environmenta l and Social Impact Assessment

EIR

Extractive Extrac tive Industry Review

ESIA

Environmental Environmenta l Social Impact Assessment

EC

European Commiss Commiss ion

EP

Exploration Per mit mit

EU

European Union

FPIC

Free, Prior, Informed Informed,, Consent

FTAA

Financial and Technical Assista nce Agreement

FFT

Fact Finding Team

GoP

Government of the Philippines

ICCPR

Interna tional Covenant on Civil and Politica Politicall Rights

ICESCR

Interna tional Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights

IFC

Interna tional Finance Corporation

ILO

Interna tional Labour Organizat Organization ion

IPRA

Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act

IPs

Indigenous Indigenous Peoples

IRR

Implementing Rules and Regulations

IUCN

Interna tional Union for Conserva tion of Nature

IUCN-CEESP

Commission on Environmenta Environmental, l, Economic and Social Policy

LGU

Local Government Unit

LRC-KSK

Legal Rights and Natura l Resource Resourcess Center-Kasama sa Kalikasan. / Friends of the Earth Philippines  

MAP

Mineral Action Plan

MDGs

Millennium Developm Deve lopment ent Goals

MILF

Moro Islamic Liberation Front

MPSA

Mineral Product Production ion Sharing Agree ment

NASSA NCIP

National Secre tariat for Soci Social al Action National Commission on Indigenous Peoples Pe oples

NDF

National Democra tic Front

NEDA

National Economic and Deve Developm lopment ent Authority

NPA

New People’s Army

PAFID

Philippine Association for Interc ultural Deve Developm lopment ent

OECD

Organization Organizat ion for Economic Cooperation Cooperat ion and Development

SCAA

Special CAFGU Armed Auxiliary

SEA

Strate gic Environmental Appraisa l

SRSG

Special Repre Representative sentative of the Secretary General

STD

Submarine Tailings Disposal

UNEP

United Nations Environmenta Environmentall Progra mme

UNCTAD

United Nations Commission on Trade and Development

WBG

World Bank Group

ix

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SUM MARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS R ECOMMENDATIONS In July 2006, the Right Honorable Clare Short MP, former UK Minister of International Development, led a Fact Finding Mission on Mining to the Philippines, the report of which was published in 2007,  Mini  Mining ng in the Philippines: Concerns and 1 Conflicts.   The report raised concerns about the implications for food security if mining in the Philippines continued It on iissthebased scaleon planned. follows up on the issue issue of food security. a fi field eldThis trip second to the report P Philippines hilippines in February 2008 by the authors, Robert Goodland and Clive Wicks, who visited a number of mining locations on the islands of Mi Mindoro ndoro and Mindanao. T This his fo follow llow up report also also entailed a mapping exercise to demons demonstrate trate the overl overlap ap of m mining ining locations – both existing and proposed – with indigenous ancestral domains, watersheds and areas of environmental importance, all of which are critical for agricultural and food security in the Philippines. Past willful negligence of the fundamental connection between natural resources management and food security has cost the Philippines dearly. As a result of this the country has suffered from two massive hemorrhages: the loss of most of its forests from the 1950s 1950s to the 1980s; and the lloss oss of much of its fisheri fisheries es since then. The forest loss has led to a decline, in turn, in the production of rice, the country’s staple food, as the loss has af affecte fected d rainfall and w water ater supply. The unn unnecessary ecessary and nationally unprofitable loss of forests and fisheries are akin to killing the goose that would have laid “ golden eggs” in perpetu perpetuity. ity. Those “golden eg eggs” gs” provided sustainable livelihoods for poorer people. Most worrying is the rapid speed at which the country’s natural resource base has declined over the last 30 years and its increasing proneness to so called “natural” disasters, which have a link to human activi activities. ties. The country will suffer suffe r many more such disasters unless drastic acti action on is tak taken. en. The general state of the outstanding natural environment in the Philippines – a global treasure as one of the world’s top biodiversity biodiv ersity hotspots2 – prompts urgent application of the Precautionary Principle 3: to prevent more damage immed immediately. iately. The prior priority ity must be o on n how best to approach this emergency, as there will almost certainly be no second chance (European 4

Commission 2005).   Despite these warnings, the large-scale mining that is now proposed for the Philippines threatens to wreak further havoc, compounding the legacy of deforestation and habitat destruct destruction. ion. There iiss strong evidence from ar areas eas in which mi min n ing has 1

  “ Mining in tthe he Philippines: Concerns and Conflicts” by Doy Do yle, le , C., Wicks, C. and Nally, Nall y, F. 2007. Society of St. Columban Columban,, Solihull, UK: 62 p. 2

  http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/xp/hotspots/hotspotsscience/Pages/hotspots_defined.aspx Hotspots are ‘characterized both by exceptional levels of plant endemism and by serious levels of habitat loss’. 3

 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development Principle 15

4

  European Commission, Commissio n, 2005. Philippines country environmental profile. Makati City, Delegation of the European Commission. 75 p. http://www.delphl.ec.europa.eu/docs/cep%20Philippines.pdf

x

 

  already taken place over the past few decades that the extraction process damages rice production,, often permanently. The Ph production Philippines ilippines already relies on rice iimpo mports rts because of the decline in its dom domestic estic prod production. uction. Meanwhile the prices of rice and other basic foodstuffs have more than doubled in recent years on world markets, making rice a more valuable cash crop and imported rice very expensive and thus increasingly out of reach of the poor who comprise in the region of 50% of the population. In comparison to agriculture, fisheries, and tourism, mining contributes the least of any sector of the economy to reducing poverty or ensuring sustainable development; on the contrary, mining mining often increases poverty. Mining creates fewer jobs per unit of money invested invested than ag agriculture, riculture, fisheries or tourism. Domestic and value-added processing in in m ini ining ng can creat createe some jobs, bu butt they are short term as most m mines ines have a relatively short llifespan. ifespan. According to a recent study, “th “thee mining industry industry’s ’s economic impact remains negligible – jobs created are only 0.4% of total employment, and revenue is less than 1% of total government collection each year.”5  In most cases, the ore is exported unproces unprocessed, sed, just as unproce unprocessed ssed logs were exported during the massive deforestation of a few decades ago. More agricultural lands, including irrigated rice paddies, will be damaged or destroyed as the mining companies compete for land and water, particularly if they are allowed to mine mine in water catchmen catchmentt areas. The cumulative impact of mining on fresh water and marine ecosystems does not appear to have been studied su suffi fficientl ciently y– or it is simply being ignored. Mining is universally acknowledged to be a high-risk activity that is especially precarious in areas of high rainfall (more than three meters per year); seismically active areas; steep slopes downstream of deforestation; and densely populated areas. These cond conditi itions ons are common iin n the Phili Philippines ppines.. Mining iiss particularly risky in agricultural areas, especia especiall lly y above irrigation and fish pond zones. All these risks are receiving scant attention from the Philippine Government or mining corporations. Mining is also frequently associated with generating or exacerbating conflicts, militarization, corruption, corrup tion, and human rig rights hts abuses. For the these se reasons, many codes of conduct, reviews and international standards conclude that mining should not be permitted in conflict zones, at least not until the conflict has been permanently resolved (see Chapter 4 Box 3: “ Sensitive Areas or ‘No-Go Zones’”). In Mindan Mindanao, ao, armed insurgents have labeled overseas mining companies as exploiters of the people, and thus thus llegitimate egitimate targets. On 1st  January 2008, the New Peoples’ Army claimed responsibility for destroying buildings at Xstrata’s mine base camp in Tampakan in Mindanao (see  Case Study 3). The country’s armed for forces ces fr frequently equently come into conflict with lloca ocall commun communiti ities es protes protesting ting aga against inst mining. This lleads eads to further human rights abuses and undermines the constitutional position of the military as protector of the rights of Filipino citizens rather than multinational interests. Mining profits accrue primarily to mining corporations, most of which are based outside the country; some go to the government, but little trickles down to poor Filipinos. Fili pinos. Thus profits are privatized by companies whil whilee the costs are exter externalized nalized to 5

