By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service
May 14, 2009
The senior U.S. commander in the Pacific today shared with Indian government and military leaders the importance of the U.S.-Indian military relationship in furthering peace and stability in a challenging neighborhood.
Navy Adm. Timothy J. Keating, commander of U.S. Pacific Command, told reporters after a whirlwind day of sessions here he hopes that relationship can grow in ways that promote the two countries’ shared interests in maritime security, counterterrorism and defense trade.
Keating met with Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon and National Security Advisor Mayankote Kelath Narayanan. He also called on Adm. Zurres Mehta, the naval staff chief and chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee; Lt. Gen. Noble Bhawan, vice chief of the army staff; and Air Marshall Pradeep Vasant, slated to take India’s top air staff position later this month.
Throughout his visits, Keating said he emphasized the principal tenets of U.S. Pacific Command’s strategy: partnership, readiness and presence. He called India an important partner in carrying out that strategy.
“We have a longstanding friendship on a military-to-military basis, we exercise frequently, we exchange personnel, [and] we have frequent visits,” he said. “India is a strong partner and a good friend.”
The relationship, he told reporters, enhances both militaries’ high state of readiness as it enables them to operate together and share expertise and lessons learned.
Keating pointed to the Malabar 2009 naval exercise that wrapped up May 3 as an example of the growing combined exercise program.
India led Malabar 2009, in which about 4,000 members of the Indian, U.S. and Japanese navies trained together in surface, subsurface and air operations. They also conducted a visit, board, search and seize operation aboard USS Blue Ridge to simulate searching a merchant vessel.
Keating said his talks today focused on continuing the increased scope and sophistication of these exercises and exchanges in ways that improve cooperation while sending a strategic message to friends and potential allies alike.
“It demonstrates our commitment to peace and stability throughout the region by being present forward all throughout our area of responsibility,” he said.
Responding to reporters’ questions, Keating addressed a few of the challenges facing the region: China’s military expansion, turmoil in Pakistan and the humanitarian crisis in Sri Lanka, among them.
Today’s talks also focused on violent extremism and ways the United States and India can work together more closely, particularly through the continued sharing of timely information and intelligence that could preclude an attack.
That issue is near and dear to Indians, still stinging from the November terror attacks in Mumbai. The coordinated bombings in the country’s financial capital left 173 people dead.
“We want to make it increasingly difficult for those who support violent extremists to move, whether it is financial or logistical support throughout the region,” Keating said. “We want those extremists themselves to find it increasingly difficult to move.
“And we want to emphasize our relentless commitment to help those countries who have similar perspectives as we [have], and want to curtail or eliminate the threat of violent extremism,” he said. He noted that “almost every country in the world” shares this goal.
Today’s discussions also focused on defense cooperation and India’s efforts to modernize its military, in part through its military weapons systems program.
This program has grown exponentially since 2006, when India purchased USS Trenton at a cost of $50 million, Joel Ehrendreich, political-military officer at the U.S. Embassy here, told American Forces Press Service.
Since then, India has bought six C-130J Hercules aircraft for its special forces and $2.1 billion in P-8-I maritime reconnaissance aircraft to add more capability to what Keating noted already is a world-class maritime force.
The latest military sales issue on the table involves India’s plans to purchase more than 100 multi-role combat aircraft for its air force. The U.S. F-16 Fighting Falcon and F/A-18 Hornet are among the contenders in the $10 billion competition.
India also plans to buy more computer technology so its forces can better network battlefield information, Ehrendreich said.
While boosting India’s capabilities, Ehrendreich said, these sales are “completely transforming the way our militaries interact” and improving opportunities for them to work more closely together.
Keating arrived in the world’s largest democracy last night as it was wrapping up the last phase of its huge general election. Results are slated to be announced May 16.
"We emphasized from a Pacific Command perspective our terrific respect for and admiration of the democratic process that is unfolding," he said. An estimated 60 percent of India’s 714 million eligible voters reportedly cast ballots over the past five weeks.
Regardless of which party wins, Keating expressed confidence that the positive trends between the United States and India will continue. “We look forward to dealing in the same manner in an open, candid exchange of ideas with the new administration in India,” he said.
15 May, 2009
U.S. Seeks SA's Backing for Africom.
Business Day
By Hopewell Radebe
15 May 2009
SA is one of the major political powerhouses in Africa that US President Barack Obama's administration will lobby to support the Command for Africa (Africom) programme.
The US claims to already have the backing of Egypt and Kenya, which are considered influential states on the continent.
The Bush administration wants to locate its strategic military functions in Africa through Africom, claiming this will strengthen the base for the US's platform to contribute to social, economic and relief work.
During former president Thabo Mbeki's time in office, Africom was met with scepticism by some members of the African Union (AU).
SA led the Southern African Development Community's (Sadc's) position against co-operating with the US on what was believed to be the militarisation of American foreign policy and aid.
The Obama administration believes that with the Bush administration out of the picture and a new leadership in SA, the attitude towards the US in general may change.
Briefing the foreign press in Washington this week on the revival and repackaging of Africom, which it claims is central to US antiterrorism and antidrug-smuggling strategies, the deputy director of civil-military affairs in Africom, Mary Yates, admits that great scepticism existed in the past.
"It (the strategy) didn't get rolled out very well. And you know, when you work in Africa, consultation is an important thing. You'd better go and listen and have about 10 cups of tea. And that probably did not occur."
She says the whole dialogue has now shifted but there are still "doubting Thomases".
"We still have to continue to prove that what we chose to do in our reorganisation (of US foreign policy) is going to be value-adding for our African partners."
Political analyst Professor Shadrack Gutto says the prospect of a US base does not appeal to the entire AU.
The body wants to avoid the continent becoming yet another political battleground for superpowers such as China and Russia.
Gutto says the Obama administration would be welcome if it separated the condition for military co-operation from trade links and socioeconomic development. Yates says Africom has tabled proposals to several African countries.
She claims the African nations that the US considers the leaders in trying to bring peace and stability to the region are the ones that naturally show up on the US radar to be its first partners. The US will favour such states when it comes to advancing its programmes and funding.
Yates says the Sadc countries that the US has visited recently include Angola and Mozambique, which she describes as playing a stronger leadership role in Sadc. She says the Sadc region is aware of a growing narcotics problem, and is interested in developing a stronger maritime relationship among member states and with the US.
After talking separately to most countries, she claims the US realises that these countries would like to be able to employ capable military forces, to strengthen their own security institutions, be able to support international peace efforts and peacekeeping, and have the ability to deter and defeat threats.
By Hopewell Radebe
15 May 2009
SA is one of the major political powerhouses in Africa that US President Barack Obama's administration will lobby to support the Command for Africa (Africom) programme.
The US claims to already have the backing of Egypt and Kenya, which are considered influential states on the continent.
The Bush administration wants to locate its strategic military functions in Africa through Africom, claiming this will strengthen the base for the US's platform to contribute to social, economic and relief work.
During former president Thabo Mbeki's time in office, Africom was met with scepticism by some members of the African Union (AU).
SA led the Southern African Development Community's (Sadc's) position against co-operating with the US on what was believed to be the militarisation of American foreign policy and aid.
The Obama administration believes that with the Bush administration out of the picture and a new leadership in SA, the attitude towards the US in general may change.
Briefing the foreign press in Washington this week on the revival and repackaging of Africom, which it claims is central to US antiterrorism and antidrug-smuggling strategies, the deputy director of civil-military affairs in Africom, Mary Yates, admits that great scepticism existed in the past.
"It (the strategy) didn't get rolled out very well. And you know, when you work in Africa, consultation is an important thing. You'd better go and listen and have about 10 cups of tea. And that probably did not occur."
She says the whole dialogue has now shifted but there are still "doubting Thomases".
"We still have to continue to prove that what we chose to do in our reorganisation (of US foreign policy) is going to be value-adding for our African partners."
Political analyst Professor Shadrack Gutto says the prospect of a US base does not appeal to the entire AU.
The body wants to avoid the continent becoming yet another political battleground for superpowers such as China and Russia.
Gutto says the Obama administration would be welcome if it separated the condition for military co-operation from trade links and socioeconomic development. Yates says Africom has tabled proposals to several African countries.
She claims the African nations that the US considers the leaders in trying to bring peace and stability to the region are the ones that naturally show up on the US radar to be its first partners. The US will favour such states when it comes to advancing its programmes and funding.
Yates says the Sadc countries that the US has visited recently include Angola and Mozambique, which she describes as playing a stronger leadership role in Sadc. She says the Sadc region is aware of a growing narcotics problem, and is interested in developing a stronger maritime relationship among member states and with the US.
After talking separately to most countries, she claims the US realises that these countries would like to be able to employ capable military forces, to strengthen their own security institutions, be able to support international peace efforts and peacekeeping, and have the ability to deter and defeat threats.
Museveni: I see no successor in NRM.
Daily Monitor
15 May 2009
By Emmanuel Gyezaho
He may have ruled Uganda for the past twenty three years but President Yoweri Museveni is still hesitant to hand over power, not even to members of the National Resistance Movement, of which he is the leader.
On Thursday the president told NRM Members of Parliament that while he would be “happy” to hand over power, he saw “nobody” ready to take on the daunting responsibility of leading Uganda.
This was during a session of the NRM party Caucus in Parliament on Thursday.
The revelation will pass as an indictment to the political ambitions of key party stalwarts such as Vice President Gilbert Bukenya and NRM Secretary General Amama Mbabazi who are understood to lead the queue of possible successors to the President.
15 May 2009
By Emmanuel Gyezaho
He may have ruled Uganda for the past twenty three years but President Yoweri Museveni is still hesitant to hand over power, not even to members of the National Resistance Movement, of which he is the leader.
On Thursday the president told NRM Members of Parliament that while he would be “happy” to hand over power, he saw “nobody” ready to take on the daunting responsibility of leading Uganda.
This was during a session of the NRM party Caucus in Parliament on Thursday.
The revelation will pass as an indictment to the political ambitions of key party stalwarts such as Vice President Gilbert Bukenya and NRM Secretary General Amama Mbabazi who are understood to lead the queue of possible successors to the President.
Mauritania editor narrowly escapes death.
Afrol News
14 May 2009
Reporters Without Borders has condemned an attempted murder of the editor of the independent Arab-language daily, El Wattan, and radio presenter Mohamed Ould Zeine in Mauritania.
Mr Ould Zeine was allegedly attacked by two men with baseball bats and knives on the evening of 12 May. He reportedly suffered very serious injuries to his left hand.
According to RSF, Mr Ould Zeine received a call on his mobile phone after presenting the news on Radio Mauritania around midnight from an unknown caller who said one of his friends needed help.
“Mr Ould Zeine left the radio studios and headed to the national lycée when he saw two men armed with baseball bats get out of a car and come towards him,” the RSF statement said.
RSF said the attackers struck him on his legs and smashed his head against a wall at which caused him to faint, saying his assailants fled believing he was dead after the attack.
The journalists organisation urged the Mauritanian government to carry out a rigorous investigation to find those responsible for the attack. The violent assault against a journalist is said to be rare in Mauritania.
“Unless this investigation produces real results, we will have reason to be seriously worried about how journalists can do their job of informing the public in safety in the run-up to presidential elections on 6 June that will be decisive for the Mauritanian people,” RSF added.
Mr Ould Zeine has lodged an official complaint about the attack. Police, who are reported to have said they do not know the motives or the identity of his alleged attackers, promised to do their utmost to find those responsible.
14 May 2009
Reporters Without Borders has condemned an attempted murder of the editor of the independent Arab-language daily, El Wattan, and radio presenter Mohamed Ould Zeine in Mauritania.
Mr Ould Zeine was allegedly attacked by two men with baseball bats and knives on the evening of 12 May. He reportedly suffered very serious injuries to his left hand.
According to RSF, Mr Ould Zeine received a call on his mobile phone after presenting the news on Radio Mauritania around midnight from an unknown caller who said one of his friends needed help.
“Mr Ould Zeine left the radio studios and headed to the national lycée when he saw two men armed with baseball bats get out of a car and come towards him,” the RSF statement said.
RSF said the attackers struck him on his legs and smashed his head against a wall at which caused him to faint, saying his assailants fled believing he was dead after the attack.
The journalists organisation urged the Mauritanian government to carry out a rigorous investigation to find those responsible for the attack. The violent assault against a journalist is said to be rare in Mauritania.
“Unless this investigation produces real results, we will have reason to be seriously worried about how journalists can do their job of informing the public in safety in the run-up to presidential elections on 6 June that will be decisive for the Mauritanian people,” RSF added.
Mr Ould Zeine has lodged an official complaint about the attack. Police, who are reported to have said they do not know the motives or the identity of his alleged attackers, promised to do their utmost to find those responsible.
Opposition parties demand electoral reforms.
Afrol News
14 May 2009
Uganda's opposition parties are demanding reforms in the electoral commission as the country prepares for the presidential polls in 2011.
The statement presented to parliament yesterday by Forum for Democratic Change president, Kizza Besigye, suggests major facelifts in the way elections are conducted, the announcement of winners, while also calling for the reinstatement of the presidential term limits.
Parliament abolished a constitutional limit on presidential terms in 2005, paving the way for Yoweri Museveni to seek a third elected term and alarming some Western donors.
The opposition parties also want to be involved in the appointment the Electoral Commission members in order make the commission more independent. Currently, the selection of commissioners is solemnly vested in the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) with approval of parliament.
Dr Besigye said an independent and impartial Electoral Commission is central to holding free and fair elections.
“The President should not have undue influence in appointing members of the commission because of the continuing perception that they owe their allegiance to him and that he can dismiss any of them even under dubious circumstances,” he told local reporters.
The opposition parties also want an end to the use of military and other security agencies in the elections as well as equitable access to both private and public media during the elections.
The parties also demanded for an end to army representation in parliament and the establishment of a code of conduct for security agencies to regulate their activities during election time and the end to the militarisation of elections.
14 May 2009
Uganda's opposition parties are demanding reforms in the electoral commission as the country prepares for the presidential polls in 2011.
The statement presented to parliament yesterday by Forum for Democratic Change president, Kizza Besigye, suggests major facelifts in the way elections are conducted, the announcement of winners, while also calling for the reinstatement of the presidential term limits.
Parliament abolished a constitutional limit on presidential terms in 2005, paving the way for Yoweri Museveni to seek a third elected term and alarming some Western donors.
The opposition parties also want to be involved in the appointment the Electoral Commission members in order make the commission more independent. Currently, the selection of commissioners is solemnly vested in the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) with approval of parliament.
Dr Besigye said an independent and impartial Electoral Commission is central to holding free and fair elections.
“The President should not have undue influence in appointing members of the commission because of the continuing perception that they owe their allegiance to him and that he can dismiss any of them even under dubious circumstances,” he told local reporters.
The opposition parties also want an end to the use of military and other security agencies in the elections as well as equitable access to both private and public media during the elections.
The parties also demanded for an end to army representation in parliament and the establishment of a code of conduct for security agencies to regulate their activities during election time and the end to the militarisation of elections.
Over 200 political prisoners in Burundi released.
Afrol News
14 May 2009
The Burundian government has released 203 National Liberation Front political prisoners as part of the ceasefire agreement signed between the government and the former rebel group, Ministry of Justice has said late yesterday in a statement.
According to the statement, the government has also registered NLF as a political party after having accepted to change its former name with an ethnic connotation of Party for the Liberation of the Hutu People/National Liberation Front (PALIPEHUTU-FNL). NLF is the 42nd registered political formation in Burundi.
The part implementation of the ceasefire agreement which is almost three years after the signing of the agreement on 7 September 2006 between government and the former rebel group, saw the number of releases reaching a thousand.
Local reports said the last of seven former main rebellion movements of the country have been able to separate the political wing from the military as part of the ceasefire agreement.
The current Burundian constitution does not recognise any political party which claims to represent any ethnic group, region or religion.
The government has accepted to integrate into the different defence and security corps, 3,500 former combatants of the NLF and has to make some positions of responsibilities available for high ranking military rebels.
14 May 2009
The Burundian government has released 203 National Liberation Front political prisoners as part of the ceasefire agreement signed between the government and the former rebel group, Ministry of Justice has said late yesterday in a statement.
According to the statement, the government has also registered NLF as a political party after having accepted to change its former name with an ethnic connotation of Party for the Liberation of the Hutu People/National Liberation Front (PALIPEHUTU-FNL). NLF is the 42nd registered political formation in Burundi.
The part implementation of the ceasefire agreement which is almost three years after the signing of the agreement on 7 September 2006 between government and the former rebel group, saw the number of releases reaching a thousand.
Local reports said the last of seven former main rebellion movements of the country have been able to separate the political wing from the military as part of the ceasefire agreement.
The current Burundian constitution does not recognise any political party which claims to represent any ethnic group, region or religion.
