SIERRA LEONE Analysis of the Oakland Institute report. Introduction

Transcription

1 SIERRA LEONE Analysis of the Oakland Institute report Introduction The report is an unfair, biased and incorrect document on the Socfinaf group activities in general and specifically in Sierra Leone. It is an accumulation of inaccurate information and deliberate, opportunistic misinterpretations. It is therefore not only indispensable to deny some points mentioned in the report, but even necessary to give additional information on the origin, objectives and operational practices of Socfinaf s Sierra Leone project. The comments on the Oakland report allow for an evaluation on the morality and intellectual honesty of the authors of such a report. Finally, it is regrettable that from the start The Oakland Institute considers the Government of Sierra Leone, its local leaders and elders as incompetent and corrupt. As if Africans cannot decide what is good or bad for them, regrettably a typical example of western intellectual paternalism. Some history During 2009 the Socfinaf group was approached by SLIEPA, an investment promotion agency of the Sierra Leone government, to study the opportunity to invest in the oil palm sector in Sierra Leone. Socfinaf was invited to an investor s forum in London by the Tony Blair foundation. The forum was also attended by his Excellency President Koroma of Sierra Leone. Besides the stable political and economic situation and the favourable agro-climatic conditions, SLIEPA documented the availability and accessibility of land, stressing the need for foreign investment as the global and sub-regional markets are characterized by an increasing demand-supply gap resulting in rising prices for vegetable oil in Sierra Leone. SLIEPA specifically mentioned that a fair and transparent process for leasing land had been established and that unlike many parts of the world, palm cultivation in Sierra Leone can be managed in such a way that operations do not displace food production or sensitive ecosystems. As a result, Socfinaf started prospection in the regions earmarked for development by the Sierra Leone government. The targeted areas are open land systems with bush fallow. Several consultations with government representatives, Members of Parliament, paramount and local chiefs, village elders and local population took place. Large numbers of underemployed young people and subsistence farmers were excited at the prospect of employment and investment coming. Finally it was decided to start the project in the Malen chiefdom, situated in South Western Sierra Leone. Project objectives The Sierra Leone project aims at the development of a modern, sustainable palm oil industry using the best agronomic and industrial practices. Adequate application of fertilisers, recycling of empty fruit bunches and self-sufficient industrial units will maximize production. This will allow for a partial satisfaction of the local urgent demand for vegetable oil. The modernisation of agriculture will allow Sierra Leone to be less dependent on food imports in the long run. 1

2 In addition, good road, administrative, industrial and social infrastructure will be created, boosting local commerce and community life. High employment, from agriculture labourers, technically qualified personnel (technicians, builders, carpenters, painters, accountants, computer scientists ) to local senior staff, will make the project area a new pole of development for Sierra Leone. Summary of operational practices After PUBLIC consultation and visiting and informing EACH settlement, a first development area was demarcated. And after a thorough Environmental and Social Impact Assessment by an independent consultancy company (STAR) a first concession of 6500 ha was granted by the Chiefdom. Land rates and land compensations were PUBLICLY discussed and PUBLICLY paid out. Particular attention was given to assure that no houses or settlements, nor rice producing areas, were affected and that a green belt was created around each settlement. Local chiefs and company representatives went from house to house to explain the situation and finally only 3600 ha of the original 6500 ha (for which the rent was paid) were retained for further development. All areas to be planted were GPS referenced and filed so that surfaces could be correctly calculated and compensated. The data are listed so that each landowner can reclaim land at the end of the lease. The approach is apparently appreciated as areas and villages that were left out in the first phase of development are now requesting to be included in the deal. As such, a further 5000 ha is earmarked for future development. What has been realised so far? A fully grown oil palm nursery has been established in the Malen area ha of land has been prepared for planting. All best practices were applied for land preparation and a leguminous cover crop will provide for soil protection and nitrogen enrichment of the overexploited, impoverished soil. Roads and bridges, connecting communities, have been built and existing road infrastructure of the chiefdom has been ameliorated. School infrastructure was erected and the capacity of the local hospital has been increased. Houses are currently being built and existing, abandoned houses were rehabilitated. Local commerce in the Malen chiefdom is thriving and the Government decided to locate the technical training school in the chiefdom. More than 1000 people are working for the project, having a huge impact on local commerce and community life: the market is bigger, a bakery was created in town and suppliers flock to the Malen chiefdom, a telecommunication mast has been installed allowing the isolated chiefdom to communicate with the outside world etc. 2