 Newsbreak ,   Miriam Please Up,” RoelofLandingin MaritesEdition Vitug (eds.) 2008. TheGrace Big Go, Dig:“First, Mining rushClean rakes up intons conflict . & Special (July-September). Philippines, Quezon Cit City. y. 3 p p..

xi

 

  commun ities. communiti es. Many of these costs remain llong ong after the mining corporation has lleft eft the country. The Mining Act of 1 1995 995 has virtually handed the country’s patri patrimony mony over to foreign mining corporations corporations.. It only provides for excise tax on mineral products and allots no share in benefits to the State as owner in trust of the resources. The authors join campaigners and the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines in calling for this Act to be revoked and urge an immediate Moratorium on all new applications for exploration and mining and a review of existing contentious applications applications and operat operations. ions. While the Philippines may appear to have some of the best laws in the world to protect the environment, human rights and Indigenous Peoples, their application is unacceptably unaccep tably poo poor. r. Many countries without such good leg legislation islation have far better practical practi cal protection for their people and env envir ironment. onment. Indigenou s Peo Indigenous Peoples ples ar aree particularly vulnerable to the negative effects of mining. The ancestral domains of indigenous communities tend to be in forested upland areas, many of which which are now targeted b by y mini mining ng corporations corporations.. Stewardship over these these lands is enshrined in oral history, myths, prayers, and traditional laws that pre-date the Philippine state. These indigenou indigenouss ccommunities ommunities have traditionally li lived ved sustainably in the forest, but have been displaced or are currentl currently y threatened wi with th disp displac lacement ement by what they call “development aggression” such as commercial logging and mining. The Philippine Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) requires that Indigenous Peoples’ Free and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) be obtained for mining on their lands. However, manipulation of the FPIC process, resulting in the fabrication of their consent, is widespread. The Philippine Government presents mining as “ sustainable”, but the extraction of finite resources such as minerals can never be sustainable. Many people iin n the Philippines do not believe that mining can make any contribution to sustainable development. This output of the Philippine Biodiversity Conservation Priority- setting Program (2002 See Annex H) illustrates the immanent threat mining poses to the very sustainabili sustainab ility ty of the Philippine Archipelago. Thi Thiss is reflected iin n the 2006 statemen statementt of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines, that “our experiences of environmental tragedies and incidents with the mining transnational corporations belie all assurances of sustainable and responsible mining that the Arroyo Administration is claiming”. 6 Addressing these concerns would necessitate that mines be developed according to practices that factor in the climatic (increasingly regular and powerful typhoons), geographic (high number and frequency of earthquakes, volcanic potential, proximity to oceans, impacts on watershed areas, high sedimentation of rivers, areas of high agricultural productivity and rich biodiversity) and demographic (proximity to areas of high population density, impacts on local livelihoods) conditions. It would also require adherence to the legislative protections already in place, respect for Indigenous Peoples’ rights and ensuring that the income generated be used to support sustainable activities. Indigenous Peoples regard large-scale mining as a direct threat to their survival. Given no other option, there is a risk that they and others could be driven to take up 6

 Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines, A Statement on Mining Issues and Concerns, Jan 29, 2006

xii

 

  arms to protect their llands ands and rights. That they have not al already ready done so iiss a testamentt to the wi testamen will ll of their leaders to rresolve esolve the iissues ssues in peaceful ways. The prospect of violence has been stated publicly on several occasions, and was forewarned by the Catholic Bishops of the Philippines in their Statement of January 2006 (Annex A). The powerful divisions within the Department of the Environment and Natural Resource (DENR), such as the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB), have full information in the mining permit processes, while, in stark contrast, the DENR’s environmental environment al and social departm departments ents are often kept iin n the dark. When diff differences erences o off opinion arise, the DENR tends to side with the mining corporations against their environmental environment al bureau bureaus. s. Thi Thiss iiss a classic case of regulatory capture: “th “thee Government’s regulatory agency that is supposed to be acting in the public interest becomes dominated by the very industry that it should be supervising”. 7  Likewise, the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) has been obstructed from executing its mandate in the interests of “harmonizing” IPRA legislation with the goals of the DENR-MBG and the Mining Act. The 2007 Report,  Mining in the Philippines: Concerns and Conflicts highlighted the extent to which the World Bank was implicated in the expansion of mining in the Philippines. Despite historica historicall prob problems lems with mining and a llegacy egacy of 800 aband abandoned oned mines, the Bank was one of the major actors influencing the Mining Act of 1995. Although the Bank’s support for mining diminished in the late 1990s, it was announced in 2008 that the private sector arm of the World Bank Group, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), is considering massive investment in the Philippine projects of a Canadian mining company, Mi Mindo ndoro ro Resources Ltd. This This is extremely worrying. This controversial move is widely opposed by campaigners in the Philippines Philippines concerned about larg large-scale e-scale corporate mining. The IFC’s resumption of mining seems to undermine the position of the rest of the World Bank Group to stay out of mining in the Philippines. In all, all, mining is reducin reducing g the options for future generations of Fili Filipinos. pinos. The llesson essonss of the 2001-2004 independent World Bank-funded Extractive Industry Review (EIR) 8  have yet to be learnt in the Philippines. Mining has never been effectively integrated into the Philippines National Sustainable Developmentt plans. In a November 2 Developmen 2007 007 statement to a lawyers’ conference in Mindanao, a former Supreme Court Justice quoted then DENR Secretary Angelo 7

  http://www.reference.com/browse/regulatory%20capture

8

  The 2001-2004 Extractive Industries Review was chaired by Dr Emil Salim, former Environmental Minister of Indonesia, and Chair of the UN World Summit on Sustainable Development, WSSD 2002. The EIR’s final report identified three main conditions that must exist in a country before the World Bank should consider supporting extractive projects: transparent pro-poor governance, based on the rule of law, including the notion that an equitable share of a project’s revenues should go to the local community; respect for human rights, including labor rights, women’s rights, and Indigenous Peoples’ rights to their land and resources; a revision of the World Bank’s own policies to ensure they promote social and environmental policies, including banning involuntary resettlement and destructive practices like the disposal rivers or seas. Mining obligation obli gation to obtain the free and prior informed consentofoftailings affectedincommunities should alsocompanies’ be enshrined.

xiii

 