The government has accepted to integrate into the different defence and security corps, 3,500 former combatants of the NLF and has to make some positions of responsibilities available for high ranking military rebels.
14 May, 2009
Shell, CNPC Agree on Stakes for Iraq Bid.
by Wan Xu, Contributer
Dow Jones Newswires 5/14/2009
URL: http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=76141
Royal Dutch Shell PLC (RDSB) has agreed on a shareholding structure with China National Petroleum Corp. ahead of a joint bid for a contract to develop an oil field in Iraq, a person familiar with the talks said.
Shell signed a memorandum of understanding with CNPC last month and is now discussing details of the official joint bid agreement to develop the Kirkuk oil field, said the person, declining to be named.
China Petrochemical Corp., known as Sinopec Group, will also join the consortium. "Shell, CNPC and Sinopec will together own a 75% stake if the bid is successful. CNPC will have 15%, Sinopec is likely to have a similar interest."
The remaining 25% interest will be held by a state-owned Iraqi operator, according to Iraq's model contract for the eight oil and gas fields offered to international oil companies in the first bidding round. The winners will be decided in Baghdad June 29-30.
Last month, Jeroen van der Veer, Shell's chief executive, confirmed the Anglo-Dutch oil major was in talks with Chinese firms to be a part of the consortium bidding for an Iraqi oil field.
Shell spokesperson Li Lusha declined to comment beyond van der Veer's comments in April. Spokespersons for CNPC and Sinopec weren't immediately available for comment.
Iraq is desperately seeking to boost production and renew an industry that has been shackled by years of war, sanctions, underinvestment and violence.
Iraq, with oil reserves exceeding 115 billion barrels, the world's third largest, produces only 2.4 million barrels a day.
According to Global Insight, the current oil production capacity of the Kirkuk field is 285,000 barrels per day.
However, daily production is forecast by Global Insight to have risen to 415,000 barrels at the time of the contract award, with a longer-term target of 600,000 barrels once the international oil companies get to work.
CNPC has already built a relationship with the Iraqi government. In March, it secured the first major oil development deal with Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003. The $3 billion project is to develop al-Ahdad oil field in Wasit Governorate, south of Baghdad.
Dow Jones Newswires 5/14/2009
URL: http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=76141
Royal Dutch Shell PLC (RDSB) has agreed on a shareholding structure with China National Petroleum Corp. ahead of a joint bid for a contract to develop an oil field in Iraq, a person familiar with the talks said.
Shell signed a memorandum of understanding with CNPC last month and is now discussing details of the official joint bid agreement to develop the Kirkuk oil field, said the person, declining to be named.
China Petrochemical Corp., known as Sinopec Group, will also join the consortium. "Shell, CNPC and Sinopec will together own a 75% stake if the bid is successful. CNPC will have 15%, Sinopec is likely to have a similar interest."
The remaining 25% interest will be held by a state-owned Iraqi operator, according to Iraq's model contract for the eight oil and gas fields offered to international oil companies in the first bidding round. The winners will be decided in Baghdad June 29-30.
Last month, Jeroen van der Veer, Shell's chief executive, confirmed the Anglo-Dutch oil major was in talks with Chinese firms to be a part of the consortium bidding for an Iraqi oil field.
Shell spokesperson Li Lusha declined to comment beyond van der Veer's comments in April. Spokespersons for CNPC and Sinopec weren't immediately available for comment.
Iraq is desperately seeking to boost production and renew an industry that has been shackled by years of war, sanctions, underinvestment and violence.
Iraq, with oil reserves exceeding 115 billion barrels, the world's third largest, produces only 2.4 million barrels a day.
According to Global Insight, the current oil production capacity of the Kirkuk field is 285,000 barrels per day.
However, daily production is forecast by Global Insight to have risen to 415,000 barrels at the time of the contract award, with a longer-term target of 600,000 barrels once the international oil companies get to work.
CNPC has already built a relationship with the Iraqi government. In March, it secured the first major oil development deal with Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003. The $3 billion project is to develop al-Ahdad oil field in Wasit Governorate, south of Baghdad.
Refugees Leave Camps Fearing Repatriation.
IRIN
14 May 2009
Some 20 Rwandan refugees a day are fleeing camps in neighbouring Uganda for localities further inland, fearing imminent repatriation, officials said.
"They [the refugees] are trying to mingle with local communities but we have been returning them to the camp," Poly Namayi, southwestern Uganda police spokesperson, told IRIN.
Namayi said some refugees had been arrested in Isingiro district. Others were crossing into neighbouring Lyantonde, Mubende and Kiboga districts, and as far as Karagwe in northern Tanzania.
At least 20 refugees have been leaving the Nakivale refugee settlement daily in the last week, according to police records. Nakivale is home to about 11,000 Rwandan refugees, most of whom fled to Uganda after the 1994 genocide.
A senior police officer said some refugees were selling their belongings as they prepared to leave the camps before the 31 July repatriation deadline set by the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) and the Ugandan government.
According to UNHCR communications officer, Carolyne Akello, the agency is investigating the cases of the fleeing refugees.
"The UNHCR continues to assist and encourage Rwandan refugees in Uganda to seize this opportunity and return to their country; however, the exercise is voluntary. We shall devise means of dealing with those who are not willing to be repatriated after July 31, when the exercise closes," Akello said, adding that UNHCR was still providing aid to the refugees in the camps.
We shall devise means of dealing with those who are not willing to be repatriated after July 31, when the exercise closes
"The government of Uganda and UNHCR will undertake to find a durable solution in case of [a] residual caseload."
Since April, the Rwandan and Ugandan governments, with UNHCR, have been conducting sensitisation campaigns to encourage returns.
The first batch of 80 returnees is expected to leave Uganda on 19 May, said Innocent Ngango, the head of refugee repatriation in the Rwanda's local government ministry.
However, Ngango noted that some elements in the refugee camps were discouraging their counterparts from returning to Rwanda for fear of being prosecuted for genocide-related crimes.
A lack of understanding of the workings of the Rwandan traditional court system, the Gacaca, is contributing to the refugees' reluctance to return home, Denis Bikesha, the head of mobilisation in the courts, told IRIN earlier.
At present, Uganda is hosting about 20,000 Rwandan refugees half of whom have in the past been opposed to repatriation, according to camp officials.
14 May 2009
Some 20 Rwandan refugees a day are fleeing camps in neighbouring Uganda for localities further inland, fearing imminent repatriation, officials said.
"They [the refugees] are trying to mingle with local communities but we have been returning them to the camp," Poly Namayi, southwestern Uganda police spokesperson, told IRIN.
Namayi said some refugees had been arrested in Isingiro district. Others were crossing into neighbouring Lyantonde, Mubende and Kiboga districts, and as far as Karagwe in northern Tanzania.
At least 20 refugees have been leaving the Nakivale refugee settlement daily in the last week, according to police records. Nakivale is home to about 11,000 Rwandan refugees, most of whom fled to Uganda after the 1994 genocide.
A senior police officer said some refugees were selling their belongings as they prepared to leave the camps before the 31 July repatriation deadline set by the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) and the Ugandan government.
According to UNHCR communications officer, Carolyne Akello, the agency is investigating the cases of the fleeing refugees.
"The UNHCR continues to assist and encourage Rwandan refugees in Uganda to seize this opportunity and return to their country; however, the exercise is voluntary. We shall devise means of dealing with those who are not willing to be repatriated after July 31, when the exercise closes," Akello said, adding that UNHCR was still providing aid to the refugees in the camps.
We shall devise means of dealing with those who are not willing to be repatriated after July 31, when the exercise closes
"The government of Uganda and UNHCR will undertake to find a durable solution in case of [a] residual caseload."
Since April, the Rwandan and Ugandan governments, with UNHCR, have been conducting sensitisation campaigns to encourage returns.
The first batch of 80 returnees is expected to leave Uganda on 19 May, said Innocent Ngango, the head of refugee repatriation in the Rwanda's local government ministry.
However, Ngango noted that some elements in the refugee camps were discouraging their counterparts from returning to Rwanda for fear of being prosecuted for genocide-related crimes.
A lack of understanding of the workings of the Rwandan traditional court system, the Gacaca, is contributing to the refugees' reluctance to return home, Denis Bikesha, the head of mobilisation in the courts, told IRIN earlier.
At present, Uganda is hosting about 20,000 Rwandan refugees half of whom have in the past been opposed to repatriation, according to camp officials.
Oil Majors Bribed Senators in Ghana.
Daily Trust
14 May 2009
By Abdul-Rahman Abubakar
Multinational oil companies operating in this country are suspected of having bribed some members of Senate oil sector committees in order to influence their inputs during debate on the Petroleum Sector Reform Bill now before the National Assembly, the Senate's official spokesman said in Abuja yesterday.
Speaking shortly after the plenary session, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Information and Media Senator Ayogu Eze (PDP, Enugu North) said he was wrong to have denied the allegation when he first spoke to reporters on the matter on Tuesday.
He said, "You will remember that when I spoke with you yesterday about the issues concerning the committees in the petroleum sector within the National Assembly, I did tell you that it is false that some of them would have undertaken the trips that they alleged in the newspapers that they undertook.
I need to say clearly that we have found out unfortunately and regrettably that there was an attempt by some private sector organizations to lobby members of the National Assembly on the bill that is before the National Assembly, and we found out today that some members of the National Assembly did go to Ghana, and we are also not very happy with the development because section 21 of our standing rules specify categorically that before you can travel abroad for whatever reason you must write to the leadership of the Senate, stating the purpose, stating the duration of your stay and stating the address where you are going to stay."
Section 21 of the Senate standing rules reads, "A senator going abroad shall so inform the President of the Senate, indicating the purpose, the time of his stay abroad and his contact address."
Senator Eze said the ten senators that travelled to Ghana contravened the provision of the section by failing to notify the leadership before embarking on the trip allegedly sponsored by the multinational oil companies.
Senate therefore resolved to investigate the matter through its Committee on Ethics and Privileges, which was mandated to conduct a public hearing. Eze said any senator found culpable in the charge will face disciplinary action.
"I want to assure Nigerians that the investigations and the public hearing by that committee will be carried live and if any senator is found wanting in any way, that senator shall stand alone. If any senator is found wanting of having committed any misdeed or enriched him or herself or indulge in anything that is unethical, that senator shall stand alone and that is the decision of the Senate," Eze said.
Special Adviser to President Umaru Musa Yar'adua on Petroleum Dr. Emmanuel Egbogah had earlier accused senators of receiving bribes from oil companies in order to dump the Petroleum Reform Bill. He was reported to have said, "The oil companies are carrying campaigns, taking the senators to Ghana to feed them, going to the labour people to bribe them and saying that this reform is going to kill you and all that nonsense."
Though senator Eze did not mention names of senators that made the trip to Ghana, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Petroleum (Upstream) Senator Lee Maeba who did not make the trip, said "When they returned from Ghana, I discussed with distinguished Senator Amange: 'How was it?' I have not received official brief from those who went to Ghana. But Senator Amange is even lamenting why he went there because there were even issues of estacode not paid to them and a lot of other issues and they had to return a day before they were supposed to return."
Other senators reported to have made the trip include Mohammed Kabir Jibril (Kaduna Central), Mohammed Mohammed (Bauchi Central), Emmanuel Paulker (Bayelsa), Adamu Sidi Ali (FCT), Dahiru Awaisu Kuta (Niger East), Joseph Akargerger (Benue), Enyinaya Abaribe (Abia), Felix Bajomo (Ogun) and Tawar Umbi Wada (Gombe).
In another twist to the case, members of the House of Representatives Committees on Petroleum (Upstream and Downstream) yesterday subjected President Umaru Yar'adua's Special Assistant on Petroleum Matters, Emmanuel Egboga to serious scrutiny over his allegation that senators and members received bribes from major oil companies to frustrate the passage of the Petroleum Sector Reform bill.
At the session, the lawmakers took their turn to lambast the presidential aide for making the allegation. Chairman of the Petroleum Committee [Downstream] Bassey Otu expressed the lawmakers' embarrassment and sought an unreserved rebuttal if the statement attributed to Mr. Egboga was actually true.
He said unless the issues bordering on bribery were cleared, Nigerians and others may go home with a negative impression of the National Assembly.
Otu said, "We have summoned you here on issues that border on the integrity of the Committees (Up and Downstream) and the House of Representatives as a whole. This matter is regarding statements made in the papers last week by you.
"We in the House realized quite early that we had cases of poor funding in the industry. We feel there were problems with the abuse of the Joint Venture Cash calls. We also realized that there were lack of incentives and investments in the local content. We realized that laws in the sector were obsolete and we proposed amendments. Ever since I came into this House we have been guided by due process. We are at no time guided by players in the industry. The House wants to find out exactly what you said before we leave the floor for further questions. The House cannot tolerate the blackmail of the National Assembly by anybody."
But Mr. Egboga denied the report, saying reporters quoted him out of context. He admitted to saying that the legislators could be lobbied, but not bribed, to pass a bill.
"I will like to start by apologizing profusely for the embarrassment this publication in the Punch newspapers has caused you. I have profound respect for the National Assembly and your efforts in the on-going reforms of the oil and gas sector. I was not properly quoted in the publication", he told the committee members.
14 May 2009
By Abdul-Rahman Abubakar
Multinational oil companies operating in this country are suspected of having bribed some members of Senate oil sector committees in order to influence their inputs during debate on the Petroleum Sector Reform Bill now before the National Assembly, the Senate's official spokesman said in Abuja yesterday.
Speaking shortly after the plenary session, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Information and Media Senator Ayogu Eze (PDP, Enugu North) said he was wrong to have denied the allegation when he first spoke to reporters on the matter on Tuesday.
He said, "You will remember that when I spoke with you yesterday about the issues concerning the committees in the petroleum sector within the National Assembly, I did tell you that it is false that some of them would have undertaken the trips that they alleged in the newspapers that they undertook.
I need to say clearly that we have found out unfortunately and regrettably that there was an attempt by some private sector organizations to lobby members of the National Assembly on the bill that is before the National Assembly, and we found out today that some members of the National Assembly did go to Ghana, and we are also not very happy with the development because section 21 of our standing rules specify categorically that before you can travel abroad for whatever reason you must write to the leadership of the Senate, stating the purpose, stating the duration of your stay and stating the address where you are going to stay."
Section 21 of the Senate standing rules reads, "A senator going abroad shall so inform the President of the Senate, indicating the purpose, the time of his stay abroad and his contact address."
Senator Eze said the ten senators that travelled to Ghana contravened the provision of the section by failing to notify the leadership before embarking on the trip allegedly sponsored by the multinational oil companies.
Senate therefore resolved to investigate the matter through its Committee on Ethics and Privileges, which was mandated to conduct a public hearing. Eze said any senator found culpable in the charge will face disciplinary action.
"I want to assure Nigerians that the investigations and the public hearing by that committee will be carried live and if any senator is found wanting in any way, that senator shall stand alone. If any senator is found wanting of having committed any misdeed or enriched him or herself or indulge in anything that is unethical, that senator shall stand alone and that is the decision of the Senate," Eze said.
Special Adviser to President Umaru Musa Yar'adua on Petroleum Dr. Emmanuel Egbogah had earlier accused senators of receiving bribes from oil companies in order to dump the Petroleum Reform Bill. He was reported to have said, "The oil companies are carrying campaigns, taking the senators to Ghana to feed them, going to the labour people to bribe them and saying that this reform is going to kill you and all that nonsense."
Though senator Eze did not mention names of senators that made the trip to Ghana, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Petroleum (Upstream) Senator Lee Maeba who did not make the trip, said "When they returned from Ghana, I discussed with distinguished Senator Amange: 'How was it?' I have not received official brief from those who went to Ghana. But Senator Amange is even lamenting why he went there because there were even issues of estacode not paid to them and a lot of other issues and they had to return a day before they were supposed to return."
Other senators reported to have made the trip include Mohammed Kabir Jibril (Kaduna Central), Mohammed Mohammed (Bauchi Central), Emmanuel Paulker (Bayelsa), Adamu Sidi Ali (FCT), Dahiru Awaisu Kuta (Niger East), Joseph Akargerger (Benue), Enyinaya Abaribe (Abia), Felix Bajomo (Ogun) and Tawar Umbi Wada (Gombe).
In another twist to the case, members of the House of Representatives Committees on Petroleum (Upstream and Downstream) yesterday subjected President Umaru Yar'adua's Special Assistant on Petroleum Matters, Emmanuel Egboga to serious scrutiny over his allegation that senators and members received bribes from major oil companies to frustrate the passage of the Petroleum Sector Reform bill.
At the session, the lawmakers took their turn to lambast the presidential aide for making the allegation. Chairman of the Petroleum Committee [Downstream] Bassey Otu expressed the lawmakers' embarrassment and sought an unreserved rebuttal if the statement attributed to Mr. Egboga was actually true.
