Member Info for coldcut

http://www.expectativa.ec/prefecto-de-imbabura-la-mineria-legal-cambiara-la-dinamica-economica-de-imbabura/
A brief but interesting article summarising comments made recently by the Prefect of Imbabura concerning the economic benefits which Cascabel will deliver to the Province, including creation of 4,000 jobs from 2023. He notes the infrastructure development and third level professional training which will be required to support such operations as well as options for transporting concentrates to the port of San Lorenzo, including, interestingly, by pipeline. I don’t recall seeing the latter option mentioned before – but open to correction.

Three articles of interest just published in the Ecuadorian press:
1. July 21, 2019: https://www.elcomercio.com/actualidad/vigilancia-monte-olivo-carchi-mineria.html . This article notes that soldiers successfully intercepted and prevented illegal miners establishing operations in El Cielito. Mention is made of illegal miners displaced from Buenos Aires very recently and also notes that a group of 500 illegal miners were evicted from the area in 2017, which was subsequently placed under military protection. The article notes that the area is “granted to a foreign company” but does not name it, although it is reasonable to presume that this is SolGold given its work on the Cielito vein in the Blanca concession (e.g. RNS March 20, 2018).
2. July 21, 2019: https://www.elcomercio.com/opinion/editorial/editorial-elcomercio-mineria-responsable-social.html . A very brief article on the social and environmental benefits of legal mining, following upon the commencement of mining operations at Mirador earlier this week (after 10 years of preparatory work), and the planned commencement of such operations at Fruta del Norte later this year. It notes that, of the next two big projects, one will be the “giant Cascabel” – a projection entirely consistent with the current SolGold focus on resource, geotechnical, decline sterilisation and planned hydrological drilling at Cascabel as announced in the 19-7-2019 RNS. The other big project is named as “Cielito Lindo” – not sure if this refers to the Cielito vein in SolGold’s Blanca concession but certainly would explain why the Ecuadorian military is active in that region.
3. July 20, 2019: https://www.primicias.ec/noticias/economia/anti-mineros-atacan-patrulla-policia-rio-blanco/ . An interesting commentary upon, and video of an attack by anti-mining activists upon the police at the Chinese operated Rio Blanco mining project in the Azuay province in the south of the country.

Cookie, hope this will work for you:
copy the url and paste into the google search bar; enter and when the search results appear, go to the listed article and press "translate this page" which will be located immediately to the right of the url. Good luck!

An interesting article about the scale and extent of illegal mining operations in Ecuador published yesterday. By omission, this is what Meneses and his backers and supporters of the CC petition to ban legal mining instead sought to facilitate:
https://www.elcomercio.com/actualidad/material-minas-ecuador-mercados-ilegales.html

@pob on ceo.com posted a link to this article: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-solgold-mining/solgold-in-talks-to-finance-long-life-ecuador-copper-project-idUSKCN1SQ1X2.

The article, though dated May 20th, prior to the CC petition, does serve to remind us of the level of activity and interest in SOLG which existed only 6 weeks ago. That petition may well have slowed the pace of such discussions, but with that issue now resolved satisfactorily, it is probably reasonable to assume that they are now very much back on the table.

A quick translation of the last two paragraphs of the verdict is as follows:
"The court decided, unanimously, to deny and file the request for a previous constitutional opinion of popular consultation. Since in the aforementioned case and beyond the formal control of recitals and questionnaire, the court did not enter to examine the origin of popular consultations on mining called by the citizens."

The petition appears to have been rejected: https://twitter.com/CorteConstEcu?lang=en

The Cascabel referendum petition has been listed for consideration as a "resolution of causes" by the Constitutional Court at 10am (local time: 4pm UK time) on June 20th: https://twitter.com/CorteConstEcu?lang=en. I assume the phrase "resolution of causes" means determination/decision in which case it is unlikely that we will hear the outcome before the close of the LSE - but perhaps before that of the TSX.

Well, nobody can say that the Vice-Minister for Mines is not making it crystal clear to the CC what they have been asked to adjudicate upon: https://twitter.com/RecNaturalesEC/status/1139540392481894402

An interview with the Ecuadorian Vice-Minister of Mines on Radio Viga, has just been summarised in a series of tweets here: #MineríaConResponsabilidad.