3 NGO involvement in the project As from the beginning of the project NGO operating in the Malen chiefdom (Hunger Hilfe, Green Scenery) made observations concerning our working procedures. At several occasions (documented) SAC proposed to work together with the above mentioned NGO s in order to obtain a more harmonious and efficient development in the area. This proposal was bluntly refused and it is therefore painful to observe that the arguments brought forward by the Oakland report are partially observations made by the NGO s. It is apparently easier to give negative comments rather than work together and take responsibility in a development project! Incorrect statements and false allegations in the Oakland report 1. Contrary to the statement in the report, all communities were properly informed and this was done publicly. All representatives of the sections of Malen signed. Lease agreements were drafted by local legal advisers and were fully approved by local and ministerial authorities. 2. The investment incentives for qualified investors are not unique to Socfinaf; they are applicable to all foreign agribusiness companies. In addition, Socfinaf provided for an additional 75,000 US$ social development fund for the people in the area that have no land so that the total community can benefit from its presence. 3. We strongly deny that there was pressure and intimidation by the company. At the specific request of the authorities, armed police was present at the payout ceremony as the amounts of money circulating were important. 4. Inadequate compensation and rental fees: the payments made by Socfinaf are far above the recommended Government rates and fees! Additionally, Socfinaf paid for 6500 ha while it is only exploiting 3600 ha! It is incorrect that other crops are not compensated: it is documented that ALL crops (also yearly) have been paid for. 5. Lack of fiscal return: again Socfinaf is submitted to Government laws and regulations. Investment incentives were approved by Government in a democratic process. One must also realise that a plantation investment is a long-term investment and that wealth is created for future generations. Oil palm only comes into full production 7 years after planting. 6. Corruption: this has to be proven by the Oakland Institute, it is far too easy to say. Western Eurocentric accusations! 7. Destruction of vital forest and agricultural land: false and ridiculous accusation. Satellite images can show that there was no forest in the area. Each village kept its food producing land, which is situated in the lower lying areas and deltas of the big rivers. 8. Appalling working conditions: The local labour law is applied by Socfinaf. There is indeed no medical insurance but workers are treated for free by the company at the state hospital and an ambulant clinic is present on the project. We apply the country s payment scale. Socfinaf cannot create an imbalance on the macro-scale of the country: today a Socfinaf s labourer is almost getting the same pay as a teacher and in time! 9. Lack of proper documentation: a point that can be considered, however, it is not fair to state this point as, for the moment, the land compensation program is still going on. 10. Destruction of biodiversity: wrong statement. The development area is a patchwork of green belts, oil palm plantations and low valley growth and agriculture. In fact the CO2 fixation of the area will be more important after the oil palm planting. 3

4 11. Water resources under threat: The project does not use more water than any other agricultural project. Annual rainfall is above 3000 mm annually. During the rainy season the valleys are inundated, the project cannot provoke water shortage!!! 12. Irregularities and legal flaws of the lease agreement: this is an accusation that should be addressed to the Government. All legal procedures of Sierra Leone were respected. Other inaccuracies in the Oakland report released to the press: - The Socfin Agricultural Corporation Sierra Leone (SAC) is not controlled by Vincent Bolloré. - Socfin SL (SAC) is not a subsidiary of the Belgian corporation Socfin. - The main shareholder is not Bolloré Investment. - No former colonial companies were bought up. - The Bolloré group is not expanding its investments in plantations. - The report forgets to mention that the accusations formulated by a group of NGO s in Cameroon were rejected by Court and considered false. - No deforestation took place in Liberia, on the contrary, an abandoned rubber plantation was rehabilitated, ensuring employment, schooling and medical care for thousands of Liberians in a country devastated by war. - Both the UN and the FIDH reports on the group s activities were already, point by point, formerly and publicly denied. Conclusions: Although it can be considered that some individuals might not agree with the approach of the development project in the Malen chiefdom, there is however an overwhelming majority of the local population, village elders, chiefs and paramount chiefs that see the long-term and sustainable benefits of this agro-industrial operation. The well balanced equilibrium between industrial plantation and native settlements and agriculture assures a harmonious development of the area. Allegations against the Bolloré group, whereby presumed African dictators, the current French president and even yacht vacations are mentioned, are in this context ad hominem, preposterous, frivolous and irrelevant to the case. It gives the impression of a political agenda rather than a factual report. The incorrect statements, the amateur-like analysis of the Group s activities, the false allegations, the dubious attitude of the involved NGO s make the objective reader wonder what the final objectives of such a report are. Verification: The deputy Minister of Agriculture, Honourable Mr. Ali Mansaray (ali_mans@yahoo.com), responsible for the follow up of the SAC project, can be contacted to either confirm or deny Socfin s observations to the Oakland report on SAC. 4

5 Legal Action The Socfin group reserves the right to undertake any legal action for defamation against the authors/publisher of the above mentioned report. 5