  Reyes’ statement  that the financial benefits from mining at present range from “zero to nil”.9  The authors of this report believe that when the costs of environmental and social damage and the costs of decommissioning, rehabilitation and restoration are included, the net figure will in fact be negative. There is a need to apply the Precautionary Principle in all decisions pertaining to large-scale mining in the Philippines. This applies to national and local governments, corporations and investors. The combination of corruption, militarization, human rights abuses and the small size of many of the thousands of islands where millions of poor people depend upon an environment already under pressure, together with the Philippine’s climatic and geographic conditions, argue strongly for adherence to this principle. Increased investments in gold in response to the global financial crisis only serve to compound environmental damage, exacerbating the on-going food crisis. As a result of the authors’ field visits to a number of proposed and existing mining locations on the islands of Mindoro and Mindanao, combined with our various experiences and discussions, we would like to make recommendations to the Philippine Government, mining corporations, development agencies, the investment community and potentially-impacted communities to ensure that mining does not undermine undermi ne the food b base ase of the country. In making recommendations, we feel it is essential to point out that, based on our interactions with the various affected communities, local government officials and civil society groups, we noted a clear and disturbing lack of confidence in existing government processes. processes . In parti particular, cular, the experience of indigenou indigenouss communiti communities, es, who are in theory entit entitled led under the 1 1997 997 Indigenous Peop Peoples les Rights Act to a legal right to Free and Prior Informed Consent over any development within their ancestral domains, suggests that in practice they are provided with little or no protection while their decision decisionss and iindigenous ndigenous traditions and processes are not respected. Ti Time me and time again, communities complained that their sentiments and wishes had been ignored or distorted in favor of advancing mining development. The deterioration in the credibility of Government processes of licensing mining operations seems to the aut authors hors a seri serious ous and dee deepening pening problem: this and the potentially potential ly calamitous impacts of mini mining ng on the coun country’s try’s food producing capaci capacity ty are the key concerns that need immediate attention. The authors’ overarching recommendation is therefore for the government of the Philippines to declare a Moratorium on any new mining development. A review of existing mining projects by a credible independent body is also necessary to determine determi ne if they impact on food produci producing ng capacity, afford adequate protection to the environment and respect existing legal provisions and rights, including the requirement requir ement to obtain Indigenous Peoples’ Free aand nd Prior Informed Informed Cons Consent. ent. Base Based d on their experience and extensive analysis of the issues facing the Philippines, the authors firmly believe that this Moratorium and review are fundamental to restoring the Philippine Government’s credibility, protecting the environment, upholding human rights and guaranteeing the food securi security ty o off the Ph Phili ilippine ppine peop people. le. 9

www.newsbreak.com.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3975&Itemid=88889094: A  ntonio T. Carpio, 30 November November 2007.

xiv

 

 

Summary recommendations to the Philippine Government A1 

Declare a Moratorium on Mining

In accordance with the widespread call from civil society, Indigenous Peoples and the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), a Moratorium on mining should be declared in the Philippines and a credible independent body established to review all existing contentious mining operations. In particular, no mining should take place in the areas visited by the authors and addressed in the case studies, namely in Mindanao: 1) Midsalip, Zamboanga del Sur, 2) Libay, Zamboanga del Norte, 3) Tampakan, South Cotabato, 4) Pujada Bay, Davao Oriental; and in 5) Victoria, Mindoro Island; and in 6) Sibuyan Island (see Case Studies 1 -6). -6). Mining iin n these locations would cause massive environm environment ent problems  jeopardizi  jeopard izing ng foo food d security and suppli supplies es by d damaging amaging agriculture and fisheries. This Moratorium should remain operational until structures and processes are in place that enjoy public confidence, especially the confidence of those communities whose lives, livelihoods and environment would be potentially adversely affected by mining. Revised processes and structural changes in line with the following recommendations will be necessary to ensure this.

A2 

Prioritize Food Production

In a hierarchy of policies, the highest priority should be given to domestic staple food production.. Mineral explorat production exploration ion and mining should only be devel developed oped if and where it is cons consistent istent wi with th this. The liberalization and promotion of the mining indust industry ry should be de-prioritized in the Philippine Government’s economic policy.

A3  Ensure that Department of Agriculture Prevails over Mining Departments (DENR-MGB)  Give precedence to those Government departments that have responsibility for food production and food security. security. Thi Thiss should entail consultation cons ultation and rrespect espect for the planning processes and decisions of local government.

A4

Suspend the Conversion of Agricultural Lands to Othe Otherr Uses

Extend the duration and scope of Administrative Order No. 226, issued in May 2008. The processing and approval of all agricultural land conversi con version on applicati applications ons sshould hould be suspended. This should include the conversion of upland ecosystems upon which the productivity of downstream agricultural lands and fisheries are dependent.

A5

Establish an Extractive Industries Coordin Coordination ation Committee

Set up a multi-sectoral and inter-departmental coordinating mechanism or committee for extractive industries. Thi Thiss comm committee ittee would be responsible for reviewing, monitoring, evaluating and approving or rejecting all extractive industry projects. Credible civil society and Indigenous Peoples’ representatives should participate in this committee on an equal footing with Government.

xv

 

 

A6 Address Decision-ma Decision-making king National Executive Powers

Conflicts

between

Local

an and d

The legislature should urgently address the on-going conflicts between National and Local executive powers in relation to the authorization of mining. The principle of subsidiarity should prevail and give respect to decisions taken by local or regional governments consistent with their sustainable development plans. Participation of civil society society advocates shou should ld be ensured with oversig oversight ht from con congress gress or the senate.

A7 Restructure the Department of the Environment and Natu Natural ral Resources (DENR) Restructure the DENR to eliminate the conflict of interest in relation to its contradictory contradic tory roles of promoti promoting ng mini mining ng and conservi conserving ng the env envir ironment. onment. Create a National Environmental Management Agency which would independently enforce environmental laws and regulations (in line with the World Bank’s recommendation  equivalent to environmental protection agencies that Bank, ) equivalent see section 8.1 on World Bank, ) operate in other countries. Congress should act upon the bill that would make this possible.

A8

Revoke the Philippine Mining Act (199 (1995) 5) RA 7942

Revoke this Act immediately and replace it with legislation which is consistent with the Philippine Constitution, applies the Precautionary Principle and adequately protects human rights, Indigenous Peoples’ rights, and the environment, while regulating mining for the public interest and ensure that the State has an adequate share of the benefi b enefits ts as o owner wner in trust of the resources.

A9

Uphold the Right to Food and Stop Human Rights Abuses

A9.1 Uphold its human rights obligations, especially in relation to the right to food. This requires guaranteeing that the Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and related agreements do not unfairly compete with, or violate, the right of communities to food security, a healthy environment and Indigenous Peoples’ self-determination rights. A9.2 Ensure that Peace Negotiations are given primacy over the interests of the extractive in areas directly affected armed or impacted conflict, in Mindanao.industries Investments in areas with ongoing conflictbyare usuallyparticularly accompanied by the proliferation of arms and militarization and lead to serious human rights violations, further jeopardizing the well-being of the community. A9.3 Stop the use of military, police, paramilitary or any other armed groups to suppress legitimate objectors to mining operations. Prosecute all those responsible for human rights abuses, including including of officer ficerss un under der whose comma command nd such abuses occur. A9.4 Ensure that independent technical monitoring on the impact of mining is mandatory mand atory and enforced. Monitoring of air, soil and water quality down downstream stream of mining operations should address impacts on yields of agricultural and fisheries produce and on the health of communities, particularly women and children. Companies should be held accountable for any negative effects detected or observed. Defaulting on environmental and health regulations should lead to immediate suspension of operati operations. ons.

xvi

 

 

A10 Enforce International Standards and Best P ractice A10.1 Require adherence to best practice and international standards and full respect for national legislation that puts all nationally declared watersheds off-limits to mining. Extend this prohibition to all other watershed watershedss decl declared ared by llocal ocal and regi regional onal governments to be critical. A10.2 should be issued to proponents with acceptable track recordsMining in termspermits of respect for human rights rightsonly and the environment. A10.3 The Government should establish effective legal mechanisms to hold companies to account for environmental damage, human rights violations and all practices involving any form of bribery or corruption. It should ensure that departments responsible for agriculture, fisheries, health, and tourism, as well as local government gover nment u units nits take effecti effective ve legal acti action on in the event o off a mining company causing environmental, health or social problems.