Some key points:
- the importance of the new mining policy which took 13 months to draft;
- it is designed to advance economic development and environmental sustainability, and combat illegal mining;
- provides a framework for international mining related academic and professional accords. He notes one signed with Chile (perhaps part of the Llurimagua accord signed earlier this week?) and, interestingly, two yet to be signed in the coming weeks with two Australian states (do either of those in some way relate to SOLG I wonder?);
- notes the release of the PEA by the "Rattlesnake" project yesterday (seemingly Cascabel translates as Rattlesnake!);
- and concludes by stating that "The Constitutional Court has a responsibility with 17 million of Ecuadorians to define on the request for Popular consultation in three cantons of Imbabura, not for issues of form, but background, as respect for the Constitution."

Two apologies:
omitted the source of the information - at this link - https://twitter.com/ComunicacionEc/status/1138250914895192067;

and for reversing the national affinity of the two companies - CODELCO (Chile) and ENAMI (Ecuador).

The Presidents of Ecuador and Chile today signed an agreement between the respective state mining companies CODELCO and ENAMI to facilitate the development of the Llurimagua deposit in Imbabura province. Perhaps a straw in the wind for the outcome of the Cascabel and INV petitions before the CC?

Earthling, I'm afraid that it is an unascribed article, albeit the third most highly read on that web site. Coldcut

A slightly dated article from May 27th but worth reading while we wait for the Constitutional Court to deliver its verdict, as it leaves no doubt as to what is riding on that decision: https://www.primicias.ec/noticias/economia/buenos-aires-violencia-extorsion/

That decision will either foster the development of environmentally responsible mining of potentially enormous benefit to Ecuador and all of its people – or, in my view, create a legal vacuum which will facilitate the type of destruction, lawlessness and environmental despoilation generated by illegal mining activities witnessed at Buenos Aires on the Hancock Mining licence IMBA02, of which Meneses, the petitioner, was an active participant until very recently.

Some key points from the article:
1. Up to 7,000 people of various nationalities engaged in the illegal mining operations, which has generated extensive environmental damage, not least through the use of cyanide and mercury in makeshift extraction processes;
2. Some law enforcement and security personnel have succumbed to bribery and corruption and/or became involved in illegal activities.
3. The evolution of armed gangs involved in killings and extortion rackets, as well as a wide range of other illegal activities, including money laundering, prostitution, trafficking in arms, drugs, fuels and even explosives.
4. The displacement of one armed gang, “El Perico”, in February this year, which then moved its operations to El Cielito – the vein on one of SOLG’s concessions.
5. There are at least 500 sites of illegal mining activity in Ecuador, of which 166 are considered especially confrontational. These are located in Esmeraldas, Carchi, Imbabura, Sucumbíos, Napo and Morona Santiago, Azuay, Zamora Chinchipe, Loja and El Oro.
6. The article notes three possible solutions to the problem: occupation by security forces and expulsion of the illegal miners; the illegal miners organise themselves into legalised small scale mining associations, although this would inevitably have to involve some form of amnesty for illegal activities to date; or for Hancock Mining to relinquish its IMBA02 licence to the illegal miners.

The Court rose about 10 minutes ago, either for an adjournment or at the conclusion of the hearing. A Newcrest representative was among the last to make a presentation.

The Constitutional Court case, 0002-19-CP, is scheduled to start at 13:00 hours local time (19:00 here - apologies for stating a time difference of 5 hours previously). The proceedings may well be streamed live (in Spanish) at http://radio.corteconstitucional.gob.ec:8000/stream; and/or available later at https://www.youtube.com/user/ccevid/videos. Thanks to @pob on ceo.ca for this information.

It might be worth while keeping an eye on this website for any breaking news, as it files reports fairly promptly (current top story was filed at 09:20 hours local time, which allowing for a 5 hour time difference, is 14:20 here): http://ecuadorinmediato.com/

Last portion was cut off:

4. "... communities settled in the parishes of Lita, Carolina Jijón and Caamaño, and Goaltal?", The proposed text establishes a reference of "communities" that do not maintain an independent form of government (see article 94 of COOTAD), and also groups to several of them (even from different provinces) which would prevent their evaluation, since it would be different voters, in different places.

It is precisely in these shortcomings, where I consider that the proposed question incurs ambiguity, vagueness and obscurity, all characteristics that vitiate its quality, and, consequently, the proposed text is not clear, nor loyal to the voter, as required by Article 102. of the LOGJCC. Consequently, if the Court acts in accordance with law, it will only disqualify the proposed text and order the file of the process. That is, it will not analyze substantive issues, because the question does not merit it.”

