Corruption
- Thread starter MoneyBags1348
- Start date
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
16/02/2023
Translation of above post
Translation of above post
Last edited:
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
17/02/2023
@Charbella Posted
by bayetayunus
February 16, 2023
If the recent report of the General Inspectorate of Finance (in the acronym IGF) highlighted the mismanagement and sale of the mining assets of the Cominière Portfolio company by the members of its board of directors, a letter, related documents and three audios reached our editorial staff uncover a plot in the shadows: selling at all costs, and in defiance of the statutes of powerful Simon Cong Mao huai.
It all starts when the Chinese mining company ZijinMINING, through its subsidiary Jin Cheng, tries around November 2021 to acquire Cominière's shares within Dathcom Mining, or 15% of the joint venture's shareholding in November 2021. Zijin and Cominière sign an agreement to assign shares without notifying AVZ International or having given it the opportunity to exercise its right of pre-emption as prescribed by law.
Faced with AVZ's refusal to ratify this irregular assignment, Zijin and Cominière are back in charge, no longer frontally but, like a crab, in bias.
In a letter of October 22, 2022 addressed to Cominière with the aim of "prohiring the Manono Lithium Operation Project", Chen Jinghe, Chairman of the Board of Directors of Zijin Mining, made a proposal to his interim counterpart within the Congolese company: do everything possible to acquire the northern portion of the northern concession covered by Dathcom Mining's Operating Permit 13359, a
Mr Jinghe, who describes AVZ International's exercise of its right of pre-emption on any offer to sell by a shareholder as an "abusive use of its majority" informs Cominière of her company's desire to acquire "the northeastern part of PR 13359, the part concerned."
In return, Cominière will be rewarded by receiving 29% of the company's share capital to be created to exploit the coveted portion of the PE 13359.
But the part does not appear to be the simplest: according to the mining code, any portion of a permit to which its holder renounces is first paid into the public domain of the State, it means that any interested person to apply to the Minier Cadastre. And given the lusts that lithium is atonating at the moment and the number of companies that are jostling at the gate of the DRC to get a piece of the cake, it is not certain that the northern portion of PE 13359 will automatically return to Zijin or its subsidiary. For this reason why, the letter, in unequivocal terms, requires Cominière to "be able" to obtain this portion of the concession and the related rights, failing which Zijin will not give back to her the 15% of Dathcom's shareholding that she illegally acquired from Cominière for the pretty sum of US$33.4 million but is unable to claim under Like what, it is never good to put the proverbial plough before the oxen...
As Zijin's letter so eloquently says: "To avoid any ambiguity, it should be specified that if COMINIERE fails to legally and effectively assign the mining right of the Party to the Joint Venture, COMINIERE will not have the right to require JIN CHENG to re-assign 15% of shares in DATHCOM, nor the waiver of the payment it
To tell the truth, Cominière would lose everything and find herself in debt to the tune of $33.4 million, a sum that this company, poorly managed and without any income, would have all the trouble in the world to repay.
We therefore understand all the despair of Cominière whose senior management, as demonstrated by the IGF report, has already squandered part of the amount paid to her, and that she is already unable to repay a distressed Zijin who has been promised the moon to receive only lead.
We also understand Zijin's peremptory PCA tone and the orders to the Cominière Board of Directors to which she addresses as vulgar obedient and submissive laquais. Who hastened to put pressure on a Minister of Mines who granted them a Ministerial Order reporting PE 13359.
As the IGF report so well details, Cominière perfectly illustrates the disastrous management of Portfolio companies and how they collude with many foreign companies to plunder and sell the natural resources that are automatically given to the Congolese.
By Mupungila Malu, Congo
@Charbella Posted
Manono lithium certified by Dathcom Mining: the underside of a plot unveiled.
by bayetayunus
February 16, 2023
If the recent report of the General Inspectorate of Finance (in the acronym IGF) highlighted the mismanagement and sale of the mining assets of the Cominière Portfolio company by the members of its board of directors, a letter, related documents and three audios reached our editorial staff uncover a plot in the shadows: selling at all costs, and in defiance of the statutes of powerful Simon Cong Mao huai.
It all starts when the Chinese mining company ZijinMINING, through its subsidiary Jin Cheng, tries around November 2021 to acquire Cominière's shares within Dathcom Mining, or 15% of the joint venture's shareholding in November 2021. Zijin and Cominière sign an agreement to assign shares without notifying AVZ International or having given it the opportunity to exercise its right of pre-emption as prescribed by law.