He said unless the issues bordering on bribery were cleared, Nigerians and others may go home with a negative impression of the National Assembly.
Otu said, "We have summoned you here on issues that border on the integrity of the Committees (Up and Downstream) and the House of Representatives as a whole. This matter is regarding statements made in the papers last week by you.
"We in the House realized quite early that we had cases of poor funding in the industry. We feel there were problems with the abuse of the Joint Venture Cash calls. We also realized that there were lack of incentives and investments in the local content. We realized that laws in the sector were obsolete and we proposed amendments. Ever since I came into this House we have been guided by due process. We are at no time guided by players in the industry. The House wants to find out exactly what you said before we leave the floor for further questions. The House cannot tolerate the blackmail of the National Assembly by anybody."
But Mr. Egboga denied the report, saying reporters quoted him out of context. He admitted to saying that the legislators could be lobbied, but not bribed, to pass a bill.
"I will like to start by apologizing profusely for the embarrassment this publication in the Punch newspapers has caused you. I have profound respect for the National Assembly and your efforts in the on-going reforms of the oil and gas sector. I was not properly quoted in the publication", he told the committee members.
13 May, 2009
KARIMOV GIVES WASHINGTON THE AIR BASE IT NEEDS FOR AFGHAN OPERATIONS.
EurasiaNet
11 May 2009
With a helping hand from South Korea, the United States has reestablished a strategic presence in Uzbekistan - sort of. The development provides a boost for US efforts to press an offensive against Islamic militants in Afghanistan, and offers evidence that Russia’s influence in Central Asia is waning.
Uzbek President Islam Karimov revealed on May 11 that a cargo airport in the city of Navoi is already being used for the airborne transport of NATO non-lethal supplies destined for coalition forces in Afghanistan. The announcement coincided with a state visit by South Korean President Lee Myung-Bak. South Korea is overseeing a major renovation at Navoi airport that will turn the facility into a world-class air freight hub.
South Korea’s involvement in the project provides a face-saving way for the resumption of US-Uzbek strategic cooperation, capping over a year of US diplomatic efforts to bridge the rift that opened amid the fallout from the 2005 Andijan massacre. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
Karimov evicted US forces from an air base in Karshi Khanabad in late 2005 as a response to US protests over his administration’s handling of the Andijan events.
The Uzbek-South Korean agreement regarding Navoi airport gives Karimov the ability to deny to Moscow that he has cut a deal with the United States. But at the same time, Washington stands to get what it needs - a transit base that can take over much of the load from the American base in Kyrgyzstan, which is scheduled to close this summer. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
During a joint news conference, Karimov and Lee did not dwell on specifics concerning how the Afghan supply operations will run out of Navoi. South Korean contractors are handling activities related to the airport’s infrastructure upgrade. But the entity handling the logistics connected to the actual transit flights remains uncertain. The facility is managed by Korean Air, but it would seem reasonable to assume that US and/or European Union military personnel are somehow involved.
Karimov and Lee were careful to cast the airport announcement as a move driven by economic, not strategic, concerns. Boosting trade ties was the central theme of Lee’s visit, and he emphasized that the Navoi facility’s upgrade would be a key component in creating a "New Silk Road" linking East Asia and Western Europe. All of that may be true down the road, but in the immediate future, the airport stands to serve a vital function for coalition stabilization efforts in Afghanistan.
A spokeswoman for the US Embassy in Tashkent insisted in an interview with EurasiaNet that the transit deal was strictly commercial in nature. The arrangement could well prove to be a financial bonanza for the Uzbek government, via the involvement of state-controlled entities like Uzbekistan Airways, and for Korean Air’s parent company, the Hanjin Group.
Although the deal was ostensibly completed between Uzbek and South Korean officials and business executives, the US military appears to have had a hand in its creation. According to a document obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, the US Transportation Command, or USTRANSCOM, in late 2008 conducted a "market survey" for transit solutions linked to the opening of the northern supply network for Uzbekistan. A document prepared for that market survey by Korean Air appears to sketch the parameters of the Navoi base agreement. The Korean Air document states that the Navoi hub would offer "an integrated commercial-based solution to meet US forces’ transportation requirements to Afghanistan."
"[The] inter-modal option offers a combination of air and land transportation via transit at Navoi," the document added. "All air shipments arriving Navoi airport will be transferred to trucks and/or rail for land transportation to final destinations."
The document outlines that Korean Air is capable of transporting cargo originating from both Europe and the United States. Goods flying across the Pacific will be carried by Korean Air’s Boeing 747-400s; goods requiring air transport from northern Europe will be by flown by Uzbekistan Airways’ Airbus 300-600s or Ilyushin-76s from Navoi to Afghanistan. As of late April, Uzbekistan Airways has reportedly been leasing the Airbus 300-600s from Korean Air.
Korean Air claimed it could get non-military goods from Europe to the southern Afghan city of Kandahar by plane in 12 hours, and from the east coast of America to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan in 25.5 hours.
Security in Uzbekistan would be provided by a "local security service under contract." In Afghanistan, an "international private military company and/or a local security service" would be hired, the document added. For forwarding services within Afghanistan, the Korean company says, "exclusive trucking services will be provided by the joint venture company of Hanjin and its Uzbekistan partner."
According to Uzbek media reports, Navoi airport’s cargo facilities will be upgraded to handle up to 300 tons of cargo daily under an $83.4 million program financed by the Fund for Reconstruction and Development of Uzbekistan and the national carrier. In addition, President Lee announced on May 11 that a $200 million credit line would be extended to Korean companies handling renovation work at Navoi.
Andrei Grozin, the director of the Central Asia Department at the CIS Institute in Moscow, suggested that Navoi was capable of rendering the Kyrgyz base at Manas, outside of Bishkek, superfluous. "Its infrastructure is more or less developed," Grozin said of Navoi airport. "Of course it is not Manas or Tashkent airport [at present], but it can become so if time and money is invested." Grozin estimated that the needed upgrades at Navoi would cost about $200 million.
The structure of the Navoi agreement, and the way it is framed, leaves the Kremlin in a diplomatic bind, and thus can be viewed as a diplomatic masterstroke by Foggy Bottom. One of Moscow’s chief geopolitical aims in recent years has been to end the American military presence in the region, a move underscored by the evident aid-for-eviction deal that it reached with Kyrgyz leaders in early 2009. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
At the same time, Russia is diplomatically supportive of the still-developing northern supply network for Afghan counter-Taliban operations. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Thus, Moscow technically has no grounds to complain about the Navoi operation, since the Americans won’t nominally be in charge, even if they are calling the shots at a distance.
The Navoi announcement seems to turn the $2.15 billion aid package that the Kremlin extended to Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev into a waste of money from the Russian viewpoint. Analysts in the region believe Russia’s main motivation for offering the package was to drive the Americans out of Manas, which, at the time, was the sole facility in Central Asia that housed US forces.
Already, Russia has transferred roughly $450 million in cash and credits to Kyrgyzstan. It will now be interesting to see whether Moscow follows through on its $1.7 billion commitment to complete Kyrgyz hydropower projects. Ironically, it seems that Karimov’s fierce opposition to Russian-Kyrgyz cooperation on hydropower plans helped drive the Uzbek leader to reengage with the United States, via the South Korean-connection. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
"These steps are in Uzbekistan’s interests [because] they increase [Tashkent’s] political status and intensify the potential of partnerships with the US and NATO," Grozin said.
11 May 2009
With a helping hand from South Korea, the United States has reestablished a strategic presence in Uzbekistan - sort of. The development provides a boost for US efforts to press an offensive against Islamic militants in Afghanistan, and offers evidence that Russia’s influence in Central Asia is waning.
Uzbek President Islam Karimov revealed on May 11 that a cargo airport in the city of Navoi is already being used for the airborne transport of NATO non-lethal supplies destined for coalition forces in Afghanistan. The announcement coincided with a state visit by South Korean President Lee Myung-Bak. South Korea is overseeing a major renovation at Navoi airport that will turn the facility into a world-class air freight hub.
South Korea’s involvement in the project provides a face-saving way for the resumption of US-Uzbek strategic cooperation, capping over a year of US diplomatic efforts to bridge the rift that opened amid the fallout from the 2005 Andijan massacre. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
Karimov evicted US forces from an air base in Karshi Khanabad in late 2005 as a response to US protests over his administration’s handling of the Andijan events.
The Uzbek-South Korean agreement regarding Navoi airport gives Karimov the ability to deny to Moscow that he has cut a deal with the United States. But at the same time, Washington stands to get what it needs - a transit base that can take over much of the load from the American base in Kyrgyzstan, which is scheduled to close this summer. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
During a joint news conference, Karimov and Lee did not dwell on specifics concerning how the Afghan supply operations will run out of Navoi. South Korean contractors are handling activities related to the airport’s infrastructure upgrade. But the entity handling the logistics connected to the actual transit flights remains uncertain. The facility is managed by Korean Air, but it would seem reasonable to assume that US and/or European Union military personnel are somehow involved.
Karimov and Lee were careful to cast the airport announcement as a move driven by economic, not strategic, concerns. Boosting trade ties was the central theme of Lee’s visit, and he emphasized that the Navoi facility’s upgrade would be a key component in creating a "New Silk Road" linking East Asia and Western Europe. All of that may be true down the road, but in the immediate future, the airport stands to serve a vital function for coalition stabilization efforts in Afghanistan.
A spokeswoman for the US Embassy in Tashkent insisted in an interview with EurasiaNet that the transit deal was strictly commercial in nature. The arrangement could well prove to be a financial bonanza for the Uzbek government, via the involvement of state-controlled entities like Uzbekistan Airways, and for Korean Air’s parent company, the Hanjin Group.
Although the deal was ostensibly completed between Uzbek and South Korean officials and business executives, the US military appears to have had a hand in its creation. According to a document obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, the US Transportation Command, or USTRANSCOM, in late 2008 conducted a "market survey" for transit solutions linked to the opening of the northern supply network for Uzbekistan. A document prepared for that market survey by Korean Air appears to sketch the parameters of the Navoi base agreement. The Korean Air document states that the Navoi hub would offer "an integrated commercial-based solution to meet US forces’ transportation requirements to Afghanistan."
"[The] inter-modal option offers a combination of air and land transportation via transit at Navoi," the document added. "All air shipments arriving Navoi airport will be transferred to trucks and/or rail for land transportation to final destinations."
The document outlines that Korean Air is capable of transporting cargo originating from both Europe and the United States. Goods flying across the Pacific will be carried by Korean Air’s Boeing 747-400s; goods requiring air transport from northern Europe will be by flown by Uzbekistan Airways’ Airbus 300-600s or Ilyushin-76s from Navoi to Afghanistan. As of late April, Uzbekistan Airways has reportedly been leasing the Airbus 300-600s from Korean Air.
Korean Air claimed it could get non-military goods from Europe to the southern Afghan city of Kandahar by plane in 12 hours, and from the east coast of America to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan in 25.5 hours.
Security in Uzbekistan would be provided by a "local security service under contract." In Afghanistan, an "international private military company and/or a local security service" would be hired, the document added. For forwarding services within Afghanistan, the Korean company says, "exclusive trucking services will be provided by the joint venture company of Hanjin and its Uzbekistan partner."
According to Uzbek media reports, Navoi airport’s cargo facilities will be upgraded to handle up to 300 tons of cargo daily under an $83.4 million program financed by the Fund for Reconstruction and Development of Uzbekistan and the national carrier. In addition, President Lee announced on May 11 that a $200 million credit line would be extended to Korean companies handling renovation work at Navoi.
Andrei Grozin, the director of the Central Asia Department at the CIS Institute in Moscow, suggested that Navoi was capable of rendering the Kyrgyz base at Manas, outside of Bishkek, superfluous. "Its infrastructure is more or less developed," Grozin said of Navoi airport. "Of course it is not Manas or Tashkent airport [at present], but it can become so if time and money is invested." Grozin estimated that the needed upgrades at Navoi would cost about $200 million.
The structure of the Navoi agreement, and the way it is framed, leaves the Kremlin in a diplomatic bind, and thus can be viewed as a diplomatic masterstroke by Foggy Bottom. One of Moscow’s chief geopolitical aims in recent years has been to end the American military presence in the region, a move underscored by the evident aid-for-eviction deal that it reached with Kyrgyz leaders in early 2009. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
At the same time, Russia is diplomatically supportive of the still-developing northern supply network for Afghan counter-Taliban operations. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Thus, Moscow technically has no grounds to complain about the Navoi operation, since the Americans won’t nominally be in charge, even if they are calling the shots at a distance.
The Navoi announcement seems to turn the $2.15 billion aid package that the Kremlin extended to Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev into a waste of money from the Russian viewpoint. Analysts in the region believe Russia’s main motivation for offering the package was to drive the Americans out of Manas, which, at the time, was the sole facility in Central Asia that housed US forces.
Already, Russia has transferred roughly $450 million in cash and credits to Kyrgyzstan. It will now be interesting to see whether Moscow follows through on its $1.7 billion commitment to complete Kyrgyz hydropower projects. Ironically, it seems that Karimov’s fierce opposition to Russian-Kyrgyz cooperation on hydropower plans helped drive the Uzbek leader to reengage with the United States, via the South Korean-connection. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
"These steps are in Uzbekistan’s interests [because] they increase [Tashkent’s] political status and intensify the potential of partnerships with the US and NATO," Grozin said.
Same Firms Shipping Aid And Arms, Report Says.
IPS
12 May 2009
Thalif Deen
12 May 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New York — The military conflicts raging across Africa, Asia and Latin America have been significantly influenced by the heavy flow of illicit small arms, cocaine and rich minerals.
But, ironically, some of the air cargo companies involved in these profitable - and politically destabilising - smuggling operations are also delivering humanitarian aid and supporting peacekeeping operations, according to a new report released Tuesday by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).
In some cases, these companies are delivering both aid and weapons to the same conflict zones, including in countries such as Sudan, Somalia, Liberia, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Guinea-Bissau.
The 70-page detailed report reveals that 90 percent of the air cargo companies identified in arms trafficking-related reports have also been used by major U.N. agencies, the European Union (EU), members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), defence contractors and some of the world's leading non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to transport humanitarian aid, peacekeepers and peacekeeping equipment.
The report, titled 'Air Transport and Destabilizing Commodity Flows,' points out that some U.N. missions have continued to contract aviation services from companies that have been named in Security Council reports for wholly illicit arms movement and have been recommended by the United Nations for a complete aviation ban.
Co-authored by Hugh Griffiths and Mark Bromley, the study cites several such cases, including the U.N. peacekeeping mission in Sudan which has continued to use Badr Airlines even after the Security Council recommended an aviation ban for violating a U.N. arms embargo.
The U.N. children's agency UNICEF and the International Medical Corps have been cited for using the services of Juba Air Cargo after the operator had been documented by the United Nations as violating its arms embargo.
The clients listed by Juba Air Cargo also include the U.N. Development Programme (UNDP), the U.N. Office of Project Services (UNOPS), the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), the International Committee of the Red Cross, Concern Worldwide, Action Centre la Faim and the Swedish Free Mission.
Additionally, Ababeel Aviation holds contracts with U.N. agencies such as the World Health Organisation (WHO) even though the operator has been accused of violating U.N. arms embargoes.
Asked what role the United Nations could play in preventing such anomalies, Griffiths told IPS: "The U.N. is not very good at policing its backyard. There is a need for an independent institute to do this effectively."
He also said the United Nations should cooperate with the EU in order to solve the problem and also attend an upcoming expert meeting in Brussels on May 14.
The SIPRI report shows how air cargo carriers involved in humanitarian aid and peacekeeping operations have also transported a range of other conflict-sensitive goods such as cocaine, diamonds, coltan and other precious minerals.
Bromley, a co-author of the report, told IPS the United Nations has an important role to play, but the EU has a unified stance on this matter and has explicitly recognised the problems of air cargo carriers transporting arms in their framework control strategy against the illicit smuggling of small arms and light weapons (SALW).
"The U.N. framework SALW control document (2001) and the Programme of Action does not make any reference to transport and does not recognize air cargo carriers as a problem," he added.
Asked for a response from the United Nations, U.N. Associate Spokesman Farhan Haq told IPS that none of the air operators cited in the SIPRI report are registered as "bona fide" air carriers by the U.N. Department of Field Support (DFS).
"That means they're not listed flight vendors by the U.N. Secretariat," Haq said.
And thus, they cannot, and have not been commercially contracted by DFS for long-term charter in peacekeeping operations, he added.
In terms of how DFS goes about contracting flight vendors, Haq explained that the department has a Quality Assurance Programme, which involves potential flight vendors having to go through a pre-qualification process for registration as flight vendors, followed by an on-site inspection of the prospective air operator.