S. Gambo Valladres, an Ecuadorian lawyer who has served as a senior executive in various Ecuadorian telecommunications, energy and resource companies, including the state mining company ENAMI, considers that the petition is deeply flawed and should be rejected by the Constitutional Court: see this link - http://www.elmonominero.com/2019/06/03/corte-analiza-nueva-consulta-antiminera/.

The petition asks: "Are you in agreement with the mining exploitation in the territories of the communities settled in the parishes of Lita, Carolina Jijón and Caamaño, and Goaltal? YES / NO? "

“These parishes are based in the provinces of Imbabura and Carchi. The Constitutional Court has convened the Sectorial Ministry, Decentralized Governments, private companies, organizations, and all persons interested in participating in the prepared procedure.”

In his analysis Valladares notes:
• the range of State and commercial bodies and organisations opposed to the petition, the loss of inward investment and job creation. SOLG is mentioned specifically.
• that the character and past history of the petitioner is irrelevant to the hearing as the Court can, as he puts it, only consider dimensions which are as he puts it “..framed exclusively in the provisions of the Law on Constitutional Guarantees and Constitutional Control..”
• That consideration must first establish “.. -the form- whether its content is clear and loyal to the future voters, and then, if -the fund - violates any constitutionally guaranteed right. (I think “fund” probably means “find”, i.e. find if the petition).
• Valadares analysis of the petition, and his conclusion, are as follows (Google translate):-
1. "You agree ...", the proposed text - it is not clear - must establish the scope of what is being asked and its effects on the national legal system (see Article 105 No. 4, LOGJCC). It is not about knowing the opinion of the voter or his concerns, since that is what the Prior Consultation consists of within the Constitution.
2. "... with exploitation ...", the text -not loyal- refers to one of the eight phases of the mining activity (Article 27, Mining Law), consequently, it is not consulted about exploration, benefit, casting , refining and other phases.
3. "... mining exploitation ...", again the text -not clear- refers indistinctly to the "mining" activity, without establishing whether it refers to the metallic or non-metallic, and within those, to the small, medium or large scale -data not less considering that it pretended to be an artisanal miner-, or if it also includes the arid and stony, the latter of municipal competence (Article 264, num.12, COOTAD).
4. "... communities settled in the parishes of Lita, Carolina Jijón and Caamaño, and Goaltal?", The proposed text establishes a reference of "communities" that do not maintain an independent form of government (see article 94 of COOTAD), and also groups to several of them (even from different provinces) which would prevent their

There is another, lengthier and more detailed article about Meneses, and the pending court case which is well worth reading at this link: https://www.primicias.ec/noticias/economia/gremios-molestos-delincuentes-minera-legal/.

This is the first section verbatim via Google translate:-

"Annoying guilds because "criminals" have put the legal mining industry at risk.

The Ecuadorian Business Committee, the Ecuadorian Chamber of Mining and the Chamber of Industries and Production expressed their displeasure at a new request for popular consultation that could paralyze several of the most important mining projects in the country and called on the Constitutional Court to clarify that it is the Central Government that has exclusive power over non-renewable resources. An ex-policeman dismissed for bribery has put the mining industry in check in Ecuador and has provoked a strong reaction from the main union leaders of the country, who demand seriousness and legal security. This is Wilmer Meneses Ibarra, who in June 2009 tried to bribe other policemen to let him send a truck loaded with 20 gasoline tanks from Lita, in Imbabura, to San Lorenzo, in Esmeraldas. Meneses Ibarra has also been identified by the authorities as one of the leaders of the illegal miners that plague the province of Imbabura and, especially, the small population of La Merced of Buenos Aires, according to official documents that PRIMICIAS had access. This is the person who on May 21 raised a petition before the Constitutional Court on behalf of a group of community members belonging to the parishes of Lita and Carolina (Imbabura) and of Goaltal and Jijón y Camaño (Carchi) to consult those communities if they agree with mining. Curiously, in his petition he did not include the parish of La Merced of Buenos Aires.

The following two sections note the impact on the international mining industry, on SOLG in particular; and Menses' involvement with the illegal mining activities centred on Hancock Mining's licence IMBA02 at La Merced de Buenos Aires. Isn't it curious that while Meneses' petition includes all the other Hancock Mining licences, it excludes La Merced de Buenos Aires! Draw your own conclusions.