Faced with AVZ's refusal to ratify this irregular assignment, Zijin and Cominière are back in charge, no longer frontally but, like a crab, in bias.
In a letter of October 22, 2022 addressed to Cominière with the aim of "prohiring the Manono Lithium Operation Project", Chen Jinghe, Chairman of the Board of Directors of Zijin Mining, made a proposal to his interim counterpart within the Congolese company: do everything possible to acquire the northern portion of the northern concession covered by Dathcom Mining's Operating Permit 13359, a
Mr Jinghe, who describes AVZ International's exercise of its right of pre-emption on any offer to sell by a shareholder as an "abusive use of its majority" informs Cominière of her company's desire to acquire "the northeastern part of PR 13359, the part concerned."
In return, Cominière will be rewarded by receiving 29% of the company's share capital to be created to exploit the coveted portion of the PE 13359.
But the part does not appear to be the simplest: according to the mining code, any portion of a permit to which its holder renounces is first paid into the public domain of the State, it means that any interested person to apply to the Minier Cadastre. And given the lusts that lithium is atonating at the moment and the number of companies that are jostling at the gate of the DRC to get a piece of the cake, it is not certain that the northern portion of PE 13359 will automatically return to Zijin or its subsidiary. For this reason why, the letter, in unequivocal terms, requires Cominière to "be able" to obtain this portion of the concession and the related rights, failing which Zijin will not give back to her the 15% of Dathcom's shareholding that she illegally acquired from Cominière for the pretty sum of US$33.4 million but is unable to claim under Like what, it is never good to put the proverbial plough before the oxen...
As Zijin's letter so eloquently says: "To avoid any ambiguity, it should be specified that if COMINIERE fails to legally and effectively assign the mining right of the Party to the Joint Venture, COMINIERE will not have the right to require JIN CHENG to re-assign 15% of shares in DATHCOM, nor the waiver of the payment it
To tell the truth, Cominière would lose everything and find herself in debt to the tune of $33.4 million, a sum that this company, poorly managed and without any income, would have all the trouble in the world to repay.
We therefore understand all the despair of Cominière whose senior management, as demonstrated by the IGF report, has already squandered part of the amount paid to her, and that she is already unable to repay a distressed Zijin who has been promised the moon to receive only lead.
We also understand Zijin's peremptory PCA tone and the orders to the Cominière Board of Directors to which she addresses as vulgar obedient and submissive laquais. Who hastened to put pressure on a Minister of Mines who granted them a Ministerial Order reporting PE 13359.
As the IGF report so well details, Cominière perfectly illustrates the disastrous management of Portfolio companies and how they collude with many foreign companies to plunder and sell the natural resources that are automatically given to the Congolese.
By Mupungila Malu, Congo
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
17/02/2023
Carlos Posted
Carlos Posted
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
17/02/2023
@Bin59 Posted
An article from October 2022 which goes a long way to explaining what we’re seeing with the actions of MoM recently ie the MoP & MoM meetings with the Chinese and the following revocation of our mining decree.
From the article:
“GOMA, DRC — China’s growing investments in the mining sector in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) allow it to demand special treatment.”
“To help protect its interests in the DRC, China seeks guaranteed, unrestricted access to important decision-makers who may advance, safeguard, and even give top priority to Chinese strategic objectives. To build relationships, China reaches out to industry leaders, local governments, the media, and public intellectuals.”
@Bin59 Posted
Minerals and China’s Military Assistance in the DR Congo
Beijing’s growing investments in strategic resources in the DRC go hand in hand with increased military assistance intended to secure those assets.
thediplomat.com
An article from October 2022 which goes a long way to explaining what we’re seeing with the actions of MoM recently ie the MoP & MoM meetings with the Chinese and the following revocation of our mining decree.
Minerals and China’s Military Assistance in the DR Congo
Beijing’s growing investments in strategic resources in the DRC go hand in hand with increased military assistance intended to secure those assets.From the article:
“GOMA, DRC — China’s growing investments in the mining sector in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) allow it to demand special treatment.”
“To help protect its interests in the DRC, China seeks guaranteed, unrestricted access to important decision-makers who may advance, safeguard, and even give top priority to Chinese strategic objectives. To build relationships, China reaches out to industry leaders, local governments, the media, and public intellectuals.”