A11 Carry out Strategic Environmental Assessments A11.1 Carry out a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) prior to any consideration of exploration or mining in an area or region. A11.2 Use the output of the ‘Philippine Biodiversity Conservation Priority-setting Program’ the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan as the cornerstone of the National Sustainable Development Strategy. (See Annex H)

A12 Restore Meaningful Assessments (ESIAs)

Environmental

and

Social

Impact

A12.1 Restore credible ESIAs, guaranteeing checks-and-balances, transparency of information and a grievance mechanism. Eliminate the potential for their automatic approval and provide the public with the possibility of rejecting projects. A12.2 Revoke Memorandum Order No. 2007-08 which declared that permits and clearances by the Local Government Units are no longer required in the processing of Environmental Compliance Certificates (ECCs).

A13 Ensure that there are no “Double Standards” Secure written assurances from foreign mining companies that they will follow host and home country legislation governing mining, whichever standard is higher.

A14 Stabilize Reforestation

Livelihoods

of

Indigenous

Peoples

through

Involve Indigenous Peoples in the protection of water catchment areas by accelerating reforestation and watershed management and ensuring sustainable livelihoods that benefit Indigenous Peoples and improve downstream conditions for farming and fishing communities.

xvii

 

 

A15 Uphold the Right to Self-Determinati Self-Determination on and Obtain Fr Free ee and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) A15.1 Ratify International Labour Organization Convention 169 and ensure the genuine implementation of the Philippine Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) and the UN Declaration on the Rights of the Indigenous Peoples. Indigenous Peoples’ right to self-determination and their priority rights to ancestral domains should be given precedence over the economic interests of mining companies. A15.2 Put a halt to the current manipulati manipulation on of FPIC process processes es by ensuring that a) potential adverse impacts to communities and ecosystems are fully disclosed; b) Indigenous Peoples’ customs and practices are respected; c) independent and accountable oversight and grievance mechanisms are established; and d) bribery of all forms is eliminated. Revise IPRA’s FPIC guidelines to ensure that they comply with national and international commitments. A15.3 Ensure adheren adherence ce wi with th the spirit and letter of IPRA and the UN Dec Declaration laration on the Rights of Indigenou Indigenouss Peoples. To achieve thi this, s, the Nati National onal Commission on Indigenous Peoples must become representative of, and accountable to, Indigenous Peoples and be allocated adequate resources to fulfill its mandate.

A16 Enforce the Pollute Polluterr Pays Principle  Enforce the Polluter Pays Principle, specifying how it will be applied and enforced and ensure that mining companies take out mandatory environmental insurance coverage adequate to short and long term potential risks before granting a mining permit (see A17 below).

A17 Implement M andatory Environmental Insurance Coverage Rescind the suspension of and implement the DENR guidelines for Mandatory Environmental Environmen tal Insu Insurance rance Coverage (MEIC) of 6th April 2005. (see B7 below). below).

A18 Implement the Extractive IIndust ndustries ries Transparency In Initi itiative ative Sign and adhere to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) and publish details of all payments, taxes and royalties made by mining companies. Implement EITI in accordance with the six criteria, ensuring participation by genuine self-selected representatives of civil society groups at each stage of the process.  

A19 Ensure W Water ater Quality and Prevent A Acid cid Mine Drainage Ensure that a company has in place measures, including best practice closed loop water systems, to ensure ensure the water q quality uality downstream of mi mining ning operations. Require proof of mechanisms and plans for prevention or treatment of Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) prior to granting permission to mine. Proof that the International Network for Acid Prevention’s goals can be met in high risk areas, such as areas prone to seismic activity or typhoons, should be obtained. Active and immediate treatment of any AMD that does occur is mandatory, such as by annual applications of limestone or water treatment plants. (See Chapter 4 Box 4 and Recommendation B7 Below)

xviii

 

 

A20 Enforce Regul Regulations ations on Cyanide Use and Conside Considerr Banning IItt Ensure greater enforcement of existing regulations on cyanide use. Establish an independent commission to examine cyanide use in heap leach mining and consider banning its use in line with recent developments in other countries.

A21 Carry out Impact-Benef Impact-Benefit it Agreements  Where there is community agreement to proceed with a project, establish a legally binding Impact-Benefit Agreement upon completion of FPIC and ESIA processes.

xix

 

 

Summary recommendations to Mining Corporations  In light of the th e enormous threat t hreat t o food security, human rights and the environment environment  posed by the massive massive expansion of mining mining in the Philippines, the authors echo the widespread call call for a Moratorium on any new mining development. They call call on the  Mining Industry to refrain from applying for or o r developing developing any new mining projec p rojectt in the Philippines until the protections outlined above (A1 to A20) are adequately addressed.

B1

Follow International Standa Standards rds and Best Practice

Commit in writing that the mining company will adhere to best practices and international standards, including all local, national and international human rights and environm environmental ental legislation, treaties and declarations. The comp company any should also commit in writing to taking full responsibility for the actions of its subcontractors.

B2

Avoid “Double Standards”

Guarantee compliance with home country and host country legislation and standards. (See A13 Above.)

B3 Zones” nes”in  conflict zones, Indigenous Peoples’ ancestral Do not Respect apply to “No-Go explore orZo mine domains without their Free Prior Informed Consent, sacred sites, protective watersheds and water catchments and other “Sensitive Areas” or “No-Go Zones” (see Chapter 4 Box 3).

B4

Ensure Free and Prior Informed Consent (FP (FPIC) IC) is Obtained

Obtain the FPIC of Indigenous Peoples before starting exploration or mining operations if the land on which the company wishes to mine is land that Indigenous Peoples use, own or traditionally occupy. (see A15 Above).

B5 Prepare and Budget for Mine Closure When Applying for Permits Provide as part the up initial budget all costs of decommissioning, rehabilitation, restoration and of clean of the minefor area, tailings, and open pits, including social costs (such as training in decommissioning before a mine is closed).

B6

Comply with the Polluter Pays P rinciple (PPP)  

Comply with the PPP by setting up an escrow account to guarantee independence from the company adequate to pay for any and all pollution its mining operations might cause.