"These are done to ensure that any air carriers under U.N. sanctions are not considered for registration/operations with the United Nations," he said.
As part of the ongoing process of enhancing safety, quality and the security of U.N. aviation operations, both DFS and the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (along with the World Food Programme and the International Civil Aviation Organisation in advisory roles), have established an Aviation Technical Advisory Group (ATAG) comprised of aviation experts from DFS, WFP and ICAO.
The ATAG's main objective is to develop U.N. Common Aviation Standards for humanitarian and peacekeeping air transport operations and ensure that risks are mitigated in DFS aviation operations, and any exposure to potential liabilities is reduced, Haq said.
The report presents a range of inexpensive options which could be adopted to tackle the problems.
U.N. agencies, governments, defence contractors and NGOs could make humanitarian aid and peacekeeping contracts conditional by requiring air cargo carriers to adhere to an ethical transportation code of conduct.
The EU could also utilise its existing air safety regulations to put companies involved in arms trafficking or destabilising commodity flows out of business.
Additionally, the EU could provide specialised training for its civilian and military peacekeepers to better identify suspect air cargo carriers operating in Africa and Eastern Europe.
A coordinated response by the EU and the humanitarian aid community could require companies to chose between transporting arms or aid to conflict zones while air safety enforcement could put hardcore arms dealers out of business, said Bromley.
"Our research shows that companies named in arms trafficking-related reports have poor safety records. Safety regulations represent their Achilles heel, and can do to them what tax evasion charges did to Al Capone," he said.
12 May 2009
Thalif Deen
12 May 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New York — The military conflicts raging across Africa, Asia and Latin America have been significantly influenced by the heavy flow of illicit small arms, cocaine and rich minerals.
But, ironically, some of the air cargo companies involved in these profitable - and politically destabilising - smuggling operations are also delivering humanitarian aid and supporting peacekeeping operations, according to a new report released Tuesday by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).
In some cases, these companies are delivering both aid and weapons to the same conflict zones, including in countries such as Sudan, Somalia, Liberia, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Guinea-Bissau.
The 70-page detailed report reveals that 90 percent of the air cargo companies identified in arms trafficking-related reports have also been used by major U.N. agencies, the European Union (EU), members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), defence contractors and some of the world's leading non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to transport humanitarian aid, peacekeepers and peacekeeping equipment.
The report, titled 'Air Transport and Destabilizing Commodity Flows,' points out that some U.N. missions have continued to contract aviation services from companies that have been named in Security Council reports for wholly illicit arms movement and have been recommended by the United Nations for a complete aviation ban.
Co-authored by Hugh Griffiths and Mark Bromley, the study cites several such cases, including the U.N. peacekeeping mission in Sudan which has continued to use Badr Airlines even after the Security Council recommended an aviation ban for violating a U.N. arms embargo.
The U.N. children's agency UNICEF and the International Medical Corps have been cited for using the services of Juba Air Cargo after the operator had been documented by the United Nations as violating its arms embargo.
The clients listed by Juba Air Cargo also include the U.N. Development Programme (UNDP), the U.N. Office of Project Services (UNOPS), the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), the International Committee of the Red Cross, Concern Worldwide, Action Centre la Faim and the Swedish Free Mission.
Additionally, Ababeel Aviation holds contracts with U.N. agencies such as the World Health Organisation (WHO) even though the operator has been accused of violating U.N. arms embargoes.
Asked what role the United Nations could play in preventing such anomalies, Griffiths told IPS: "The U.N. is not very good at policing its backyard. There is a need for an independent institute to do this effectively."
He also said the United Nations should cooperate with the EU in order to solve the problem and also attend an upcoming expert meeting in Brussels on May 14.
The SIPRI report shows how air cargo carriers involved in humanitarian aid and peacekeeping operations have also transported a range of other conflict-sensitive goods such as cocaine, diamonds, coltan and other precious minerals.
Bromley, a co-author of the report, told IPS the United Nations has an important role to play, but the EU has a unified stance on this matter and has explicitly recognised the problems of air cargo carriers transporting arms in their framework control strategy against the illicit smuggling of small arms and light weapons (SALW).
"The U.N. framework SALW control document (2001) and the Programme of Action does not make any reference to transport and does not recognize air cargo carriers as a problem," he added.
Asked for a response from the United Nations, U.N. Associate Spokesman Farhan Haq told IPS that none of the air operators cited in the SIPRI report are registered as "bona fide" air carriers by the U.N. Department of Field Support (DFS).
"That means they're not listed flight vendors by the U.N. Secretariat," Haq said.
And thus, they cannot, and have not been commercially contracted by DFS for long-term charter in peacekeeping operations, he added.
In terms of how DFS goes about contracting flight vendors, Haq explained that the department has a Quality Assurance Programme, which involves potential flight vendors having to go through a pre-qualification process for registration as flight vendors, followed by an on-site inspection of the prospective air operator.
"These are done to ensure that any air carriers under U.N. sanctions are not considered for registration/operations with the United Nations," he said.
As part of the ongoing process of enhancing safety, quality and the security of U.N. aviation operations, both DFS and the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (along with the World Food Programme and the International Civil Aviation Organisation in advisory roles), have established an Aviation Technical Advisory Group (ATAG) comprised of aviation experts from DFS, WFP and ICAO.
The ATAG's main objective is to develop U.N. Common Aviation Standards for humanitarian and peacekeeping air transport operations and ensure that risks are mitigated in DFS aviation operations, and any exposure to potential liabilities is reduced, Haq said.
The report presents a range of inexpensive options which could be adopted to tackle the problems.
U.N. agencies, governments, defence contractors and NGOs could make humanitarian aid and peacekeeping contracts conditional by requiring air cargo carriers to adhere to an ethical transportation code of conduct.
The EU could also utilise its existing air safety regulations to put companies involved in arms trafficking or destabilising commodity flows out of business.
Additionally, the EU could provide specialised training for its civilian and military peacekeepers to better identify suspect air cargo carriers operating in Africa and Eastern Europe.
A coordinated response by the EU and the humanitarian aid community could require companies to chose between transporting arms or aid to conflict zones while air safety enforcement could put hardcore arms dealers out of business, said Bromley.
"Our research shows that companies named in arms trafficking-related reports have poor safety records. Safety regulations represent their Achilles heel, and can do to them what tax evasion charges did to Al Capone," he said.
Stavridis is new NATO supreme commander.
AFP
12 May 2009
NATO on Tuesday announced it had appointed United States Admiral James Stavridis as its supreme military commander, following a request from the US. Stavridis will replace US General John Craddock as Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), said a statement from the Defence Planning Committee of the world’s biggest military alliance.
12 May 2009
NATO on Tuesday announced it had appointed United States Admiral James Stavridis as its supreme military commander, following a request from the US. Stavridis will replace US General John Craddock as Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), said a statement from the Defence Planning Committee of the world’s biggest military alliance.
This is London – the capital of Somali pirates' secret intelligence operation.
By Giles Tremlett
11 May 2009
The Guardian
For the 14 crew aboard the Karagöl, a Turkish chemical tanker churning through the lawless waters of the Gulf of Aden, it was the moment all seafarers dread: heavily armed Somali pirates were speeding towards the slow-moving cargo vessel, and there was no chance of escape.
The Turkish sailors were swiftly overpowered and the 5,850-ton tanker was diverted to a port in Somalia, where it was held for two months while its owners negotiated a ransom payment.
What the crew could not know was that their ship had been singled out as a target by a network of informers based several thousand miles away – in London. Security officials say well-placed informants in the British capital, the world centre of shipbroking and insurance, gather so much detail on targets that, in the case of the Karagöl, they not only knew its layout, route and cargo, but had spent several days practising the assault.
The attack on the Turkish ship was a sign that the pirates have turned a regional phenomenon into a global criminal business that now reaches into the heart of London's shipping community.
"They made regular calls from the ship to London," said Haldun Dincel, general manager of Turkey's Yardimci shipping company, who negotiated the release of their ship. The calls were made on satellite phones the pirates brought with them.
Speaking by telephone from Istanbul, Dincel said today that London was one of a number of centres the pirates contacted regularly after the tanker had been sailed to the Somali coast and senior gang members had boarded and taken control. "Every day the chief of the pirates got in touch with people from London, Dubai and some from the Yemen," he said.
At least one of the four or five major pirate groups that are now carrying out the attacks has London-based "consultants" to help them choose their targets, according to a European military intelligence report leaked to Spain's Cadena SER radio station yesterday.
The report has been circulated around those countries, including Britain, that are involved in the European Union's Operation Atalanta to protect ships against piracy in the area. It indicated that the hijacking of at least three vessels, including the Karagöl, the Greek cargo ship Titan and Spanish tuna trawler Felipe Ruano, followed tipoffs from the London-centred network of informers, according to Cadena SER.
In each case, according to the report, the pirates had full knowledge of the cargo, nationality and course of the vessel.
It is not clear who these "consultants" were, but Dincel believes they may work inside the industry. "They knew the vessel, they knew the cargo, they knew the loading ports, they knew the destination, they knew everything," he said. "The knew their job."
Andrew Mwangura, who heads the East African's Seafarer's Assistance Programme, a piracy monitoring group based in Mombassa, Kenya, said negotiations over hijacked ships often involve Somalis in London. "Not only for the Karagöl, but for many other ships, the negotiations involve people in London," he said.
The EU report said information being passed to the pirates was often extracted from the international organisations that control or track the world's shipping.
The national flag of the vessel was also taken into account when choosing a target, with British vessels apparently being increasingly avoided, the report said.
"We have heard this a lot. It strikes me as plausible," said Graeme Gibbon-Brooks, of Dryad Maritime Intelligence, last night. "They are getting more sophisticated because they are funded by criminal gangs from outside of Somalia."
He warned, however, that while pirates might receive information on individual targets from London and elsewhere it was still difficult to locate a ship in mid-ocean. Pirates were more likely to receive lists of potential targets so they could identify one if they came across it, he said.
Dincel said he suspected the pirates' informers had also infiltrated the authorities who run the Suez canal, enabling them to track the Karagöl's movements from the moment it left the canal.
Dincel himself spoke several times a day to one of two pirate negotiators who had both lived in the US. "One said he had lived there for 10 years," he said. "The other had graduated from a US college. The ship's master also said they were educated people."
Dincel said the chief negotiator had told him over the telephone that all young Somalis wanted to become pirates. "He said that he had a car, money and a house. He has everything and the young people see him, and naturally they ask to be pirates." In January, Yardimci eventually airlifted money to the pirates to secure the release of the Karagöl and its cargo.
11 May 2009
The Guardian
For the 14 crew aboard the Karagöl, a Turkish chemical tanker churning through the lawless waters of the Gulf of Aden, it was the moment all seafarers dread: heavily armed Somali pirates were speeding towards the slow-moving cargo vessel, and there was no chance of escape.
The Turkish sailors were swiftly overpowered and the 5,850-ton tanker was diverted to a port in Somalia, where it was held for two months while its owners negotiated a ransom payment.
What the crew could not know was that their ship had been singled out as a target by a network of informers based several thousand miles away – in London. Security officials say well-placed informants in the British capital, the world centre of shipbroking and insurance, gather so much detail on targets that, in the case of the Karagöl, they not only knew its layout, route and cargo, but had spent several days practising the assault.
The attack on the Turkish ship was a sign that the pirates have turned a regional phenomenon into a global criminal business that now reaches into the heart of London's shipping community.
"They made regular calls from the ship to London," said Haldun Dincel, general manager of Turkey's Yardimci shipping company, who negotiated the release of their ship. The calls were made on satellite phones the pirates brought with them.
Speaking by telephone from Istanbul, Dincel said today that London was one of a number of centres the pirates contacted regularly after the tanker had been sailed to the Somali coast and senior gang members had boarded and taken control. "Every day the chief of the pirates got in touch with people from London, Dubai and some from the Yemen," he said.
At least one of the four or five major pirate groups that are now carrying out the attacks has London-based "consultants" to help them choose their targets, according to a European military intelligence report leaked to Spain's Cadena SER radio station yesterday.
The report has been circulated around those countries, including Britain, that are involved in the European Union's Operation Atalanta to protect ships against piracy in the area. It indicated that the hijacking of at least three vessels, including the Karagöl, the Greek cargo ship Titan and Spanish tuna trawler Felipe Ruano, followed tipoffs from the London-centred network of informers, according to Cadena SER.
In each case, according to the report, the pirates had full knowledge of the cargo, nationality and course of the vessel.
It is not clear who these "consultants" were, but Dincel believes they may work inside the industry. "They knew the vessel, they knew the cargo, they knew the loading ports, they knew the destination, they knew everything," he said. "The knew their job."
Andrew Mwangura, who heads the East African's Seafarer's Assistance Programme, a piracy monitoring group based in Mombassa, Kenya, said negotiations over hijacked ships often involve Somalis in London. "Not only for the Karagöl, but for many other ships, the negotiations involve people in London," he said.
The EU report said information being passed to the pirates was often extracted from the international organisations that control or track the world's shipping.
The national flag of the vessel was also taken into account when choosing a target, with British vessels apparently being increasingly avoided, the report said.
"We have heard this a lot. It strikes me as plausible," said Graeme Gibbon-Brooks, of Dryad Maritime Intelligence, last night. "They are getting more sophisticated because they are funded by criminal gangs from outside of Somalia."
He warned, however, that while pirates might receive information on individual targets from London and elsewhere it was still difficult to locate a ship in mid-ocean. Pirates were more likely to receive lists of potential targets so they could identify one if they came across it, he said.
Dincel said he suspected the pirates' informers had also infiltrated the authorities who run the Suez canal, enabling them to track the Karagöl's movements from the moment it left the canal.
Dincel himself spoke several times a day to one of two pirate negotiators who had both lived in the US. "One said he had lived there for 10 years," he said. "The other had graduated from a US college. The ship's master also said they were educated people."
Dincel said the chief negotiator had told him over the telephone that all young Somalis wanted to become pirates. "He said that he had a car, money and a house. He has everything and the young people see him, and naturally they ask to be pirates." In January, Yardimci eventually airlifted money to the pirates to secure the release of the Karagöl and its cargo.
12 May, 2009
Aid shipped in weapon planes.
AFP
12 May 2009
Air cargo carriers used to smuggle weapons to war-torn parts of Africa have also been hired to deliver humanitarian aid and support peacekeeping operations, a leading peace think tank said on Tuesday.
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said in a report that 90% of air cargo companies identified in arms trafficking-related reports had been used by UN agencies, European Union and Nato members as well as leading non-governmental organisations to deliver aid.
"For example, UN peacekeeping missions in Sudan have continued to use aircraft operated by (Sudan's) Badr Airlines even after the UN Security Council recommended an aviation ban be imposed on the carrier in response to arms embargo violations," the SIPRI report said.
The report also singled out other African carriers such as Astral Aviation, African International Airlines and the Sudanese-registered Trans Attico as being named in arms trafficking reports.
It also said several US private security firms hired air cargo carriers and aircraft which have been "involved in the trafficking of arms to militia which the US government have designated 'global terrorists'".
Conflict sensitive
The report cited Dyncorp, a company that provides security services for the US government, as having contracted Aerolift, a firm accused by the UN Security Council in 2006 of being involved in arms trading, to supply weapons to an Islamist militia that controls much of southern Somalia.
The militant group, Al-Shabab, was added by the US government to its list of terrorist organisations in March 2008 over alleged links to al-Qaeda.
SIPRI's report added that air carriers involved in aid and peacekeeping operations were also used to transport "conflict-sensitive" goods such as cocaine, diamonds and other precious materials.
One of the report's authors, Mark Bromley, said that a more rigorous application of the EU's existing air safety regulations could play a crucial role in stemming the flow of weapons to Africa's conflict zones.
"Air safety enforcement could put hard core arms dealers out of business," Bromley said in a statement.
"Our research shows that companies named in arms trafficking-related reports have poor safety records. Safety regulations represent their Achilles heel, and can do to them what tax evasion charges did to Al Capone," he added.
12 May 2009
Air cargo carriers used to smuggle weapons to war-torn parts of Africa have also been hired to deliver humanitarian aid and support peacekeeping operations, a leading peace think tank said on Tuesday.
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said in a report that 90% of air cargo companies identified in arms trafficking-related reports had been used by UN agencies, European Union and Nato members as well as leading non-governmental organisations to deliver aid.
"For example, UN peacekeeping missions in Sudan have continued to use aircraft operated by (Sudan's) Badr Airlines even after the UN Security Council recommended an aviation ban be imposed on the carrier in response to arms embargo violations," the SIPRI report said.
The report also singled out other African carriers such as Astral Aviation, African International Airlines and the Sudanese-registered Trans Attico as being named in arms trafficking reports.