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
17/02/2023
@Misfits Posted
The General Inspectorate of Finance (IGF) made public on Wednesday, February 15, 2023 its audit report on the implementation of the Chinese contract. The Supreme Review Body paints a bleak picture of the implementation of the infrastructure-for-minerals contract concluded between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and China in 2008.
This report comes after calls from civil society and Westerners calling for the contract to be revised. Although the Government has repeatedly expressed its intention to renegotiate this major contract, in practice nothing has yet changed.
Below, in 11 points the main conclusions of the General Inspectorate of Finance:
1. The constitution of SICOMINES in 2008 was carried out in violation of Article 1 of the Royal Decree of 22 June 1926. The share capital not proportionate to the purpose of the company and not indicating the mineral deposits as a contribution from the Congolese party. USD 100,000,000.00 set by the GEC (Chinese Group of Enterprises) was very insufficient and therefore disproportionate to the corporate purpose.
2. No evaluation of the mineral deposits contributed by GECAMINES S.A. has been made and therefore, failure to integrate the value into the share capital: while its minimum consistency was known and listed in Annex A of the Agreement of 22 April 2008 and Annex B of the Joint Venture Agreement of the same date: 10,616,070 t/cu and 629,619 t/co worth USD 90,936,120,000, at the rates on the day of conclusion of the agreement.
3. Arbitrary, discriminatory and illegal nature of the fixing and distribution of the share capital at USD 100,000,000.00 at the rate of 68% of the shares for the GEC and 32% for the Gécamines Group. This capital was set at USD 100,000,000.00 (while SICOMINES held assets of USD 90,936,120,000.00) and it was decided that Chinese companies would have 68% of the shares against 32% for the Congolese side. The Chinese contributed USD 68 million and lent GECAMINES S.A USD 32 million, which it repaid with interest of USD 10,979,566.00 through deductions on its dividends.
4. Significant financial imbalance to the detriment of the DRC between the advantages granted to the Chinese side and the commitments to be borne by it as well as the gains expected by the Congolese side: USD 90,936,120,000.00 to the Chinese against commitments borne by them of USD 6.2 billion, i.e. a gain for the Chinese of USD 84,736,120,000.00 to which must be added the tax and customs exemptions provisionally estimated at the lowest rates at USD 2,163,623,850.15. Even determining the net present value (NPV) based on the elements included in the 2021 Feasibility Study, the NPV is USD 76,573,723,516.28 which constitutes the gain in favor of the Chinese side because the NPV involves the deduction of CAPEX and OPEX from turnover. USD 76 billion gain for the Chinese side against 3 billion infrastructure for the DRC
5. In six years, from 2016 to October 2022, SICOMINES disbursed from one of its overseas accounts, in this case Main Account No. 100001700001077 housed in the books of BANK OF CHINA DUBAI BRANCH, a total amount of USD 9,677,613,625.15 to Chinese companies and itself for various unsubstantiated reasons. Illustrative cases of sales return for USD 1,564,280,538.68, contract payment for USD 1,506,989,864.14 and other debit transactions without giving reason for USD 3,827,943,282.32.
6. Lack of visibility and impact of the work carried out and its unjustified selectivity in violation of Annex C of the Convention of 22 April 2008. Eligible work performed: USD 534,902,461.66 Ineligible work performed: USD 287,287,598.42
7.Glaring weakness and modicity of infrastructure investments: SICOMINES has mobilized, in 14 years, financing totaling USD 4,471,588,685.14 and has allocated only USD 822,190,060.14 for the financing of infrastructure works, i.e. 18.38% of the total financing mobilized
8. Under the terms of the collaboration agreement and the joint venture agreement, the GEC was responsible for mobilizing resources for the financing of mining and infrastructure investments (USD 6.2 billion) for which SICOMINES was to be reimbursed. Instead, it was the SICOMINES Joint Venture that took on debt, to the tune of USD 3,341,948,821.85 to finance both mining and infrastructure investments. But at the same time, she paid herself, from 2016 to October 2022, USD 5,464,880,564.06 in her main account in DUBAI for the benefit of one or more other accounts not yet identified;
9. Failure to repatriate export earnings and fines of 5% due by SICOMINES: Following an erroneous interpretation of the contractual stipulations enshrining the freedom of transfer of funds, SICOMINES did not repatriate export earnings totalling USD 2,004,167,489.24 over the period from 2016 to October 2022. As such, it owes fines of 5%, i.e. USD 100,280,374.46
10. Imbroglio maintained in investment repayment periods This imbroglio was used to reduce the amount of infrastructure investment from USD 6.5 billion to USD 3.0 billion. Article 12 of the Convention provided that during the second period the total reimbursement should not exceed USD 3 billion in principal. It is curious. We probably wanted to delay the repayment and therefore the clearance of the DRC's debt vis-à-vis Chinese investors;
11. Irregular and unjustified payment of 4.8% of the amounts of the works under "Amount to be valued": For all works reported by the Congolese Agency for Major Works (ACGT), these costs amount to USD 37,256,434.59. The legality of such a levy and the destination given to the funds thus collected are problematic. It is therefore probably a way to remunerate oneself in a different way.