B7

Take out Industrial Insurance and Set up Performance Bonds

Take out performance bonds, issued by an insurance company or a bank, to cover accidents and damages. Post a bond for each speci specific fic mine before exploration begins. The bonds must be long dated so that negative impacts, such as acid mine drainage, can be addressed ev en ifpubli it iissc before detected year years after a mi mine ne has closed. Insurance guarante guarantees es mu must st be even made public m ini ining ngsbegins.

xx

 

   

B8

Ensure Water Quality 

Ensure and publicly guarantee that water quality downstream from a mine matches or exceeds upstream water quality. There should be no discharge or outflow of any pollution, including acid mine drainage, into natural water bodies during operations and after mine mine closure. The Internat International ional Network for Acid Prevention’ Prevention’ss goals must be met in all areas, especially high high risk areas such as those tho se prone to seismic ac activity tivity or typhoons.

B9

Do not Dispose of Tailings in Rivers

Companies must not carry out any riverine tailings disposal.

B10

Do not Dispose of Tailings at Sea

Companies must not practice Submarine Tailing Disposal (STD) or offshore disposal of tailings.

B11

Do not Use Cyanide 

Do not use cyanide in areas of high rainfall that are seismically active, where agriculture, particularly rice cultivation, is practiced, or in areas that have significant population densities downstream. As mandated by P Philippine hilippine law, projects th that at have been permitted to use cyanide must recover it.

B12

Employ Environmental Professional Professionalss

Employ permanent in-house and experienced environmental officials and empower them to veto any projects that fail to meet environmental standards.

B13

Employ Social Science Professi Professionals onals

Employ social scientists, anthropologists and human rights experts and empower them to veto projects that violate national legislation and or international human rights standards.

xxi

 

 

Summary recommendations to Development Agencies, NGOs, World Bank  In light of the th e enormous threat t hreat t o food security, human rights and the environment environment  posed by the massive massive expansion of mining mining in the Philippines, the authors echo the widespread call call for a Moratorium on any new mining development. They call call on the global development community to support this call and discourage governments, mining companies and investors from developing any new mining projects in the Philippines until the protections outlined above (A1 to A20) are adequately addressed.

C1 Encourage the Philippine Government to Implement Recommendations Vigorously encourage the Philippine Government to follow the recommendations set out above, particularly those on human rights, rule of law, good governance, industry best practice and better protection for Indigenous Peoples, the environment and food security. securi ty. Provide an example to government agencie agenciess by updating and disseminati disseminating ng internal policies on Indigenous Peoples to reflect the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

C2

Help the Philippine Government Achieve Food Security

Foster dialogue with the Philippine Government on how to ensure that mining does not jeopardize poverty reduction programs, food security and agriculture. Support departments involved in food production, irrigation and environmental protection, especially through research examining links between mineral extraction and impacts on food producti production. on.

C3

Support Capacity Building within Civil Society Institutions 

Support capacity-building through education on the extractive industries within civil society and academia and encourage their involvement in independent monitoring of decision-making processes regarding the mining industry.

C4 Strengthen & Civil Society Support institution Government strengthening and advocate thatInstitutions the Department of the Environment and Natural Resources’ two conflicting functions, namely protection of the environment environment on the o one ne hand and the promoti promotion on of mining on the o other, ther, should not be maintained under one and the same Department. (See A7 above) C5

Monitor “No Go Zo Zones” nes”

Monitor and help prevent mining companies from gaining access to “No-Go Zones”, especially in areas with ongoing armed conflict. (See Chapter 4 Box 3)

C6

Engage International Dono Donorr Community

Development Agencies, NGOs and the World Bank Group should all use their influence with the international donor community to pressure the Government of the Philippines to act responsibly and comply with its own laws and international obligations.

xxii

 

 

C7 Influence Companies

Home

Country

Governments,

Inv Investo estors rs

and

Development Agencies, NGOs and the World Bank Group should also urge those foreign governments that actively support mining in the Philippines to review their policy in this sector. These governments should also be urged to enact extra-territorial legislation to hold their companies to account. This is particularly important for the British, Canadian and Australian governments where most of the mining companies operating in the Philippines are based.

C8 Assist Communities Geohazzards

with

Mapping

of

Ecosystems

and

Development agencies and NGOs should assist mining affected communities to map the resources that sustain them (forests, rivers, rice fields and all agricultural and, marine ecosystems). This report and the maps provided at the end of each case study (available at http://www.piplinks.org/maps) provide a model that can be used. It is suggested that in order to optimize the effectiveness of such maps they be integrated with the maps developed through the Philippine Biodiversity Conservation Priorities setting Program (PBCPP) which highlight geohazards and priority conservations areas. see Annex H. Such maps would provide communities with the capacity to better assess and make informed decisions regarding on their liv livelihoods, elihoods, envir environment onment and food securi security. ty. the impact mining would have

C9 The World Bank Group (WBG) should not Support Mining Expansion in the Philippines The World Bank Group should: C9.1 Uphold iits ts mandate tto o help rreduce educe world poverty, protect the environmen environmentt and assist the Philippine Government to meet its Millennium Development Goals, targets while respecting the conclusion of the 2004 Extractive Industries Review. It should fully implement its guidelines and safeguard procedures which, if applied, would under current conditions preclude investment in most, if not all, Philippine mining projects. This would include the proposed IFC equity investment of up to Can$5 million in a project of a Canadian mining Junior, Mindoro Resources Ltd. (MRL), which is planning operations throughout the Philippines. C9.2 Ensure that its g guidelines uidelines and safeguard p policies olicies are upd updated ated to be in accordance with the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, particularly in relation to the requirement to o obtain btain Free and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC).  C9.3 Con Continue tinue to support the clean-up of abandoned mines in the Philippines. This must not be used as an excuse to recommence mining in previously abandoned mining mini ng sites. Such clean-up project projectss should al also so be subject to llocal ocal acceptance acceptance cri criteria teria and processes.

xxiii

 

 

Summary recommendations to the Investor Community  In light of the enormous threat to food security, security, human rights and and the environment environment  posed by the massive expansion expansion of mining in the Philippines, Philippines, the authors echo echo the widespread call for a Moratorium Morat orium on any new mining development. They call on the global investment community to refrain from investing in mining project in the Phi hilippines lippines until the th e protections outlined above (A1 to A20) are adequately addressed.

As a minimum, investors are advised to exercise extreme caution when considering funding fund ing exploration or mining activities in the Phili Philippines. ppines. Mining, as currently practiced in the Philippines, poses extremely high social, environmental and financial risks. It is therefore essential that rigorous due diligence regarding potential human rights and environmental impact of projects is conducted. cond ucted.

D1

Determine the Governance Quality

Assess the extent to which the rule of law prevails.

D2

Examine Track Records

Assess the environmental and social track record of the mining corporations on the ground by due diligence with communities and by engaging with NGOs in home countries that work with them. (See Annex F London Mining Declaration for list of NGOs active in this area.) a rea.)

D3

Assess Policies and No Norms rms

Assess the policies and norms adopted by the mining corporations and their implementation in practice.

D4

Review Past Experience

Verify that an adequate corporate framework to ensure social and environmental prudence is in place by consulting with communities and NGOs who have recognized competence in working with impacted communities. (See Annex F London Mining Declaration for list of NGOs active in this area.)

D5

Ensure Prudent Policies

Ensure that a prudent set of policies is in place with regard to Indigenous Peoples’ rights.

D6

Require a Panel of Experts

Verify that an external independent high-level Panel of Social and Environmental Experts has been engaged and obtain o btain and revie review w their reports.

