‘Green bank’ linked to eco-unfriendly project
Nedbank ‘turns blind eye’ to suffering caused by mine
BALLA Camara signed over his land with a soldier pointing a gun at him. “I had no choice,” says the Guinea small-scale gold buyer who lost his home and his business. “If you had a man standing over you with a gun, what would you do?”
Camara is featured in a new hard-hitting report that has implicated South Africa’s “green bank”, Nedbank, in financing a “socially and environmentally destructive” mining project in Guinea, run by SAG, a subsidiary of AngloGold Ashanti.
The report, “Unjust Enrichment: How the IFC (International Finance Corporation) Profits from Land Grabbing in Africa”, compiled by Inclusive Developmental International, alleges Nedbank has turned a “blind eye” to the “suffering and destruction” reportedly caused by the mine.
“AngloGold Ashanti has made a number of promises to the people whose lives it has upended. It has pledged to provide jobs, irrigation, drinking water, and electricity to those it evicted. yet community members say the company has kept few of these promises.”
In 2015, the IFC provided Nedbank with $140 million (R1.87 billion) for “cross-border lending across Africa, including capital-intensive projects.
“An IFC press release announcing the deal noted the funding was designed to increase lending for ‘resource extraction projects’ in Africa, among other goals,” says the report.
Support for AngloGold Ashanti’s gold mine in Guinea “falls squarely within the purpose of the IFC’s loan to Nedbank.
“When the Nedbank loan was announced, IFC of ficial James Scriben praised the deal, (stating) ‘IFC, the African Development Bank and Nedbank share the objective of increasing social and environmental awareness in the financial sector, hoping to contribute to more sustainable development across Africa’.”
Through this financial relationship, IFC money could be used by AngloGold Ashanti to operate and expand the mine in Guinea.
“Moreover, profits from AngloGold Ashanti and the mine have moved up through Nedbank and onto the IFC, in the form of interest from the loans.”
But the report claims the IFC, whose mission is to fight poverty and support sustainable private sector-led development, is both indirectly financing and profiting from a project that is harming and further impoverishing the poor.
It cites community members, who accuse the company of “moving in with government security and defence forces” and compelling families to sign inventories of their possessions “often at gunpoint”.
“In Guinea, the IFC’s support for Nedbank has created anything but sustainable development. Deprived of their land and livelihoods, and given paltry compensation by AngloGold Ashanti, the relocated families have spiralled into destitution.”
The loan agreement between Nedbank and AngloGold suggests Nebank will “turn a blind eye” to how AngloGold Ashanti uses its funds.
“Given this complete lack of accountability, which appears to be a flagrant violation of IFC requirements, it’s no wonder the mine has caused such suffering and destruction.”
The mine, says the report, has caused serious environmental damage because “residual cyanide (has) flowed into the area’s water sources, killing fish, livestock and poisoning drinking water, according to community members”.
Paul Miller, a mining investment banker at Nedbank, says: “Nedbank has a long-standing corporate banking relationship with AngloGold Ashanti and Nedbank has received funding from a number of the IFC’s funding programmes over the years.
“We cannot comment on the specific issues raised in the report, however, social and environmental regulatory compliance forms a core part of our lending risk management practices.”
The WWF Nedbank Green Trust is a funding organisation that supports programmes with a strong community- based focus.
Theressa Frantz, the head of WWF South Africa’s environmental programmes, says it’s seeking clarity from Nedbank on the report.
“As with all our direct relationships, the areas of work WWF is involved in with Nedbank are clearly defined, but this doesn’t prevent us from holding differing positions or raising specific issues of concern, such as the one you have brought to our attention.”
Chris Nthite, a spokesperson for AngloGold Ashanti, points out SAG and AngloGold Ashanti have been engaging with NGOs cited in the report for several months on the resettlement process and the report.
“Regrettably, our feedback was not reflected in their final report.
“Both AngloGold Ashanti and SAG categorically reject the report’s key findings, including the alleged collusion with Guinean security forces.
“The military in no way participated in, or interfered with, the conservation inventory process.
“We reiterate none of the affected residents signed resettlement agreements in haste or under duress. SAG is also satisfied that adequate and fair compensation was paid on a case-by-case basis.
“All existing infrastructure has not only been restored, but improved in the new resettlement site.”
He says 74 from 155 affected landholders have thus far taken occupation of their new houses. “The feedback we’ve received has been hugely positive.
“We’re committed to doing no harm and to addressing adverse human rights impacts where they may be linked to our activities.”
AngloGold Ashanti, he says, is certified to the International Cyanide Management Institute’s cyanide code and was in compliance with environmental laws and regulations.
“We’re not aware of any ‘residual cyanide’ that has flowed into the area’s water sources, killing fish and livestock and poisoning drinking water.”