It also said several US private security firms hired air cargo carriers and aircraft which have been "involved in the trafficking of arms to militia which the US government have designated 'global terrorists'".
Conflict sensitive
The report cited Dyncorp, a company that provides security services for the US government, as having contracted Aerolift, a firm accused by the UN Security Council in 2006 of being involved in arms trading, to supply weapons to an Islamist militia that controls much of southern Somalia.
The militant group, Al-Shabab, was added by the US government to its list of terrorist organisations in March 2008 over alleged links to al-Qaeda.
SIPRI's report added that air carriers involved in aid and peacekeeping operations were also used to transport "conflict-sensitive" goods such as cocaine, diamonds and other precious materials.
One of the report's authors, Mark Bromley, said that a more rigorous application of the EU's existing air safety regulations could play a crucial role in stemming the flow of weapons to Africa's conflict zones.
"Air safety enforcement could put hard core arms dealers out of business," Bromley said in a statement.
"Our research shows that companies named in arms trafficking-related reports have poor safety records. Safety regulations represent their Achilles heel, and can do to them what tax evasion charges did to Al Capone," he added.
Somalia faces worst drought in a decade - UN.
IOL News
12 May 2009
The United Nations' aid chief for Somalia says the East African country faces the worst drought in at least a decade.
Mark Bowden says satellite surveys of rainfall and research on the ground indicate the drought will worsen the plight of a population already suffering from war and famine.
Bowden says the "need for humanitarian assistance is increasing dramatically".
More than one million Somalis have fled their homes due to fighting between Islamic insurgents and pro-government forces.
Bowden told reporters in Geneva on Tuesday that already in some areas a quarter of children under five suffer from acute malnutrition.
He says local Somali elders have described the situation to the UN as "the worst crisis that they've seen in a very long time"
12 May 2009
The United Nations' aid chief for Somalia says the East African country faces the worst drought in at least a decade.
Mark Bowden says satellite surveys of rainfall and research on the ground indicate the drought will worsen the plight of a population already suffering from war and famine.
Bowden says the "need for humanitarian assistance is increasing dramatically".
More than one million Somalis have fled their homes due to fighting between Islamic insurgents and pro-government forces.
Bowden told reporters in Geneva on Tuesday that already in some areas a quarter of children under five suffer from acute malnutrition.
He says local Somali elders have described the situation to the UN as "the worst crisis that they've seen in a very long time"
Acholi Chiefs Warned on Land Rows.
The New Vision
11 May 2009
By Dennis Ojwee
Traditional chiefs and LC chairmen in Acholi have been warned against corruption while handling the land wrangles between the Lamogi and Amuru clans.
"The wrangles over land between the clans are caused by some traditional chiefs (Rwot) and LCs who have personal interests," Amuru district Police commander Justino Ovuru said.
He was addressing local leaders and stakeholders at a two-day training on land usage at the Riser Gardens on Thursday
"In some areas, the chiefs allocate land to themselves. Some LC chairmen donot handling the land courts properly because they belong to the wrangling clans," Ovuru aded.
The resident district commissioner, Edwin Yakobo Komakech, said the land rows between the two clans had escalated and that some LC2 chairmen were unlawfully charging land court sh75,000 fees instead of the Government rate of sh4,000.
"land wrangles in Acholi only exist in Amuru and not in Gulu, Pader or Kitgum," the RDC added. The district intelligence security officer, Albert Ogwal, said the Police should investigate allegations of the charges and arrest the LCs and chiefs who are involved.
"The law doesn't allow any person or leader to over charge and collect un authorised money," he said. The Rwot of Lamogi, Otinga Atuka and that of the Ariya clan, PiCoo Oywelo, who attended the training, denied the allegations that they were involved in collecting the alleged court fees from the LCs.
"Chiefs only attend courts on land when asked by the Chief Magistrate to give an input or intervene," Atuka retorted. Only the Rwot of Lamogi, Ariya and Pagak clans attended.
The training was funded by the Northern Uganda Transition Initiative and Amuru District Reconciliation Peace Team.
11 May 2009
By Dennis Ojwee
Traditional chiefs and LC chairmen in Acholi have been warned against corruption while handling the land wrangles between the Lamogi and Amuru clans.
"The wrangles over land between the clans are caused by some traditional chiefs (Rwot) and LCs who have personal interests," Amuru district Police commander Justino Ovuru said.
He was addressing local leaders and stakeholders at a two-day training on land usage at the Riser Gardens on Thursday
"In some areas, the chiefs allocate land to themselves. Some LC chairmen donot handling the land courts properly because they belong to the wrangling clans," Ovuru aded.
The resident district commissioner, Edwin Yakobo Komakech, said the land rows between the two clans had escalated and that some LC2 chairmen were unlawfully charging land court sh75,000 fees instead of the Government rate of sh4,000.
"land wrangles in Acholi only exist in Amuru and not in Gulu, Pader or Kitgum," the RDC added. The district intelligence security officer, Albert Ogwal, said the Police should investigate allegations of the charges and arrest the LCs and chiefs who are involved.
"The law doesn't allow any person or leader to over charge and collect un authorised money," he said. The Rwot of Lamogi, Otinga Atuka and that of the Ariya clan, PiCoo Oywelo, who attended the training, denied the allegations that they were involved in collecting the alleged court fees from the LCs.
"Chiefs only attend courts on land when asked by the Chief Magistrate to give an input or intervene," Atuka retorted. Only the Rwot of Lamogi, Ariya and Pagak clans attended.
The training was funded by the Northern Uganda Transition Initiative and Amuru District Reconciliation Peace Team.
Halliburton - U.S.$150 Million Traced to AVM Bello's Account.
Vanguard
12 May 2009
By Ise-Oluwa Ige and Ikechukwu Nnochiri
It has come to light that over $150 million of the $180 million Halliburton bribe money was allegedly disbursed through the account of former Chief of Air Staff, AVM A.D. Bello (rtd), while the sum of $11.5 million of the bribe money was found in Ibrahim Aliyu's foreign account, according to sources at the Special Investigation Panel headed by Inspector-General of Police, Mike Okiro.
However, investigators are shocked that AVM Bello is sticking to his defence that though the account through which the $180 million was disbursed was his, he had no knowledge of when or how the huge sum of money was disbursed and who the beneficiaries were.
AVM Bello (rtd) was also a former Managing Director of defunct national carrier, Nigeria Airways, while Ibrahim Aliyu is a brother to the governor of Niger State, Dr Muazu Babangida Aliyu.
Both men have been in detention for some time after their arrest by the investigation panel.
Vanguard gathered that the federal government also at the weekend requested the American Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to extradite one Mr. Jeffery Tessler, a Briton and lawyer of both AVM Bello and Ibrahim Aliyu who allegedly disbursed the $180 million bribe money through their accounts to help reveal the names of the beneficiaries.
Consequently, the investigating team, led by CP Amodu Ali of the Special Investigation Unit of the Police Force headquarters has no iota of doubt that Air Vice Marshal Bello (rtd) was in a position to disclose the beneficiaries of the Halliburton bribery money and the amount each of them got.
According to Vanguard sources, one of the accounts in question is an off-shore account opened in London for Bello by Jeffery Tessler. He (Bello) said that the account was opened in 2001 and that towards the end of that year (2001), he closed that account to any transaction whatsoever, and was therefore at a loss to how the account was used.
Having tried to reach the lawyer (Tessler) and failed, the Police investigating team asked AVM Bello to furnish it with documents of the offshore account showing that he closed down the account in 2001 and that he was not aware of any transaction with it.
This, our sources said, he has failed to do for almost two weeks now.
Asked how such account could be in operation over a period of time and the documents of transaction carried out with it could not be traced, the source said such offshore accounts don't need to have directors to be opened, rather what they have is a nominee director and Mr. Tessler is the only nominee director.
"That is why we have requested our American counterparts to intervene on our behalf over the arrest of Mr. Tessler and we are aware that motions have been put in place for the extradition of Mr Tessler to America to answer questions.
Ibrahim Aliyu's role
On the role of the brother of the governor of Niger State, the source said the same Mr. Tessler who is based in the UK, is both a business partner and lawyer to Ibrahim Aliyu and that he was the one Aliyu used to open an offshore account through which he (Aliyu) was to concretise his ownership of an oil block in Nigeria.
The source noted that when the account was opened in a Swiss bank, a huge amount of money from the Halliburton bribery money was found to have been moved through it while the sum of $11.5million was found in the account. He added that about $5million was also frozen from the same Aliyu's account by the foreign investigators.
Asked how long it would take before the names of those already made known by foreign investigators of having taken part in the sharing of the $180million was made public, the source said: "That is why we are going the extra mile to get Mr. Tessler because he disbursed the money."
It will be recalled that following public outcry over the $180million Halliburton bribery scandal, the Federal Government set up a five-man inter-agency investigation panel headed by the Inspector-General of Police, Mr Mike Okiro.
Attorney-General of the Federation, Chief Michael Aondoakaa, inaugurated the panel on April 21, 2009, and charged it to, among others, examine the circumstances surrounding the Halliburton bribery scandal in the Bonny Liquefied Natural Gas Project.
A senior officer involved in the investigation who spoke on condition of anonymity told Vanguard that by the time names are being mentioned in the coming days or we see the calibre of persons that are arrested, Nigerians would be shocked. He added that time has come for Nigerians to be told the truth about what is happening to their country.
Indications are also rife that more important personalities, including very senior citizens of the country both in and outside government are among those indicted. Past ministers, and top government officials would soon be picked up as investigations progresses because of information available to the investigating team, the source said.
12 May 2009
By Ise-Oluwa Ige and Ikechukwu Nnochiri
It has come to light that over $150 million of the $180 million Halliburton bribe money was allegedly disbursed through the account of former Chief of Air Staff, AVM A.D. Bello (rtd), while the sum of $11.5 million of the bribe money was found in Ibrahim Aliyu's foreign account, according to sources at the Special Investigation Panel headed by Inspector-General of Police, Mike Okiro.
However, investigators are shocked that AVM Bello is sticking to his defence that though the account through which the $180 million was disbursed was his, he had no knowledge of when or how the huge sum of money was disbursed and who the beneficiaries were.
AVM Bello (rtd) was also a former Managing Director of defunct national carrier, Nigeria Airways, while Ibrahim Aliyu is a brother to the governor of Niger State, Dr Muazu Babangida Aliyu.
Both men have been in detention for some time after their arrest by the investigation panel.
Vanguard gathered that the federal government also at the weekend requested the American Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to extradite one Mr. Jeffery Tessler, a Briton and lawyer of both AVM Bello and Ibrahim Aliyu who allegedly disbursed the $180 million bribe money through their accounts to help reveal the names of the beneficiaries.
Consequently, the investigating team, led by CP Amodu Ali of the Special Investigation Unit of the Police Force headquarters has no iota of doubt that Air Vice Marshal Bello (rtd) was in a position to disclose the beneficiaries of the Halliburton bribery money and the amount each of them got.
According to Vanguard sources, one of the accounts in question is an off-shore account opened in London for Bello by Jeffery Tessler. He (Bello) said that the account was opened in 2001 and that towards the end of that year (2001), he closed that account to any transaction whatsoever, and was therefore at a loss to how the account was used.
Having tried to reach the lawyer (Tessler) and failed, the Police investigating team asked AVM Bello to furnish it with documents of the offshore account showing that he closed down the account in 2001 and that he was not aware of any transaction with it.
This, our sources said, he has failed to do for almost two weeks now.
Asked how such account could be in operation over a period of time and the documents of transaction carried out with it could not be traced, the source said such offshore accounts don't need to have directors to be opened, rather what they have is a nominee director and Mr. Tessler is the only nominee director.
"That is why we have requested our American counterparts to intervene on our behalf over the arrest of Mr. Tessler and we are aware that motions have been put in place for the extradition of Mr Tessler to America to answer questions.
Ibrahim Aliyu's role
On the role of the brother of the governor of Niger State, the source said the same Mr. Tessler who is based in the UK, is both a business partner and lawyer to Ibrahim Aliyu and that he was the one Aliyu used to open an offshore account through which he (Aliyu) was to concretise his ownership of an oil block in Nigeria.
The source noted that when the account was opened in a Swiss bank, a huge amount of money from the Halliburton bribery money was found to have been moved through it while the sum of $11.5million was found in the account. He added that about $5million was also frozen from the same Aliyu's account by the foreign investigators.
Asked how long it would take before the names of those already made known by foreign investigators of having taken part in the sharing of the $180million was made public, the source said: "That is why we are going the extra mile to get Mr. Tessler because he disbursed the money."
It will be recalled that following public outcry over the $180million Halliburton bribery scandal, the Federal Government set up a five-man inter-agency investigation panel headed by the Inspector-General of Police, Mr Mike Okiro.
Attorney-General of the Federation, Chief Michael Aondoakaa, inaugurated the panel on April 21, 2009, and charged it to, among others, examine the circumstances surrounding the Halliburton bribery scandal in the Bonny Liquefied Natural Gas Project.
A senior officer involved in the investigation who spoke on condition of anonymity told Vanguard that by the time names are being mentioned in the coming days or we see the calibre of persons that are arrested, Nigerians would be shocked. He added that time has come for Nigerians to be told the truth about what is happening to their country.
Indications are also rife that more important personalities, including very senior citizens of the country both in and outside government are among those indicted. Past ministers, and top government officials would soon be picked up as investigations progresses because of information available to the investigating team, the source said.
11 May, 2009
Madagascar wants US envoy out.
DPA
11 May 2009
Madagascar's Prime Minister Monja Roindefa says Niels Marquadt, the critical United States Ambassador to the island nation, should leave if he does not stop interfering in the country's internal affairs.
The prime minister criticised the US diplomat in several speeches made during an official visit to the south-west of the country.
If Marquardt continues to interfere, it would be better for him to leave the island, Moindefa said.
Marquardt has called for dialogue since the start of a power struggle launched by the 34-year-old Andry Rajoelina in late January.
Since Rajoelina overthrew the head of state Marc Ravalomanana in mid-March, the US ambassador has publicly called for a return to constitutional order and fresh elections to be held this year.
11 May 2009
Madagascar's Prime Minister Monja Roindefa says Niels Marquadt, the critical United States Ambassador to the island nation, should leave if he does not stop interfering in the country's internal affairs.
The prime minister criticised the US diplomat in several speeches made during an official visit to the south-west of the country.
If Marquardt continues to interfere, it would be better for him to leave the island, Moindefa said.
Marquardt has called for dialogue since the start of a power struggle launched by the 34-year-old Andry Rajoelina in late January.
Since Rajoelina overthrew the head of state Marc Ravalomanana in mid-March, the US ambassador has publicly called for a return to constitutional order and fresh elections to be held this year.
Africa Tractored out by “land grabs”?
IRIN
11 May 2009
Rich countries and firms are leasing or buying massive tracts of land in developing nations for the production of food or biofuel.
An area equivalent to Germany’s farmed land is at stake, and tens of billions of dollars on offer.
On the plus side, agro-industrial production could develop underused land, and broaden the world’s food production base while providing much needed resources for poor countries.
But is the land really idle and currently unused? Are small-scale farmers going to be “tractored out” in a murky neo-colonial “land grab”?
Farmers and experts in several African countries know all too well the need for higher food production, but the scale and structure of the deals gives rise to concern on many fronts, according to multiple interviews.
The food and fuel prices hikes of 2007 and 2008 and a steadily growing world population raised the immediate and strategic value of food production.
Food-importing countries that lack land and water but are rich in capital, such as the Gulf States, are initiating deals to produce food in developing countries, where land and water are more abundant and production costs much lower.
Vast tracts of land and huge amounts of money are involved: 15 million to 20 million hectares, almost equivalent to the total area under cultivation in Germany, according to analysts at the US-based International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Investment so far adds up to $20 billion to $30 billion, dwarfing foreign aid budgets for agriculture.
Murky?
Joachim von Braun and Ruth Meinzen-Dick of IFPRI point out in a new policy brief that developing countries with large populations, like China, South Korea and India, are seeking similar deals, including growing biofuel crops.
The institute warned that there was a "lack of transparency" in many deals, with the amounts involved "often still murky".
Farmers will never be real farmers again, job or no job.
Land is an "emotional issue", said Theo de Jager, deputy president of Agri SA, the South African farmers' association. Some of the deals have already begun to ruffle feathers in developing countries, most of which are highly food insecure, and at least one has led to the overthrow of a government.
An April 2009 policy paper from the German NGO Welt Hunger Hilfe says: “States that are dependent on food imports, in particular, are surrendering more and more land to foreign investors while failing to ensure that conditions improve income and food security for their own population. Agricultural investments are rarely made in such a way that they offer the local population a genuine share of the benefits.” The paper also points out the risks of high-level corruption.