D7

Review Environmental and Social Assessments (ESIAs)

Ensure independent review of the ESIAs for adequacy; obtain copies of these and check that this information has been made available to communities.

xxiv

 

 

D8

Insist on Adequate Bonds and Insurance

Check that social and environmental performance bonds or industrial insurance commensurate commensur ate with potential social and environmental risk riskss and the decomm decommissi issioning oning phase of the project have been posted.

D9

Examine In Independent dependent Third Pa Party rty Audits

Review the history of third party audits conducted in relation to their projects.

D10 Ensure Free and Prior IInformed nformed Consent (FP (FPIC) IC) is Obtained Ensure that the proponent has indicated if Indigenous Peoples will be impacted by proposed mining projects and, if this is the case, has obtained their Free and Prior Informed Consent Consent (FPIC) (FPIC).. Check the proponent’s track rec record ord with regard to respect for FPIC in practice. Failure to obtain an impacted indigenous community’s FPIC should constitute groun grounds ds for di disinvestment sinvestment.. Check iiff the company has proceed proceeded ed with mining operations in the past without the FPIC of iimpacted mpacted communities. (see  A15 Above)

xxv

 

 

Summary recommendations to Mining-Impacted Communities  In light of the enormous threat to commu communities’ nities’ food security, security, human rights and the environment posed by the massive expansion expansion of mining mining in i n the Philippines, the authors echo and support their calls for a Moratorium on any new mining development and a review of review of existing exi sting contentious projects by an ind indepen ependent dent review body .  . 

This report and the associated maps have been prepared primarily to ensure that the voices and concerns of mining-affected communities, especially Indigenous Peoples, are heard and heeded and their human rights and food security are realized.

E1

Challenge inappropriate FPIC FP IC processes

Due to the th e abuses of FPIC processes, one piece of advi advice ce incr increasingly easingly given is to sh shun un or boycott all FPIC processes until a) these processes are brought into line with the spirit and intent of IPRA, guaranteeing respect for Indigenous Peoples customary laws and practices, b) effective measures are adopted to eliminate any subsequent manipulation of FPIC by companies and/or government agencies, including the National Commission for Indigenous People, and c) appropriate grievance mechanisms have been established to address any related violations of Indigenous Peoples’ rights. While the authors understand the frustration leading to this advice and recognize this is a valid strategy in attempting to rectify the situation, it is clear in some cases this approach has resulted in unrepresentative unrepresentative voices and bogus b ogus groups b being eing gi given ven a free unchallenged place in such meetings and thereby allowed them illegitimately to grant "consent" on behalf of those boycotting these meetings. An additional strategy, which might afford more safeguard and be used as a basis for upholding community decisions, is to ensure - whether in attendance or in boycott of FPIC processes – that the clear sentiments of the community are made known, not only to the NCIP and local company officials but also to various levels of the company and Government divisions and departments and to independent groups and the press. This is best done in writing. The authors believe it is essential to register and re-register opposition at every opportunity so that those far away can be truly guided by community sentiment.

E2 Challenge inappropriate Environmental and Social Impact (ESIA) Assessment Processes Demand effective participation in ESIA processes impacting the community. The community has a right to full disclosure of technical information from mining companies, government bodies and financial institutions covering the proposed activities. Information demanded should include the potential risks and cumulative short and long term environmental and social impacts and the measures undertaken to address these. It should also include details of the risk r isk assessments performed and all assumptions made. Insist on clarity with regard to implementation of similar projects under comparable climatic and geographic, demographic conditions.

xxvi

 

  Ensure that all this information is independently reviewed and critiqued and presented to the community in an understandable manner. Where this information is not forthcoming or the contents are not no t in line with the communiti communities es expectations, follow the advice provided in E1 above and immediately lodge written requests and complaints with as many implicated parties as possible. Demand effective community participation in monitoring processes and the establishment of effective grievance mechanisms with provisions for adequate compensation.

E3

Challenge Abuses through Legal Mech Mechanisms anisms

The authors encourage all communities and local authorities adversely affected by mining impacts to continue to explore and pursue all avenues available within the law at local, national and international levels, to register their concerns and aspirations and seek redress for wrongs. The authors offer their continued support to all communities in efforts efforts to reali realize ze their food secu security rity and sustainable devel developm opment ent aspirations. The Working Group on Mining in the Philippines is willing to assist communities by providing information on how to raise complaints to international mechanism and bring community statements and letters of concern to the attention of mining companies and their shareholders.

E4

Consider Setting up Citizens’ Advisory Councils

While upland and rural communities bear the immediate impact of mining, large urban populations who are also impacted by the rising cost of food prices and who have easier access to financial and technical expertise could look at approaches to establishing independent citizens’ councils, following a model implemented in Alaska. These councils would be accountable to the community and be responsible for reviewing, mon monitoring itoring and reporting on the impacts of mining. Such councils should operate independently from the government, the mining industry and the military. Tr Transp ansparency arency and accountability mus mustt be guaranteed. Members of the council coun cilss should be el elected ected or selected by their own constituencies. They should respect existing indigenous and other community-based structures or groups and, where requested, compliment and interface with them.

E5 Raise Awareness of Impacts of Mining on the Environment, Food Security and Human Rights Information dissemination and awareness-raising are vital for tackling issues pertaining to the impacts of mining on the environment, food security and human rights. The internet provides a useful and practical medium for this, in particular through the posting of video clips of mining operations and their impacts on youtube. Communities in the Philippines and throughout the world have already done so and have generated internation international al attention to their plight. These vi video deo clips, w which hich may provide communities considering mining with a greater understanding of its potential impact, can viewed at www.youtube.com by searching with the key words “Mining Philippines”. Informat Information ion on iissues ssues facing commun communiti ities es in the Philippines and elsewhere in relation to mining can also be found at www.minesandcommunities.org.

xxvii

 

 

REPORT INTRODUCTION The Phili Philippines ppines has has rich and and diverse natural resources. However, However, these resources are being rapidly depleted due a variety of mutually reinforcing negative factors: high population pressure with the majority of the poor deriving their income from natural ecosystems; advancing industrialization, conflicts of i nterest nterest between long term environmental concerns and short term t erm  profit motives motives in particular particular regarding logging logging and mining; absence of  political will (and th therefore erefore of allocation of resources) to enforce effective implementation of a relatively comprehensive comprehensive legal and regulatory regu latory regime regime and lack of clearly defined defi ned mandates and responsibility between the various layers of central and local authorities.  The European Commission, 2005 10 

The Philippines, an archipelago of 7,107 islands, is rich in minerals: gold, copper, chromite, nickel, coal, limestone, iron ore, silver, platinum, palladium and uranium (although much is cons considered idered llow-grade ow-grade ore). Many of these deposits, however, are located in areas of rich biodiversity which contain the country’s few remaining forests, in geohazard zones prone to typhoons, earthquakes, landslides and volcanoes, or within within th thee ancestral domain o off Indigenous Peoples. Large-scale mining in the Philippines typically consists of open-pit mining of minerals, especially copper and gold ores, and strip-mining for nickel. To extract the ores, thousands of tonnes of earth and rocks have to be removed, forests cleared, and water and drainage syst systems ems diverted. Strip-mining for nickel nicke l is especially problematic as nickel-rich earth is stockpiled causing massive damage to the land. The industry also requires large volumes of water for mining, milling and waste disposal, directly competing with the water necessary for rice growing, agricultural production producti on and human needs. Such mining has had severe environmental impacts, not only in the areas mined, but also on land, land, waters and seas further afield. Rivers, lakes and irrigation systems have been polluted by mine tailings and toxic metals; forest loss has led to rivers drying up in some seasons and flooding flooding in others. Yet, since 1992, the Government of the Philippines has been pursuing an aggressive policy to “revitalize” the mining industry, potentially opening up 30% of the country’s coun try’s lland and area to mini mining. ng. The resulting massive increase in mi mining ning projects will accelerate the rate at which the country’s remaining vital tropical forest cover is being lost. Apart from exacerbating devastating soil erosion, such expanded mi mining ning will further damage watersheds and the 371 major river systems that are still biologically alive. Loss of watershed functions directly reduces the water supply and irrigation. irrigation.