@Misfits Posted
Mines versus infrastructure: after audit, the IGF exposes how China has fooled the DRC
February 16, 2023
The General Inspectorate of Finance (IGF) made public on Wednesday, February 15, 2023 its audit report on the implementation of the Chinese contract. The Supreme Review Body paints a bleak picture of the implementation of the infrastructure-for-minerals contract concluded between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and China in 2008.
This report comes after calls from civil society and Westerners calling for the contract to be revised. Although the Government has repeatedly expressed its intention to renegotiate this major contract, in practice nothing has yet changed.
Below, in 11 points the main conclusions of the General Inspectorate of Finance:
1. The constitution of SICOMINES in 2008 was carried out in violation of Article 1 of the Royal Decree of 22 June 1926. The share capital not proportionate to the purpose of the company and not indicating the mineral deposits as a contribution from the Congolese party. USD 100,000,000.00 set by the GEC (Chinese Group of Enterprises) was very insufficient and therefore disproportionate to the corporate purpose.
2. No evaluation of the mineral deposits contributed by GECAMINES S.A. has been made and therefore, failure to integrate the value into the share capital: while its minimum consistency was known and listed in Annex A of the Agreement of 22 April 2008 and Annex B of the Joint Venture Agreement of the same date: 10,616,070 t/cu and 629,619 t/co worth USD 90,936,120,000, at the rates on the day of conclusion of the agreement.
3. Arbitrary, discriminatory and illegal nature of the fixing and distribution of the share capital at USD 100,000,000.00 at the rate of 68% of the shares for the GEC and 32% for the Gécamines Group. This capital was set at USD 100,000,000.00 (while SICOMINES held assets of USD 90,936,120,000.00) and it was decided that Chinese companies would have 68% of the shares against 32% for the Congolese side. The Chinese contributed USD 68 million and lent GECAMINES S.A USD 32 million, which it repaid with interest of USD 10,979,566.00 through deductions on its dividends.
4. Significant financial imbalance to the detriment of the DRC between the advantages granted to the Chinese side and the commitments to be borne by it as well as the gains expected by the Congolese side: USD 90,936,120,000.00 to the Chinese against commitments borne by them of USD 6.2 billion, i.e. a gain for the Chinese of USD 84,736,120,000.00 to which must be added the tax and customs exemptions provisionally estimated at the lowest rates at USD 2,163,623,850.15. Even determining the net present value (NPV) based on the elements included in the 2021 Feasibility Study, the NPV is USD 76,573,723,516.28 which constitutes the gain in favor of the Chinese side because the NPV involves the deduction of CAPEX and OPEX from turnover. USD 76 billion gain for the Chinese side against 3 billion infrastructure for the DRC
5. In six years, from 2016 to October 2022, SICOMINES disbursed from one of its overseas accounts, in this case Main Account No. 100001700001077 housed in the books of BANK OF CHINA DUBAI BRANCH, a total amount of USD 9,677,613,625.15 to Chinese companies and itself for various unsubstantiated reasons. Illustrative cases of sales return for USD 1,564,280,538.68, contract payment for USD 1,506,989,864.14 and other debit transactions without giving reason for USD 3,827,943,282.32.