The president of the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP), Ajay Vashee, told IRIN "Faced with a growing population, if we do not increase our global food production I can foresee another crisis, maybe in another two years." IFAP, formed in 1946, claims to represent 600 million mostly small-scale farmers, a third of the world's food-growers.
"We are not against the deals, as they will bring in huge amounts of money for agricultural infrastructure development, besides boosting food production globally, but we must also realise that in most developing countries, such as those in Africa, most small-scale farmers have customary rights and face the threat of being forced off their land," said Vashee, who farms in Zambia.
IFPRI has called for a code of conduct to be drawn up, modelled on international business laws to prevent corrupt practices in the context of foreign direct investment.
So what's the deal?
According to von Braun, the arrangements usually involve governments, either directly or through state-owned entities and public-private partnerships, and the land was usually leased or made available through concessions, but was sometimes bought.
"The size and terms of the contract differ widely - some deals do not involve direct land acquisition, but seek to secure food supplies through contract farming [[and investing in]] rural and agricultural infrastructure, including irrigation systems and roads - these are the better deals."
The concept is not new. Von Braun pointed out that China started leasing land for food production in Cuba and Mexico 10 years ago.
However, in its 2008 report on "land grabbing", GRAIN, a Spain-based NGO that promotes the sustainable management and use of agricultural biodiversity, warned that the "very basis on which to build food sovereignty is simply being bartered away" in the deals.
"These lands will be transformed from smallholdings or forests, or whatever they may be, into large industrial estates connected to far-off markets. Farmers will never be real farmers again, job or no job," GRAIN cautioned.
Various Gulf States have struck most of the deals in East Africa, which is facing some of the biggest food shortages globally. IFPRI's von Braun and David Hallam of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) told IRIN it was "too early" to assess the impact of the deals on food security and farmers in the lessor countries.
Unease, resistance and protests
Farming and pastoralist communities in the delta of Kenya's Tana River have reacted strongly to reports of government's intention to lease a chunk of this rich coastal land to Qatar. Kenya is facing huge food shortages and high prices after a third consecutive year of drought.
Mohammed Mbwana, who farms in the area and is an official of the Shungwaya Welfare Association, a local NGO, said the agreement would displace thousands of locals. At least 150,000 families in farming and pastoralist communities depend on the land in question, said to be part of Kenya's biggest wetland.
Tana River County councillors have threatened to go to court and block government's plans to lease the land. The council's vice-chairman, Gure Golo, told IRIN they were opposed to the project because local communities used the delta for produce and livestock farming.
During drought periods, pastoralists from as far as Garissa, the capital of neighbouring North-Eastern Province, and other arid regions, came to the delta in search of pasture and water, he said.
According to media reports, Mozambicans have resisted the settlement of thousands of Chinese agricultural workers on leased land.
In Madagascar, negotiations with the South Korean Daewoo Logistics Corporation to lease 1.3 million hectares to grow maize and oil palms played a role in the political conflict that led to the overthrow of the government earlier this year, the IFPRI brief said.
In Malawi, Chinese investors were allocated land, used by locals for agriculture in the southern town of Balaka, to construct a cotton processing plant. When protests followed, local traditional leaders were taken to neighbouring Zambia to see what the Chinese might deliver in terms of development. When they came back they relented and opted to move to another area "because the Chinese would create jobs for their subjects", a government official told IRIN.
Victor Mhone of the Civil Society Agriculture Network (CISANET), a grouping of individuals and NGOS in Malawi, said: "What we need as a country is to improve on food production, and that can be done if we empower local farmers by giving them the best land for cultivation. Foreign companies are here to make profits and there is little that we can benefit from, whatever they will be growing here."
Sudan, which has received some of the biggest foreign investments in agriculture in Africa, dismissed notions of the emergence of a new form of colonialism.
Abdeldafi Fadlalla Ali, the Federal Agriculture Commissioner at the Sudanese Ministry of Investment, told IRIN that they always ensured local interests were taken care of in the deals - the produce was sold locally and local people "become the highest beneficiaries".
Sudan, Ali said, has 84 million hectares of arable land, of which only 20 percent is under cultivation, and had registered 75 deals worth $3.5 billion in eight years. Almost $930 million of this was already invested. Eight countries, including Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Egypt, Jordan, China and India are involved.
Ali reasoned that in the face of limited domestic capital, foreign investment seemed to be a "better strategy" to achieve agricultural targets, and expected that produce from the deals would be exported in future.
Millions of Sudanese require food aid, according to the UN. However, Ali claimed food insecurity was more related to transport and marketing than absolute production shortfalls.
Millions of people need food aid in Sudan, which has received some of the biggest foreign investments in agriculture in Africa.
Safeguards
IFPRI recommends transparency, respect for existing land rights, sharing of benefits, environmental sustainability and adherence to national trade policies as key elements to be incorporated in a proposed code of conduct. This could include foreign investors being denied the right to export during an acute national food crisis.
Farmers and think-tanks talk about turning this "opportunity" into a "win-win" situation. While the agriculture sector in most poor countries grapples with the impact of the economic slowdown, deals for arable land continue to prove attractive.
Rwanda recently announced a new programme to identify “unexploited“ arable land for foreign investors. On the other hand, the Republic of Congo announced it would lease 10 million hectares of farmland to individual foreign farmers to boost its food security.
"This is a better option - leasing out land to farmers who will transfer skills to local farmers, boost the country's production, and care about the land," said Agri SA's de Jager. South African farmers have helped improve production in Zambia, Botswana, Mozambique and Nigeria, among other countries he said.
But IFAP's Vashee pointed out that farmers cannot bring in the huge investment needed to build or rebuild infrastructure.
IFPRI is working with the African Union to develop guidelines on how to negotiate with foreign investors, which will be presented to African leaders for ratification at a summit in July.
11 May 2009
Rich countries and firms are leasing or buying massive tracts of land in developing nations for the production of food or biofuel.
An area equivalent to Germany’s farmed land is at stake, and tens of billions of dollars on offer.
On the plus side, agro-industrial production could develop underused land, and broaden the world’s food production base while providing much needed resources for poor countries.
But is the land really idle and currently unused? Are small-scale farmers going to be “tractored out” in a murky neo-colonial “land grab”?
Farmers and experts in several African countries know all too well the need for higher food production, but the scale and structure of the deals gives rise to concern on many fronts, according to multiple interviews.
The food and fuel prices hikes of 2007 and 2008 and a steadily growing world population raised the immediate and strategic value of food production.
Food-importing countries that lack land and water but are rich in capital, such as the Gulf States, are initiating deals to produce food in developing countries, where land and water are more abundant and production costs much lower.
Vast tracts of land and huge amounts of money are involved: 15 million to 20 million hectares, almost equivalent to the total area under cultivation in Germany, according to analysts at the US-based International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Investment so far adds up to $20 billion to $30 billion, dwarfing foreign aid budgets for agriculture.
Murky?
Joachim von Braun and Ruth Meinzen-Dick of IFPRI point out in a new policy brief that developing countries with large populations, like China, South Korea and India, are seeking similar deals, including growing biofuel crops.
The institute warned that there was a "lack of transparency" in many deals, with the amounts involved "often still murky".
Farmers will never be real farmers again, job or no job.
Land is an "emotional issue", said Theo de Jager, deputy president of Agri SA, the South African farmers' association. Some of the deals have already begun to ruffle feathers in developing countries, most of which are highly food insecure, and at least one has led to the overthrow of a government.
An April 2009 policy paper from the German NGO Welt Hunger Hilfe says: “States that are dependent on food imports, in particular, are surrendering more and more land to foreign investors while failing to ensure that conditions improve income and food security for their own population. Agricultural investments are rarely made in such a way that they offer the local population a genuine share of the benefits.” The paper also points out the risks of high-level corruption.
The president of the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP), Ajay Vashee, told IRIN "Faced with a growing population, if we do not increase our global food production I can foresee another crisis, maybe in another two years." IFAP, formed in 1946, claims to represent 600 million mostly small-scale farmers, a third of the world's food-growers.
"We are not against the deals, as they will bring in huge amounts of money for agricultural infrastructure development, besides boosting food production globally, but we must also realise that in most developing countries, such as those in Africa, most small-scale farmers have customary rights and face the threat of being forced off their land," said Vashee, who farms in Zambia.
IFPRI has called for a code of conduct to be drawn up, modelled on international business laws to prevent corrupt practices in the context of foreign direct investment.
So what's the deal?
According to von Braun, the arrangements usually involve governments, either directly or through state-owned entities and public-private partnerships, and the land was usually leased or made available through concessions, but was sometimes bought.
"The size and terms of the contract differ widely - some deals do not involve direct land acquisition, but seek to secure food supplies through contract farming [[and investing in]] rural and agricultural infrastructure, including irrigation systems and roads - these are the better deals."
The concept is not new. Von Braun pointed out that China started leasing land for food production in Cuba and Mexico 10 years ago.
However, in its 2008 report on "land grabbing", GRAIN, a Spain-based NGO that promotes the sustainable management and use of agricultural biodiversity, warned that the "very basis on which to build food sovereignty is simply being bartered away" in the deals.
"These lands will be transformed from smallholdings or forests, or whatever they may be, into large industrial estates connected to far-off markets. Farmers will never be real farmers again, job or no job," GRAIN cautioned.
Various Gulf States have struck most of the deals in East Africa, which is facing some of the biggest food shortages globally. IFPRI's von Braun and David Hallam of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) told IRIN it was "too early" to assess the impact of the deals on food security and farmers in the lessor countries.
Unease, resistance and protests
Farming and pastoralist communities in the delta of Kenya's Tana River have reacted strongly to reports of government's intention to lease a chunk of this rich coastal land to Qatar. Kenya is facing huge food shortages and high prices after a third consecutive year of drought.
Mohammed Mbwana, who farms in the area and is an official of the Shungwaya Welfare Association, a local NGO, said the agreement would displace thousands of locals. At least 150,000 families in farming and pastoralist communities depend on the land in question, said to be part of Kenya's biggest wetland.
Tana River County councillors have threatened to go to court and block government's plans to lease the land. The council's vice-chairman, Gure Golo, told IRIN they were opposed to the project because local communities used the delta for produce and livestock farming.
During drought periods, pastoralists from as far as Garissa, the capital of neighbouring North-Eastern Province, and other arid regions, came to the delta in search of pasture and water, he said.
According to media reports, Mozambicans have resisted the settlement of thousands of Chinese agricultural workers on leased land.
In Madagascar, negotiations with the South Korean Daewoo Logistics Corporation to lease 1.3 million hectares to grow maize and oil palms played a role in the political conflict that led to the overthrow of the government earlier this year, the IFPRI brief said.
In Malawi, Chinese investors were allocated land, used by locals for agriculture in the southern town of Balaka, to construct a cotton processing plant. When protests followed, local traditional leaders were taken to neighbouring Zambia to see what the Chinese might deliver in terms of development. When they came back they relented and opted to move to another area "because the Chinese would create jobs for their subjects", a government official told IRIN.
Victor Mhone of the Civil Society Agriculture Network (CISANET), a grouping of individuals and NGOS in Malawi, said: "What we need as a country is to improve on food production, and that can be done if we empower local farmers by giving them the best land for cultivation. Foreign companies are here to make profits and there is little that we can benefit from, whatever they will be growing here."
Sudan, which has received some of the biggest foreign investments in agriculture in Africa, dismissed notions of the emergence of a new form of colonialism.
Abdeldafi Fadlalla Ali, the Federal Agriculture Commissioner at the Sudanese Ministry of Investment, told IRIN that they always ensured local interests were taken care of in the deals - the produce was sold locally and local people "become the highest beneficiaries".
Sudan, Ali said, has 84 million hectares of arable land, of which only 20 percent is under cultivation, and had registered 75 deals worth $3.5 billion in eight years. Almost $930 million of this was already invested. Eight countries, including Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Egypt, Jordan, China and India are involved.
Ali reasoned that in the face of limited domestic capital, foreign investment seemed to be a "better strategy" to achieve agricultural targets, and expected that produce from the deals would be exported in future.
Millions of Sudanese require food aid, according to the UN. However, Ali claimed food insecurity was more related to transport and marketing than absolute production shortfalls.
Millions of people need food aid in Sudan, which has received some of the biggest foreign investments in agriculture in Africa.
Safeguards
IFPRI recommends transparency, respect for existing land rights, sharing of benefits, environmental sustainability and adherence to national trade policies as key elements to be incorporated in a proposed code of conduct. This could include foreign investors being denied the right to export during an acute national food crisis.
Farmers and think-tanks talk about turning this "opportunity" into a "win-win" situation. While the agriculture sector in most poor countries grapples with the impact of the economic slowdown, deals for arable land continue to prove attractive.
Rwanda recently announced a new programme to identify “unexploited“ arable land for foreign investors. On the other hand, the Republic of Congo announced it would lease 10 million hectares of farmland to individual foreign farmers to boost its food security.
"This is a better option - leasing out land to farmers who will transfer skills to local farmers, boost the country's production, and care about the land," said Agri SA's de Jager. South African farmers have helped improve production in Zambia, Botswana, Mozambique and Nigeria, among other countries he said.
But IFAP's Vashee pointed out that farmers cannot bring in the huge investment needed to build or rebuild infrastructure.
IFPRI is working with the African Union to develop guidelines on how to negotiate with foreign investors, which will be presented to African leaders for ratification at a summit in July.
Guinea coup leader says will not run for president.
BBC News
10 May 2009
Guinea's military coup leader Captain Moussa Dadis Camara has said he will not run in forthcoming elections.
Capt Camara said none of the other leaders who helped bring him to power in December's coup would run either.
Capt Camara came to power in a bloodless coup after the death of President Lansana Conte, who had ruled Guinea for 24 years.
Polls are due to take place in Guinea, a mineral rich but poverty-stricken country, at the end of the year.
Politicians criticised
"We're heading into elections. I am not going to run and the members of the CNDD (National Council for the Defence of Democracy) are also not going to run," Capt Camara was quoted by the AFP news agency as saying.
But despite ruling himself out of the running, the captain criticised politicians for trying to force the military to leave power early, the agency reported.
In April, two army officers were arrested on suspicion of plotting a coup, as Capt Camara prepared for his first official trip outside the country.
More than a third of the world's bauxite reserves are in Guinea, but its people are among the poorest in West Africa.
10 May 2009
Guinea's military coup leader Captain Moussa Dadis Camara has said he will not run in forthcoming elections.
Capt Camara said none of the other leaders who helped bring him to power in December's coup would run either.
Capt Camara came to power in a bloodless coup after the death of President Lansana Conte, who had ruled Guinea for 24 years.
Polls are due to take place in Guinea, a mineral rich but poverty-stricken country, at the end of the year.
Politicians criticised
"We're heading into elections. I am not going to run and the members of the CNDD (National Council for the Defence of Democracy) are also not going to run," Capt Camara was quoted by the AFP news agency as saying.
But despite ruling himself out of the running, the captain criticised politicians for trying to force the military to leave power early, the agency reported.
In April, two army officers were arrested on suspicion of plotting a coup, as Capt Camara prepared for his first official trip outside the country.
More than a third of the world's bauxite reserves are in Guinea, but its people are among the poorest in West Africa.
10 May, 2009
Victims’ Request to Speak in Hartmann Trial Dismissed.
IWPR
By Simon Jennings in The Hague (TU No 600, 8-May-09)
Hague tribunal judges set to hear the case against former prosecution spokeswoman Florence Hartmann have denied permission to regional war victims’ organisations to present arguments during the trial.
The Association of the Concentration-Camp Detainees in Bosnia and Hercegovina, the Association of Mothers of the Srebrenica and Zepa Enclaves and the Association of Women Victims of War wrote to the court in March this year, requesting to appear before it to provide information which they said would contribute to a fair trial for Hartmann.
Hartmann, who was spokeswoman to former chief prosecutor Carla Del Ponte from 1999 until 2006, faces trial for two counts of contempt of court for allegedly revealing the contents of confidential decisions made by appeal judges in the trial of former Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic. Milosevic’s war crimes trial for atrocities in Bosnia, Croatia and Kosovo, which began in 2002, was never completed as he died in his cell in March 2006.
According to the order issued by the trial chamber in place of an indictment on August 27, 2008, Hartmann is responsible for “knowingly and wilfully disclosing information in knowing violation of an order of [judges]”.
The court order states that the disclosures were made in Hartmann’s 2007 book Paix and Chatiment (Peace and Punishment), and in an article, Vital Genocide Documents Concealed, which was published on the Bosnian Institute website on January 21, 2008.
Hartmann allegedly revealed elements of two confidential decisions – made by appeals judges on September 20, 2005 and April 6, 2006 – while at the same time acknowledging that they were confidential.
