Arbitrary Executions regarding killings of residents of Porgera byPJV’s private security guards (tolerated by the government), PNGPolice, and Mobile Unit Police at the Porgera Mine.Jethro Tulin from the Akali Tange Association and members of the Porgera Land Owners Association (PLOA) have traveled toBarrick Gold’s annual shareholder meeting in Canada in 2008,2009 and 2010 to complain of human rights abuses at the handsof Barrick’s Security, such as gang rapes, only to have theseallegation repeatedly denied by Barrick Gold. In 2011, due to
the Human Rights Watch report, Barrick nally allowed for an
investigation of their security regarding the allegations of gang
rapes. Five Barrick employees were red, while eight former
employees were implicated in the abuse.
1. Norwegian Government website http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/n/press-center/Press
2. Hufngton Post “The 12 Least Ethical Companies In The World: Covalence’s Ranking”, http://www.hufngtonpost.com/2010/01/28/the-least-ethical-compani_n_440073.html3. Post Courier “MP calls for SoE in Porgeraby HARLYNE JOKU. http://www.postcourier.com.
4. Northern Miner , “Barrick To Build Pascua-Lama: WOES CONTINUE AT PORGERA IN PAPUA
NEW GUINEAby Trish Saywell. 5/18/09 http://www.northernminer.com/issuesV2/VerifyLogin.aspx
5. Amnesty International “Undermining Rights: Forced Evictions and Police Brutality around thePorgera Gold Mine, Papua New Guinea” http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA34/001/2010/
6. Human Rights Watch, “Gold’s Costly Dividend: Human Rights Impacts of Papua New Guinea”
Porgera Gold Mine1/2/2011
7. “Canadian Firm Admits to Killings at PNG Gold Mine” by Bob Burton. Nov. 18, 2005. http://www.
8. “PNG goldmine acts over allegations of torture and rape” by Lindsay Murdoch. Feb 10, 2011
“ ... the challenges and the struggles we face as indigenous peoples who see all the resources that these multinational comein to extract are far more than we can tell by just talking here.I stand here and can say that Barrick’s behaviour in my place,Porgera, Enga Province in Papua New Guinea is bad but if you are physically there at the site it is even worse, your eyes could not believe this.... what they say and what they portray themselves here in North America is that where they go and where they do businessthey leave good and treat the communities well before they
extract the resources ... but what we nd with their behaviour in
my country, my place is opposite of what they say ... We are asmall community and we have been surprised a lot and even if information does come out from us the people with the money,these corporates of extractive industries they control the media,they control the government and they control people who areobstacles to their extractive process.
I am still ghting the struggle against Barrick today, we will never
give up until these kind of people, criminals in corporate boxes,are held accountable for what they are doing against us.”
Excerpt from a presentation by Jethro Tulin, Poregra Alliance, at the Mining (In)Justice conference, Toronto, Canada, May 2010
battle in court and on country
Australia’s Lake Cowal, “the Sacred Heartland of the WiradjuriNation,” is the largest inland lake in New South Wales. A wetlandof national and international signicance, the lake also provides
habitat for many threatened species and birds listed under theInternational Convention on Wetlands (the Ramsar Convention).Barrick’s Cowal Gold Project is an opencut pit that lies within highwater level on the lake’s western edge, essentially half the pit sitsin the lake bed. The lake is ephemeral and was in a dry cycle whenthe mine originally started operating in 2006, however, in startingin later 2010 heavy rains have bought water back into the lake.Floods are a reality in this region, Barrick’s mine poses a seriousthreat to the environment if toxics from its operation leach into thegroundwater and river systems that Lake Cowal is connected to.
As well as ecologically signicant site, Lake Cowal is alsoculturally signicant for Wiradjuri people. Traditional Owners
oppose the mine and charge that Barrick and its predecessorsignored demands to protect cultural objects.
Barrick desecratedsacred ground when it cleared the way for the mine and laidwater pipes and an electricity transmission line. The companyalso felled dozens of river red gum trees that had shelteredWiradjuri people from the elements for hundreds of years, andheld generations worth of historic markings. Wiradjuri sacreditems and places have been damaged or destroyed includingtens of thousands of stone artifacts, ancient ceremonial areas,marked trees, and traditional camp and tool-making sites.Artifacts hold individual meaning, but piecemeal artifact collectioncompromises the integrity of the site and the larger landscape
of spiritual signicance. Independent archaeologists have dated
some local Wiradjuri sites to between 2,000 and 4,000 years old- contemporaries of the Egyptian pyramids. Given Lake Cowal’sancient origins, more archaeological work will likely reveal a mucholder heritage. Barrick has reportedly collected more than 10,000artifacts from the mine area.Since 2001, Wiradjuri Traditional Owners, represented by NevilleChappy Williams, have focused on the validity of consents issuedby the NSW Government permitting Barrick to destory all culturalheritage sites at Lake Cowal and on the protection of WiradjuriNative Title Rights. These challenges have been partiallysuccessful with injunctions delaying approvals for the mine whichlead to a complete overhaul of how consent to destroy Aboriginalcultural heritahe are issued. The battle in court continues withrecent appeals against the expansion of the mine.
1. “Legislative Council Hansard, Wednesday, 29 October 2003, Corrected Copy” http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hanstrans.nsf/v3ByKey/LC20031029