10

 

http://www.delphl.ec.europa.eu/docs/cep%20Philippines.pdf:

European

Commission,

2005.

Philippines country environmental profile. Makati City, Delegation Delegati on of the European Commissi Commission on tto o the Philippines Philippines.. 75 p. p.

1

 

  In July 2006, the Right Honorable Clare Short MP, former UK Minister of International Development, led a Fact Finding Mission on Mining to the Philippines, the report of which,  Mining in the th e Philippines: Concerns and Conflicts was published 11 in 2007.  This report noted that: “ Mining in the Philippines is being developed at a speed…scale…and speed…scale…and in a manner likely to cause massive long-term environmental damage and social  problems. Current mining plans will undermine the Government’s Government’s own strategy for sustainable development by destroying or severely damaging critical eco-systems, including watersheds, rivers, marine eco-systems and important agricultural production areas.” The report raised particular concerns about the implications for food security if mining in the Philippines continues on the scale that was planned. “ The [Fact Finding Mission] team fears further damage to the environment by mining…will increase the threat to the country’s long-term food security and the survival of future genera g enerations tions of Filipinos….  International experience suggests suggests that if pursued on the scale currently currently  proposed by the Philippine Philippine government, mining could weaken the food security of affected communities and even of the country as a whole. Local communities feared that pollution and siltation of rivers may deplete water sources, reducing rice production and fisheries.”

The food crisis at the beginning of 2008 which was linked to the shortage and consequent skyrocketing price of rice, the stable food for Filipinos, alerted many Filipinos to the urgency of this concern regarding the country’s food security. Thus a stark choices now face the Philippines: a few years of mining or thousands of years of sufficiency of irrigated rice and fisheries production? If mining is to make a positive contribution to national development, it will have to fit within the country’s sustainable sustainab le developmen developmentt strategy. The Philippines is one of the ttop op 10 coun countries tries in the world likely likely to be most affe affected cted by c limat limatee change, and the impacts of mining mining w will ill compound compoun d the eenvironmen nvironmental tal prob problems lems the country already faces. As tthe he then Secretary of the Government Department for the Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Heherson Alvarez, put it in 2001: “ What does it gain a nation to be short-sighted and merely think of money when … irreparable damage to the environment will cost human lives, health, and livelihood capacity of our farmers and fisherfolk endangering the food security of our people?”12  This second report, Philippines: Mining or Food?,  follows up on the issue of food security securi ty highlig highlighted hted in the 2007 report. It is based o on n a fiel field d tr trip ip to the archi archipelago pelago by the authors, Robert Goodland and Clive Wicks, in February 2008. They visited a number of mining mining locations on the isl islands ands of Mindanao and Mi Mindo ndoro. ro. An iimpo mportant rtant part of the process has been a mapping exerci exercise se to demonstrate the overl overlap ap of mini mining ng 11

  “ Mining in the Ph Philippines: ilippines: Concerns and Conflicts” by by Doyle, C., Wicks, Wicks, C. and Nall Nally, y, F. 2007.

Society Societ y of St. Colu Columban, mban, Solihul Solihull, l, UK: 62 p. 12

  Philippine Star , 13th November 2001

2

 

  locations – both existing and proposed – with indigenous ancestral domains, watersheds and areas of environmental importance, all of which are critical for agriculture, fisheries and food security. It is hoped these maps will be usefu usefull tools for those campaigning against destructive large-scale mining.

This Report aims to: •

•

•

Outline the Philippine Government’s approach to mining in the light of emerging evidence of its social and environmental impacts. Support and inform people impacted by mining, and inform decision-makers. These include the governors, mayors, and local government officials whom the authors met duri du ring ng the field visits who asked for help to better understand the mining industry, its impacts and how they could protect their people from long-term harm. Ensure that aid agencies, banks, investors, foreign chambers of commerce, and governments supporting mining companies from their home countries are fully aware of the problems that the expansion of mining is causing for the Filipino people, and for their tropical islands archipelago and biodiverse environment, and especi especially ally with regard to impacts on Indig Indigenous enous Peoples. Peoples.

•

Foster a productive w working orking relationsh relationship ip between North and S South. outh. Greater cooperation would help to ensure that northern mining corporations are clear about local sentiments and concerns, while at the same time potentially impacted Indigenous Peoples, farmers, and fisherfolk are informed about mining proposals, their voices are heard, and they are involved in decisionmaking.

The Report is divided into three sections. The first contains eight chapters covering thematic areas of concern, the second covers the six case studies highlighted by the authors, with each one prompting its own set of recommendations, and the third section secti on concludes with the authors’ main cross-cutting recommendati recommendations. ons.

3

 

  ANNEX Report Table of Contents

Foreword to Second Mining Repo Report rt Message from Senator Aquilino Pimentel Jr Message from Bishop Bishop.. Zacarias C. Jimene Jimenez, z, DD

vii viii ix

.

EXECUTIVE EXECUTI VE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary recommend recommendations ations to the Phili Philippine ppine Governm Government ent Summary recommend recommendations ations to Mining Corpo Corporations rations Summary recommend recommendations ations to Development Agencies, NGOs, Wor World ld Bank Summary recommend recommendations ations to the Investor Community Summary recommend recommendations ations to Mining-Impacted Communities

xi xvi xxi xxii xxiiii xxv xxvii

INTRODUCTION

1

Chapter 1: Mining and Food Security 1.1 The Impo Importance rtance of Rice 1.2 The 2008 Food Price Frenzy 1.3 Peak Oil, Peak Food Food,, Peak Phos Phosphate, phate, Peak Water & Peak Stable Climate 1.4 Why Does the Philippines Impo Import rt Rice?