The decisions are thought to relate to the court’s handling of certain documents, including minutes of meetings of Serbia’s Supreme Defence Council, SDC, during the wars in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s.
The contents of these documents have been kept confidential by the court – under rules that enable it to protect a state’s national security – but are widely believed to include crucial information about Belgrade’s involvement in the wars.
By requesting to appear in Hartmann’s trial, the victims’ organisations were seeking to present information to the court about the “damages that both the victims and all the communities in the region have suffered because of the so-called protected archives and documents”.
They also said they wished to inform the chamber of the difficulties of prosecuting war crimes suspects and compensating victims in the region as a result of the Hague tribunal continuing to protect the documents.
Under tribunal rules, judges may invite or allow a state, organisation or person to appear before it as an amicus curiae – or friend of the court – and make submissions on a particular issue if they consider it “desirable for the proper determination of the case”.
The organisations said they also wanted to demonstrate the negative impact of holding the proceedings against Hartmann.
According to them, the trial may “destabilise relations in the region, inflame victims’ frustrations, [and] endanger the founding principles of the work of the [tribunal],” said the groups in their joint letter of March 13 this year.
“Trust in the [tribunal] and international justice might be lost [as a result of this].”
The Association of Concentration Camp Detainees of Bosnia and Herzegovina wrote a separate letter to the court on February 2, 2009, also seeking to present arguments during the Hartmann case for the confidential Serbian military documents in the court’s possession to be made public.
The organisation believes that the documents will show that refugee camps which housed Bosniak, Croat and Serb civilians in Serbia during the war were actually prisons, deliberately set up as such by the former Yugoslav authorities.
Serbian officials have denied that this was the case, arguing that the camps served as collection centres for refugees in the region, and maintain that conditions inside were in line with international law.
However, in a ruling of May 6, judges denied the organisations the opportunity to put their concerns to the court as part of the contempt case against Hartmann.
“The chamber is of the view that it would not be desirable for the proper determination of this matter to consider the submissions proposed by the applicants,” ruled judges. No further reasons were given.
Murat Tahirovic, president of the Association of Concentration Camp Detainees of Bosnia and Hercegovina, has told IWPR that he will be appealing the decision of the specially appointed chamber of judges hearing the Hartmann case not to hear arguments for releasing protected documents.
“[The] Association of Concentration Camp Detainees of Bosnia and Herzegovina is not satisfied with the decision of the specially appointed chamber,” he told IWPR.
“Victims of torture in the camps deserve to participate in the [trial] process. We hope that [the court will] reconsider our request, or appeal, [and] allow [us] to take part in the legal process against Florence Hartmann.”
No new date has been set for Hartmann’s trial, which was originally scheduled for February 5 this year. Prior to that date, the case was suspended on the back of a request from the defence for two judges to be replaced because they “lacked an appearance of impartiality”.
A panel of judges appointed by the court’s president to oversee the matter ruled that the relationship between the judges and the appointed prosecutor, Bruce MacFarlane, “may lead an objective observer to conclude that the chamber has an interest in the investigation and prosecution of the case against Ms Hartmann”.
The two judges – Carmel Agius and Alphons Orie – were removed from the case and replaced by Judge Mehmet Guney and Judge Liu Daqun on April 2.
The defence has since filed a request on April 21 for judges to set aside all orders and decisions made by the previous judges, including the charges themselves.
It says that the charges against Hartmann are no longer valid as they were initiated by the previous judges, and argues that the new judges should neither reinitiate nor continue with the contempt proceedings against the accused.
No ruling has yet been made on this request.
By Simon Jennings in The Hague (TU No 600, 8-May-09)
Hague tribunal judges set to hear the case against former prosecution spokeswoman Florence Hartmann have denied permission to regional war victims’ organisations to present arguments during the trial.
The Association of the Concentration-Camp Detainees in Bosnia and Hercegovina, the Association of Mothers of the Srebrenica and Zepa Enclaves and the Association of Women Victims of War wrote to the court in March this year, requesting to appear before it to provide information which they said would contribute to a fair trial for Hartmann.
Hartmann, who was spokeswoman to former chief prosecutor Carla Del Ponte from 1999 until 2006, faces trial for two counts of contempt of court for allegedly revealing the contents of confidential decisions made by appeal judges in the trial of former Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic. Milosevic’s war crimes trial for atrocities in Bosnia, Croatia and Kosovo, which began in 2002, was never completed as he died in his cell in March 2006.
According to the order issued by the trial chamber in place of an indictment on August 27, 2008, Hartmann is responsible for “knowingly and wilfully disclosing information in knowing violation of an order of [judges]”.
The court order states that the disclosures were made in Hartmann’s 2007 book Paix and Chatiment (Peace and Punishment), and in an article, Vital Genocide Documents Concealed, which was published on the Bosnian Institute website on January 21, 2008.
Hartmann allegedly revealed elements of two confidential decisions – made by appeals judges on September 20, 2005 and April 6, 2006 – while at the same time acknowledging that they were confidential.
The decisions are thought to relate to the court’s handling of certain documents, including minutes of meetings of Serbia’s Supreme Defence Council, SDC, during the wars in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s.
The contents of these documents have been kept confidential by the court – under rules that enable it to protect a state’s national security – but are widely believed to include crucial information about Belgrade’s involvement in the wars.
By requesting to appear in Hartmann’s trial, the victims’ organisations were seeking to present information to the court about the “damages that both the victims and all the communities in the region have suffered because of the so-called protected archives and documents”.
They also said they wished to inform the chamber of the difficulties of prosecuting war crimes suspects and compensating victims in the region as a result of the Hague tribunal continuing to protect the documents.
Under tribunal rules, judges may invite or allow a state, organisation or person to appear before it as an amicus curiae – or friend of the court – and make submissions on a particular issue if they consider it “desirable for the proper determination of the case”.
The organisations said they also wanted to demonstrate the negative impact of holding the proceedings against Hartmann.
According to them, the trial may “destabilise relations in the region, inflame victims’ frustrations, [and] endanger the founding principles of the work of the [tribunal],” said the groups in their joint letter of March 13 this year.
“Trust in the [tribunal] and international justice might be lost [as a result of this].”
The Association of Concentration Camp Detainees of Bosnia and Herzegovina wrote a separate letter to the court on February 2, 2009, also seeking to present arguments during the Hartmann case for the confidential Serbian military documents in the court’s possession to be made public.
The organisation believes that the documents will show that refugee camps which housed Bosniak, Croat and Serb civilians in Serbia during the war were actually prisons, deliberately set up as such by the former Yugoslav authorities.
Serbian officials have denied that this was the case, arguing that the camps served as collection centres for refugees in the region, and maintain that conditions inside were in line with international law.
However, in a ruling of May 6, judges denied the organisations the opportunity to put their concerns to the court as part of the contempt case against Hartmann.
“The chamber is of the view that it would not be desirable for the proper determination of this matter to consider the submissions proposed by the applicants,” ruled judges. No further reasons were given.
Murat Tahirovic, president of the Association of Concentration Camp Detainees of Bosnia and Hercegovina, has told IWPR that he will be appealing the decision of the specially appointed chamber of judges hearing the Hartmann case not to hear arguments for releasing protected documents.
“[The] Association of Concentration Camp Detainees of Bosnia and Herzegovina is not satisfied with the decision of the specially appointed chamber,” he told IWPR.
“Victims of torture in the camps deserve to participate in the [trial] process. We hope that [the court will] reconsider our request, or appeal, [and] allow [us] to take part in the legal process against Florence Hartmann.”
No new date has been set for Hartmann’s trial, which was originally scheduled for February 5 this year. Prior to that date, the case was suspended on the back of a request from the defence for two judges to be replaced because they “lacked an appearance of impartiality”.
A panel of judges appointed by the court’s president to oversee the matter ruled that the relationship between the judges and the appointed prosecutor, Bruce MacFarlane, “may lead an objective observer to conclude that the chamber has an interest in the investigation and prosecution of the case against Ms Hartmann”.
The two judges – Carmel Agius and Alphons Orie – were removed from the case and replaced by Judge Mehmet Guney and Judge Liu Daqun on April 2.
The defence has since filed a request on April 21 for judges to set aside all orders and decisions made by the previous judges, including the charges themselves.
It says that the charges against Hartmann are no longer valid as they were initiated by the previous judges, and argues that the new judges should neither reinitiate nor continue with the contempt proceedings against the accused.
No ruling has yet been made on this request.
Charges Against Karadzic Questioned.
IWPR
By Simon Jennings in The Hague (TU No 600, 8-May-09)
Prosecutors bringing the case against former Bosnian Serb president Radovan Karadzic at the Hague tribunal came under the spotlight this week when the pre-trial judge questioned them about their formulation of the charges against the defendant.
Judge Iain Bonomy raised concerns relating to the prosecution’s allegations that Karadzic took part in three separate criminal conspiracies, known as “joint criminal enterprises”, in Bosnia between 1992 and 1995.
According to the prosecution’s indictment, these separate plans all fell under an earlier conceived, “overarching plan” aimed at permanently removing Bosniaks and Bosnian Croats from Bosnian Serb- claimed territory in Bosnia.
Judge Bonomy pointed out that in the indictment, the description of the overarching plan – which was alleged to have been conducted in Bosnia from as early as October 1991 until November 30, 1995 – omits three of the 11 counts, as well as two of the three additional alleged criminal conspiracies that Karadzic is accused of.
“It is difficult to see how the initial joint criminal enterprise [which is outlined in the indictment] can be said to be ‘overarching’,” Judge Bonomy told American prosecutor, Alan Tieger.
The prosecution has charged Karadzic with separate criminal conspiracies relating to the siege of Sarajevo between April 1992 and November 1995; the 1995 genocide at Srebrenica when approximately 8,000 Bosniak males were slaughtered; and the taking of United Nations hostages between May and June 1995 to force NATO to refrain from carrying out airstrikes against Bosnian Serb targets.
Karadzic was also part of the “overarching” plan carried out between October 1991 and November 30, 1995, say prosecutors in the indictment.
“[The mention of an ‘overarching’ plan] would tend to indicate that the other three somehow fall within the ambit of this overarching joint criminal enterprise,” Judge Bonomy told the prosecution.
“But a closer reading of the indictment indicates that the [siege of Sarajevo and the UN hostage allegation] do not, on the face of the indictment, fall within the overarching joint criminal enterprise.”
Tieger responded that all forms of joint criminal enterprise charged in the indictment were interlinked.
“The pursuit of these [three separate] objectives was related to the [initial] objective and overarching joint criminal enterprise to permanently remove Bosnian Muslims [from parts of Bosnia Herzegovina],” said Tieger.
“Each of the [three] joint criminal enterprises furthered and were related to the overarching joint criminal enterprise.”
The discussion – which was held at a meeting between all the parties in court this week – stemmed from a request made by Karadzic for the three separate conspiracies to be removed from the indictment and for him only to be charged with the single “overarching” joint criminal enterprise.
“The prosecutor alleges four separate joint criminal enterprises that took place in Bosnia Herzegovina of which the timeframes, the objectives, the members, and Dr Karadzic’s alleged role in the joint criminal enterprises significantly overlap,” Karadzic wrote to judges on March 19.
“Moreover, the prosecutor pleads that these joint criminal enterprises all share the same common purpose.”
Karadzic has also insisted that charging a defendant with multiple joint criminal enterprises is “unprecedented” at the tribunal. However, Tieger told the court this week that that was not the case.
Clarifying the prosecution’s indictment, Tieger said that without referring to an “overarching” plan, the prosecution would “misleadingly signal” that the three conspiracies were not all related to one another within a single plan to remove non-Serbs from parts of Bosnia.
“The use of the term ‘overarching’ provides greater clarity about the relationship between the four joint criminal enterprises,” said Tieger.
Tieger explained further that in referring to an “overarching” plan, prosecutors were trying to establish Karadzic’s responsibility for every crime he has been charged with. However, this explanation did not appear to satisfy Judge Bonomy.
“That’s just a lot of words to me, Mr Tieger,” replied the judge, who said prosecutors were required to show the nature of the defendant’s involvement in all the alleged crimes.
Asked to speak on the matter, Karadzic expressed his concern that charging him with multiple joint criminal enterprises made his case even more complex.
“This is going to complicate something which is already very complicated and a voluminous case,” he said.
He also appeared confident that judges would ask prosecutors to amend the indictment and said that it should be done promptly.
“I’m sure that this pre-trial chamber and the appeals chamber will recognise and adhere to all of my requests and it would be much better if the prosecution were to accept your well-intentioned proposals and amend the indictment within a few weeks and not have it arrive in December because then these proceedings will be extended a great deal,” he told Judge Bonomy.
Following Karadzic’s arrest in Belgrade in July 2008, prosecutors submitted an amended indictment on September 22 last year. Although the indictment was confirmed on February 18, 2009, prosecutors were forced to amend it for the third time on February 27.
This was because judges would not support a charge for the killing of up to 140 detainees at the Susica prison camp in the Bosnian town of Vlasenica because prosecutors had mistakenly not submitted the necessary evidence.
Any amendments requested by judges on the back of Karadzic’s March 19 request could result in a fourth indictment being filed.
A number of other motions currently before the court, mainly filed by the defendant, were discussed by parties this week as Judge Bonomy seeks to ready the case for trial.
The judge rejected Karadzic’s request that, on the basis of equality of arms, the prosecution be given the same limitations in its contact with the media as him.
The court’s registry has allowed Karadzic to conduct an interview with a journalist in The Netherlands via written letter. Among other restrictions, the registry has limited the journalist’s questions to 500 words and Karadzic’s response to 2,000 words and told the defendant not to make any political statements.
“The chamber has carefully considered this and is satisfied that it does not raise an issue of equality of arms,” said Judge Bonomy.
“Your motion borders on the frivolous.”
The parties also discussed Karadzic’s bid to have the whole case against him dropped because, he alleged, the prosecution abused tribunal procedures.
Last month, he said that searches on his relatives’ homes in Sarajevo initiated by the prosecution had intimidated potential witnesses in his case and therefore harmed his defence.
The prosecution was, in fact, responsible for only one of the searches, on March 27, and has denied accusations of illegal procedure.
“The accused’s allegations of an abuse of process are baseless and unsupported. His right to a fair trial has not been compromised by the searches, and he has not suffered any prejudice,” responded the Office of The Prosecutor, OTP, on April 27.
This week, Judge Bonomy wanted to know if the prosecution was able to disclose the documents that police from Bosnia’s Serb dominated entity, Republika Srpska, found during their search of Karadzic’s sister-in-law’s house and handed to OTP in Sarajevo last month.
“We do not yet have the materials in house, although I believe their receipt is imminent,” said Tieger.
“It’s rather surprising that they should arrive in your office in Sarajevo on April 21 and be regarded as not urgent. We are [now] another two weeks down the line and we still don’t have them,” said Judge Bonomy.
“I will always be concerned about what appears to be a lack of urgency in this case.”
Judge Bonomy said that judges would likely rule on the joint criminal enterprise issue and Karadzic’s abuse of process motion next week.
All parties are scheduled to meet in court again on June 3.
By Simon Jennings in The Hague (TU No 600, 8-May-09)
Prosecutors bringing the case against former Bosnian Serb president Radovan Karadzic at the Hague tribunal came under the spotlight this week when the pre-trial judge questioned them about their formulation of the charges against the defendant.
Judge Iain Bonomy raised concerns relating to the prosecution’s allegations that Karadzic took part in three separate criminal conspiracies, known as “joint criminal enterprises”, in Bosnia between 1992 and 1995.
According to the prosecution’s indictment, these separate plans all fell under an earlier conceived, “overarching plan” aimed at permanently removing Bosniaks and Bosnian Croats from Bosnian Serb- claimed territory in Bosnia.
Judge Bonomy pointed out that in the indictment, the description of the overarching plan – which was alleged to have been conducted in Bosnia from as early as October 1991 until November 30, 1995 – omits three of the 11 counts, as well as two of the three additional alleged criminal conspiracies that Karadzic is accused of.
“It is difficult to see how the initial joint criminal enterprise [which is outlined in the indictment] can be said to be ‘overarching’,” Judge Bonomy told American prosecutor, Alan Tieger.
The prosecution has charged Karadzic with separate criminal conspiracies relating to the siege of Sarajevo between April 1992 and November 1995; the 1995 genocide at Srebrenica when approximately 8,000 Bosniak males were slaughtered; and the taking of United Nations hostages between May and June 1995 to force NATO to refrain from carrying out airstrikes against Bosnian Serb targets.
Karadzic was also part of the “overarching” plan carried out between October 1991 and November 30, 1995, say prosecutors in the indictment.
“[The mention of an ‘overarching’ plan] would tend to indicate that the other three somehow fall within the ambit of this overarching joint criminal enterprise,” Judge Bonomy told the prosecution.
“But a closer reading of the indictment indicates that the [siege of Sarajevo and the UN hostage allegation] do not, on the face of the indictment, fall within the overarching joint criminal enterprise.”
Tieger responded that all forms of joint criminal enterprise charged in the indictment were interlinked.
“The pursuit of these [three separate] objectives was related to the [initial] objective and overarching joint criminal enterprise to permanently remove Bosnian Muslims [from parts of Bosnia Herzegovina],” said Tieger.
“Each of the [three] joint criminal enterprises furthered and were related to the overarching joint criminal enterprise.”
The discussion – which was held at a meeting between all the parties in court this week – stemmed from a request made by Karadzic for the three separate conspiracies to be removed from the indictment and for him only to be charged with the single “overarching” joint criminal enterprise.
“The prosecutor alleges four separate joint criminal enterprises that took place in Bosnia Herzegovina of which the timeframes, the objectives, the members, and Dr Karadzic’s alleged role in the joint criminal enterprises significantly overlap,” Karadzic wrote to judges on March 19.
“Moreover, the prosecutor pleads that these joint criminal enterprises all share the same common purpose.”
Karadzic has also insisted that charging a defendant with multiple joint criminal enterprises is “unprecedented” at the tribunal. However, Tieger told the court this week that that was not the case.
Clarifying the prosecution’s indictment, Tieger said that without referring to an “overarching” plan, the prosecution would “misleadingly signal” that the three conspiracies were not all related to one another within a single plan to remove non-Serbs from parts of Bosnia.
“The use of the term ‘overarching’ provides greater clarity about the relationship between the four joint criminal enterprises,” said Tieger.
Tieger explained further that in referring to an “overarching” plan, prosecutors were trying to establish Karadzic’s responsibility for every crime he has been charged with. However, this explanation did not appear to satisfy Judge Bonomy.
“That’s just a lot of words to me, Mr Tieger,” replied the judge, who said prosecutors were required to show the nature of the defendant’s involvement in all the alleged crimes.
Asked to speak on the matter, Karadzic expressed his concern that charging him with multiple joint criminal enterprises made his case even more complex.
“This is going to complicate something which is already very complicated and a voluminous case,” he said.
He also appeared confident that judges would ask prosecutors to amend the indictment and said that it should be done promptly.
“I’m sure that this pre-trial chamber and the appeals chamber will recognise and adhere to all of my requests and it would be much better if the prosecution were to accept your well-intentioned proposals and amend the indictment within a few weeks and not have it arrive in December because then these proceedings will be extended a great deal,” he told Judge Bonomy.
Following Karadzic’s arrest in Belgrade in July 2008, prosecutors submitted an amended indictment on September 22 last year. Although the indictment was confirmed on February 18, 2009, prosecutors were forced to amend it for the third time on February 27.
This was because judges would not support a charge for the killing of up to 140 detainees at the Susica prison camp in the Bosnian town of Vlasenica because prosecutors had mistakenly not submitted the necessary evidence.
Any amendments requested by judges on the back of Karadzic’s March 19 request could result in a fourth indictment being filed.
A number of other motions currently before the court, mainly filed by the defendant, were discussed by parties this week as Judge Bonomy seeks to ready the case for trial.
The judge rejected Karadzic’s request that, on the basis of equality of arms, the prosecution be given the same limitations in its contact with the media as him.
The court’s registry has allowed Karadzic to conduct an interview with a journalist in The Netherlands via written letter. Among other restrictions, the registry has limited the journalist’s questions to 500 words and Karadzic’s response to 2,000 words and told the defendant not to make any political statements.
“The chamber has carefully considered this and is satisfied that it does not raise an issue of equality of arms,” said Judge Bonomy.
“Your motion borders on the frivolous.”
The parties also discussed Karadzic’s bid to have the whole case against him dropped because, he alleged, the prosecution abused tribunal procedures.
Last month, he said that searches on his relatives’ homes in Sarajevo initiated by the prosecution had intimidated potential witnesses in his case and therefore harmed his defence.
The prosecution was, in fact, responsible for only one of the searches, on March 27, and has denied accusations of illegal procedure.
“The accused’s allegations of an abuse of process are baseless and unsupported. His right to a fair trial has not been compromised by the searches, and he has not suffered any prejudice,” responded the Office of The Prosecutor, OTP, on April 27.
This week, Judge Bonomy wanted to know if the prosecution was able to disclose the documents that police from Bosnia’s Serb dominated entity, Republika Srpska, found during their search of Karadzic’s sister-in-law’s house and handed to OTP in Sarajevo last month.
“We do not yet have the materials in house, although I believe their receipt is imminent,” said Tieger.
“It’s rather surprising that they should arrive in your office in Sarajevo on April 21 and be regarded as not urgent. We are [now] another two weeks down the line and we still don’t have them,” said Judge Bonomy.
“I will always be concerned about what appears to be a lack of urgency in this case.”
Judge Bonomy said that judges would likely rule on the joint criminal enterprise issue and Karadzic’s abuse of process motion next week.
All parties are scheduled to meet in court again on June 3.
Halliburton - U.S. Seeks Extradition of Briton in NLNG Bribe Scandal.
This Day
By Yemi Adebowale and Ali M. Ali in Abuja
9 May 2009
United States prosecutors yesterday launched extradition proceedings against a Briton, Jeffrey Tesler, alleged to be the key figure and linkman in an international bribery scandal involving contracts for the construction and expansion of the Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas plant in Bonny, Rivers State.
The latest move by the US coincides with the questioning and detention of two key witnesses by the investigative panel set up by the federal government to unearth those involved in the Halliburton bribery scandal.
Halliburton, a US construction firm was said to have given $180 million bribes to top Nigerian politicians and government officials, including those of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) to win the contract for the construction of the LNG plant.
The bribe, in which three former Nigerian presidents were also said to have benefited, allegedly spanned the period from 1995 when the nearly $7 billion contract was awarded to 2004 and possibly beyond.
After more than five years of investigations covering half a dozen countries, Tesler was arrested early this year at the behest of US authorities and accused of being the "bagman" who conveyed the $180m in bribes to the Nigerian officials.
If the extradition bid succeeds, Tesler will face trial and possible jail in Texas. Tesler appeared at Horse-ferry Road Magistrates Court in London yesterday where hearing into the extradition request commenced, reported the London-based Guardian newspaper.
A US arrest warrant has been issued for a second Briton, a former company executive, Wojciech Chodan, also accused of breaching the foreign corrupt practices act in the Halliburton scandal.
Legal sources in UK say British prosecutors are willing to hand over Tesler and Chodan.
Tesler has hired William Clegg, a prominent British defence QC whose clients have included the man eventually acquitted last year of television broadcaster, Jill Dando's murder, Barry George.
"Mr. Tesler's stated position is that he strongly denies any wrongdoing and has acted at all times within the law," his solicitors said yesterday.
The case against Tesler was outlined in a 29-page indictment issued by the US department of justice.
He is accused of spending a decade, between 1994 and 2004, conspiring to break America's foreign corrupt practices act, in a case, which has already led to one of the largest corruption fines ever levied against a US corporation.
London-based company executives seeking construction contracts are alleged to have described Tesler as their "cultural adviser."
According to part of the US indictment, Tesler is alleged to have "arranged for $1m in $100 bills, which was stacked into a leather case and delivered to a politician's hotel room in order to fund the Nigerian election campaigns in 2003 that returned President Olusegun Obasanjo to power."
Tesler, a former partner in a north London high street firm, holds Israeli dual nationality and a Swiss court has revealed that $2.26m of his assets has been moved into family accounts in Israel.
Investigations into the bribe scandal were first launched in France in 2003 and then taken up in Washington by a small team led by Mark Mendelsohn of the US department of justice. The UK Serious Fraud Office gave help, but little progress was made.
The case was politically sensitive for years in the US because former US vice president Dick Cheney, although not personally linked to the alleged bribe payments, previously ran Halliburton, whose subsidiary led the consortium.
Last year the Texan chief executive of Halliburton's construction subsidiary, Jack Stanley, was forced to admit taking personal "kickbacks" from his company's Nigerian slush funds. Now facing seven years in jail, he testified about the bribery in the hope of a reduced sentence.
Halliburton agreed in February this year to pay a record $579 million fine, while its subsidiary, Kellogg Brown & Root, admitted meeting and agreeing to bribe "three successive former holders of a top-level office" in Nigeria.
Swiss courts have announced that they would overrule legal objections and release bank records, including those linked to Tesler.
The Swiss accounts include cash linked to Tesler's Gibraltar-registered vehicle, Tristar, and money passing through other secretive offshore entities in Panama, Liechtenstein, the Bahamas, the Turks & Caicos islands and the Seychelles.
Former President Olusegun Obasanjo, one of the ex-heads of state suspected to have benefited from the bribe has been forced to defend himself publicly from allegations of corruption since the Tesler indictment was made public.
Accused last month on US television by investigative journalist Lowell Bergman of having been implicated by Stanley, he responded: "I've been investigated and reinvestigated and reinvestigated. Nobody can find corruption around me."
Obasanjo subsequently told the BBC the allegations against him personally were "absolute nonsense I do not say that people in my government were not corrupt, but I am not corrupt."
The developments in the NLNG contract scandal highlight repeated allegations from other countries that Britain has been soft on overseas bribery.
"British taxpayer helped finance part of the Nigerian deal and some of the evidence suggests key operations may have taken place in London to avoid strict US anti-corruption laws.
"MW Kellogg Ltd., then a subsidiary of Halliburton, was eligible for UK taxpayer assistance because it was UK-registered and based at the Kellogg Tower in Greenford, west London," the Guardian newspaper wrote on Thursday.
Just last month, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) said that it had quizzed some Nigerians linked to the Halliburton scandal.
However, the anti-graft body did not name the affected former public officials whose testimonies it said were recorded.
It also said that it had written to the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Michael Aondoakaa (SAN), requesting a copy of the US court judgment in which the former Nigerian public officials were indicted.
Aondoakaa is reported to have made two trips to the US last month, in an apparent attempt to get American authorities to release details of the case to him, amid growing criticisms against the federal government's lack of interest in prosecuting the suspects.
Meanwhile, the Mike Okiro investigative panel set up by the federal government to probe the Halliburton bribery scandal has questioned and detained a one time Chief of Air Staff, and a relation of a serving governor from the North-central zone.
THISDAY learnt that the panel has made progress in unmasking the identity of the culprits.
Sources said that the former air force chief served in the Second Republic while the other suspect is the younger brother of a prominent first term serving governor in a north-central state.
"The investigative panel has also invited and quizzed some other highly placed Nigerians, with the hope of getting facts from them on who demanded for what, and the exact amount each person got from the bribe.
Since the panel started sitting, some 15 persons, including serving and retired top civil servants have been quizzed," a source disclosed yesterday.
The source said that a further list of about 35 Nigerians has been drawn up for questioning starting next week, "and the police placed on standby to arrest any recalcitrant person invited to help with the investigation."
By Yemi Adebowale and Ali M. Ali in Abuja
9 May 2009
United States prosecutors yesterday launched extradition proceedings against a Briton, Jeffrey Tesler, alleged to be the key figure and linkman in an international bribery scandal involving contracts for the construction and expansion of the Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas plant in Bonny, Rivers State.
The latest move by the US coincides with the questioning and detention of two key witnesses by the investigative panel set up by the federal government to unearth those involved in the Halliburton bribery scandal.
Halliburton, a US construction firm was said to have given $180 million bribes to top Nigerian politicians and government officials, including those of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) to win the contract for the construction of the LNG plant.
The bribe, in which three former Nigerian presidents were also said to have benefited, allegedly spanned the period from 1995 when the nearly $7 billion contract was awarded to 2004 and possibly beyond.
After more than five years of investigations covering half a dozen countries, Tesler was arrested early this year at the behest of US authorities and accused of being the "bagman" who conveyed the $180m in bribes to the Nigerian officials.
If the extradition bid succeeds, Tesler will face trial and possible jail in Texas. Tesler appeared at Horse-ferry Road Magistrates Court in London yesterday where hearing into the extradition request commenced, reported the London-based Guardian newspaper.
A US arrest warrant has been issued for a second Briton, a former company executive, Wojciech Chodan, also accused of breaching the foreign corrupt practices act in the Halliburton scandal.
Legal sources in UK say British prosecutors are willing to hand over Tesler and Chodan.
Tesler has hired William Clegg, a prominent British defence QC whose clients have included the man eventually acquitted last year of television broadcaster, Jill Dando's murder, Barry George.
"Mr. Tesler's stated position is that he strongly denies any wrongdoing and has acted at all times within the law," his solicitors said yesterday.
The case against Tesler was outlined in a 29-page indictment issued by the US department of justice.
He is accused of spending a decade, between 1994 and 2004, conspiring to break America's foreign corrupt practices act, in a case, which has already led to one of the largest corruption fines ever levied against a US corporation.
London-based company executives seeking construction contracts are alleged to have described Tesler as their "cultural adviser."
According to part of the US indictment, Tesler is alleged to have "arranged for $1m in $100 bills, which was stacked into a leather case and delivered to a politician's hotel room in order to fund the Nigerian election campaigns in 2003 that returned President Olusegun Obasanjo to power."
Tesler, a former partner in a north London high street firm, holds Israeli dual nationality and a Swiss court has revealed that $2.26m of his assets has been moved into family accounts in Israel.
Investigations into the bribe scandal were first launched in France in 2003 and then taken up in Washington by a small team led by Mark Mendelsohn of the US department of justice. The UK Serious Fraud Office gave help, but little progress was made.
The case was politically sensitive for years in the US because former US vice president Dick Cheney, although not personally linked to the alleged bribe payments, previously ran Halliburton, whose subsidiary led the consortium.
Last year the Texan chief executive of Halliburton's construction subsidiary, Jack Stanley, was forced to admit taking personal "kickbacks" from his company's Nigerian slush funds. Now facing seven years in jail, he testified about the bribery in the hope of a reduced sentence.
Halliburton agreed in February this year to pay a record $579 million fine, while its subsidiary, Kellogg Brown & Root, admitted meeting and agreeing to bribe "three successive former holders of a top-level office" in Nigeria.
Swiss courts have announced that they would overrule legal objections and release bank records, including those linked to Tesler.
The Swiss accounts include cash linked to Tesler's Gibraltar-registered vehicle, Tristar, and money passing through other secretive offshore entities in Panama, Liechtenstein, the Bahamas, the Turks & Caicos islands and the Seychelles.
Former President Olusegun Obasanjo, one of the ex-heads of state suspected to have benefited from the bribe has been forced to defend himself publicly from allegations of corruption since the Tesler indictment was made public.
Accused last month on US television by investigative journalist Lowell Bergman of having been implicated by Stanley, he responded: "I've been investigated and reinvestigated and reinvestigated. Nobody can find corruption around me."
Obasanjo subsequently told the BBC the allegations against him personally were "absolute nonsense I do not say that people in my government were not corrupt, but I am not corrupt."
The developments in the NLNG contract scandal highlight repeated allegations from other countries that Britain has been soft on overseas bribery.
"British taxpayer helped finance part of the Nigerian deal and some of the evidence suggests key operations may have taken place in London to avoid strict US anti-corruption laws.
"MW Kellogg Ltd., then a subsidiary of Halliburton, was eligible for UK taxpayer assistance because it was UK-registered and based at the Kellogg Tower in Greenford, west London," the Guardian newspaper wrote on Thursday.
Just last month, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) said that it had quizzed some Nigerians linked to the Halliburton scandal.
However, the anti-graft body did not name the affected former public officials whose testimonies it said were recorded.
It also said that it had written to the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Michael Aondoakaa (SAN), requesting a copy of the US court judgment in which the former Nigerian public officials were indicted.
Aondoakaa is reported to have made two trips to the US last month, in an apparent attempt to get American authorities to release details of the case to him, amid growing criticisms against the federal government's lack of interest in prosecuting the suspects.
Meanwhile, the Mike Okiro investigative panel set up by the federal government to probe the Halliburton bribery scandal has questioned and detained a one time Chief of Air Staff, and a relation of a serving governor from the North-central zone.
THISDAY learnt that the panel has made progress in unmasking the identity of the culprits.
Sources said that the former air force chief served in the Second Republic while the other suspect is the younger brother of a prominent first term serving governor in a north-central state.
"The investigative panel has also invited and quizzed some other highly placed Nigerians, with the hope of getting facts from them on who demanded for what, and the exact amount each person got from the bribe.
Since the panel started sitting, some 15 persons, including serving and retired top civil servants have been quizzed," a source disclosed yesterday.
The source said that a further list of about 35 Nigerians has been drawn up for questioning starting next week, "and the police placed on standby to arrest any recalcitrant person invited to help with the investigation."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