4 4 5 7 8

1.5

9

Reasons for Decreased Domest Domestic ic Rice Produ Production ction

Chapter 2: Mining and Forests 2.1 Deforestation Harms Rice and Fisheries 2.2 The Need for Watershed Conservation 2.3 Deforestation Increases Poverty 2.4 Indigenou Indigenouss Peoples and Forests 2.5 Rainforestation

11 11 13 13 13 14

Chapter 3: Mining and Marine Resou Resources rces 3.1 Mining and Fisheries 3.2 Pollution From Mining

15 15 15

Chapter 4: Flawed Governmen Governmentt Policy 4.1 Scale of the Mining Problem 4.2 Con Confli flict ct of Interest 4.3 DENR Promote Promotess Mining and Demotes Environment 4.4 Corrup Corruption tion in Environmental Governance 4.5 Philippine Min Mining ing Act, 1995 4.6 Separate Exploration from Exploitation 4.7 Post-Mining Rehab Rehabilitation ilitation Must Be Enforced 4.8 Governmen Governmentt and Society Split on the Benefits of Min Mining ing

18 18 20 20 22 23 29 29 32

Chapter 5: Indigeno Indigenous us Peoples 5.1 Indigenou Indigenouss Peoples and the National Comm Commission ission on Indigenous Peoples 5.2 The Role of the National Comm Commission ission on Indigenous Peoples 5.3 Rights of Ownership and Ancestral Domain

36 36 37 38

5.4 5.5

38 38

Right to Develop Lands and Natural Resou Right Resources rces The Right to Benefits

1

 

  5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9

Protections Afforded by Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act Free and Prior Informed Consen Consentt FPIC and ESIA Indigenou Indigenouss Peoples need Environmental and Social Impact Assessm Assessments ents

39 39 41 42

Chapter 6: Human Rights, Militarization and Mining 6.1 Human Rights and Mining 6.2 Official Repo Reports rts Documenting Human Rights Violations 6.3 Human Rights, Civil Society and the Catholic Church 6.4 The Human Security Act 6.4 Further Militarization of Mining Projects and Investmen Investmentt Defense Forces 6.5 The Relat Relationship ionship Between DENR and NCIP 6.6 DENR Engulfs NCIP

44 44 45 47 48 49 51 51

Chapter 7: Philippine Min Mining ing Econo Economics mics 7.1 Deficienc Deficiencies ies in Mining Econo Economics mics 7.2 Internalizing Currently Externa Externalized lized Costs 7.3 Policy Opt Options ions for Internalization 7.4 Benefit Allocation 7.5 The Resou Resource rce Curse 7.6 Impact-Benefit Agreements

53 53 54 54 55 55 57

7.7 7.8

59 61

Assessm Assessment ent of Cost Externalization in Philippine Mining Mining is the wrong Engine for Growth

Chapter 8: The Position of the International Agenc Agencies ies 8.1 The Wor World ld Bank Grou Group p 8.2 Internation International al Deve Development lopment Assistance to DENR

70 70 72

FIELD TRIP CASE STUDIES

73

Case Study 1: Iron Ore & other Minerals, Midsalip, Zamboanga del Sur - Mindanao Island 75 Background 75 Water, Food and Liv Livelihoo elihoods ds 77 The Threat of Mining in Midsalip 79 Potential Impacts and Opposition 82 Midsalip Visit 84 Midsalip Conclusion Conclusion,, Recomm Recommendation endation and Map 85 Case Study 2: Cop Copper per and Gold Mining Z Zambo amboanga anga del Norte - Mindanao Island Background Mining damage Future plans? Sibutad and Libay Visi Visitt Sibutad and Libay Conclusion, Recommendation and Map

94 94 95 98 99 100

Case Study 3: Copper and Gold Mining in Tampakan, South Cotabato – Mindanao Island 106 Background Threat of a huge open-pit copper and gold mine

106 108

2

 

  Uncertainty Raising Fears Visit to South Cotabato South Cotabo Conclusion, Recommendation and Map

113 118 121

Case Study 4: Nickel and Cobalt in Davao Oriental – Mindanao. The Hallmark Project Background Proposed Mining Environmental Environmen tal and Social Impacts Opposition and Deficiencies in Con Consultation sultation Visit to Pujada Bay / Mt Hamigu Hamiguitan itan Pujada Bay Conclus Conclusion, ion, Recommendation and Map

126 126 127 129 31 134 135

Case Study 5: Nicke Nickell Mining – Mindo Mindoro ro Island Background Mining Propo Proposal sal Opposition Indigenouss opposition Indigenou Visit to Mindo Mindoro ro Company continu continues es to plan Governor Issues Order to Stop Mining Activities

142 142 143 144 145 148 149 156

Mindoro Conclusion, Recommend Recommendation ation and Map

161

Case Study 6: Go Gold ld and Nickel Mining - Sibuy Sibuyan an Island Background Forest Resources Already Threatened Proposed Industrial Mining Opposition Visit to Sibuyan Sibuyan Island Conclusion, Recommendation and Map

172 172 173 173 175 176 177

Recommendations Recommendations Recommendations Recommendations Recommendations

181 191 196 199 202

Annex Annex Annex Annex Annex Annex Annex Annex

to the Phili Philippine ppine Governmen Governmentt to Mining Corpo Corporations rations to Development Agencies, NGOs & the Wor World ld Bank Group to the Investor Community to Mining-I Mining-Impacted mpacted Communities

A: Church Declarations and Positi Position on Papers on Mining B: Civil Soc Society iety Reports on Human Rights Violations C: Strategic Environm Environmental ental Assessm Assessment ent (SEA) D: Health Impact Assessm Assessment ent (HIA) E: Literature Cited and Guide to Further Information F: Mines and Communities (MAC): The Londo London n Mining Declarat Declaration. ion. G: Geohazards and Earthquakes in the Philippines H: Philippine Biodiversity Cons Conservation ervation Priorit Priorities ies

206 212 213 217 221 246 251 260

3

 

About the Authors  

Robert Goodland is an environmental scientist specializing in economic development. He advised the World Bank G Group roup from 1978 through 2001. He then became the technical director to H.E. Dr. Emil Salim s inde indep pende endent nt Extractive Industry Review (eir.org) of the World Bank Group s portfolio of oil, gas and mining projects. He was elected president of the International Association of Impact Assessment, and Metropolitan Chair of the Ecological Society of America. He was awarded the World Conservation Union s Coolidge medal in October 2008. ([email protected]) 󲀙

󲀙

󲀙

Cliv Clivee Wick ickss has 48 years of experience of working in engineering, agriculture and environment, specializing in the impact of extractive industries on the environment envir onment.. He iiss a v vice ice chai chairr o off IUC IUCN-CEES N-CEESP P (IUCN’ (IUCN’ss Commis Commission sion on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy) and co-chairs SEAPRISE (IUCNCEESP’s Wor Working king Gro Group up on the So Social cial and Envir Environmental onmental Acco Accountabili untability ty of the Private Sector). He worked in the international environmental movement for for the last 24 years, years, mainly with WWF UK. He headed WWF UK UK’s ’s African, Asian and Latin American programs, and represented WWF at G8, World Bank, International Finance Corporation, UNEP and UNDP meetings on extractive industries .([email protected]) .([email protected])

.. Perhaps reluctantly we come to acknowledge acknowledge that there are also scars which mark the surface of our earth: erosion, erosion, deforestation, deforestation, the squandering of the world’s mineral and and ocean resources in order to fuel an insatiable consumption. Some of you come from island nations whose very existence is threatened by rising water levels; others from nations suffering the effects of devastating drought. God’s wondrous creation is sometimes experienced as almost hostile hos tile to its stewards, stewards, even something something dangerous. dangerous. How can what what is “good” “good” appear so threatening? ...My dear friends, God’s creation is one and it is good. The concerns for nonviolence, sustainable development, justice and peace, and care for our environment are of vital importance for humanity.

His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, 23rd World Youth Day, Sydney, Australia, July 12-21, 2008 Photos of the fact-finding trip can be found on: http://workinggrouponmininginthephilippines.blogspot.com

Working Group on Mining in the Philippines (WGMP) 28 Redington Redington Road, London, London, NW3 NW3 7RB [email protected] 

1