6. Lack of visibility and impact of the work carried out and its unjustified selectivity in violation of Annex C of the Convention of 22 April 2008. Eligible work performed: USD 534,902,461.66 Ineligible work performed: USD 287,287,598.42
7.Glaring weakness and modicity of infrastructure investments: SICOMINES has mobilized, in 14 years, financing totaling USD 4,471,588,685.14 and has allocated only USD 822,190,060.14 for the financing of infrastructure works, i.e. 18.38% of the total financing mobilized
8. Under the terms of the collaboration agreement and the joint venture agreement, the GEC was responsible for mobilizing resources for the financing of mining and infrastructure investments (USD 6.2 billion) for which SICOMINES was to be reimbursed. Instead, it was the SICOMINES Joint Venture that took on debt, to the tune of USD 3,341,948,821.85 to finance both mining and infrastructure investments. But at the same time, she paid herself, from 2016 to October 2022, USD 5,464,880,564.06 in her main account in DUBAI for the benefit of one or more other accounts not yet identified;
9. Failure to repatriate export earnings and fines of 5% due by SICOMINES: Following an erroneous interpretation of the contractual stipulations enshrining the freedom of transfer of funds, SICOMINES did not repatriate export earnings totalling USD 2,004,167,489.24 over the period from 2016 to October 2022. As such, it owes fines of 5%, i.e. USD 100,280,374.46
10. Imbroglio maintained in investment repayment periods This imbroglio was used to reduce the amount of infrastructure investment from USD 6.5 billion to USD 3.0 billion. Article 12 of the Convention provided that during the second period the total reimbursement should not exceed USD 3 billion in principal. It is curious. We probably wanted to delay the repayment and therefore the clearance of the DRC's debt vis-à-vis Chinese investors;
11. Irregular and unjustified payment of 4.8% of the amounts of the works under "Amount to be valued": For all works reported by the Congolese Agency for Major Works (ACGT), these costs amount to USD 37,256,434.59. The legality of such a levy and the destination given to the funds thus collected are problematic. It is therefore probably a way to remunerate oneself in a different way.
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
17/02/2023
@Sammael Posted
COMMENT BY THE SPOKESPERSON OF THE CHINESE EMBASSY IN THE DRC ON THE IGF REPORT ON THE CHINESE CONTRACT
The Congolese aren't buying it. Here's a few comments but it goes on and on with close to zero support of this document:
Where is the social housing? Large modern hospitals? 3500 km of rail? Two great modern universities? The hospitals with more than 150 beds, the roads connecting our provinces, apparently you are making fun of the Congolese people
Mr. Ambassador, your comment already provides no objective element that contradicts the IGF report. In addition, the Congolese know that the Chinese contract has not benefited the DRC compared to the Chinese party. It's not a win-win.
You take us for idiots! Who does not know that the Chinese contract is a scam.
From kutambo store to Central Station it's more or less 5 kilometers, explain to us how it can cost $70 million for its expansion?
It would be better to attach the documents which contradict the IGF, to this rag of communiqué which you published.
Contradict the Igf with figures and supporting evidence. Respect the DRC.
You should contradict the report of @ALINGETEJULES_K @IgfRdc with the figures, Give us a numerical balance sheet. Nevertheless, your comment reinforces the IGF report. #HMK
It looks like a veiled threat from the Chinese government to the Congolese government.
@Sammael Posted
COMMENT BY THE SPOKESPERSON OF THE CHINESE EMBASSY IN THE DRC ON THE IGF REPORT ON THE CHINESE CONTRACT
The Congolese aren't buying it. Here's a few comments but it goes on and on with close to zero support of this document:
Where is the social housing? Large modern hospitals? 3500 km of rail? Two great modern universities? The hospitals with more than 150 beds, the roads connecting our provinces, apparently you are making fun of the Congolese people
Mr. Ambassador, your comment already provides no objective element that contradicts the IGF report. In addition, the Congolese know that the Chinese contract has not benefited the DRC compared to the Chinese party. It's not a win-win.
You take us for idiots! Who does not know that the Chinese contract is a scam.
From kutambo store to Central Station it's more or less 5 kilometers, explain to us how it can cost $70 million for its expansion?
It would be better to attach the documents which contradict the IGF, to this rag of communiqué which you published.
Contradict the Igf with figures and supporting evidence. Respect the DRC.
You should contradict the report of @ALINGETEJULES_K @IgfRdc with the figures, Give us a numerical balance sheet. Nevertheless, your comment reinforces the IGF report. #HMK
It looks like a veiled threat from the Chinese government to the Congolese government.
Last edited:
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
18/02/2023
@Sammael Posted
$AVZ #lithium of #Manono @MariusMihigo requests the intervention of the presidency to avoid an arbitration Will the consultant from #RDC manage to promote the interests of the mining company AVZ with
@Presidence_RDC in the very strategic file
@Sammael Posted
$AVZ #lithium of #Manono @MariusMihigo requests the intervention of the presidency to avoid an arbitration Will the consultant from #RDC manage to promote the interests of the mining company AVZ with
@Presidence_RDC in the very strategic file
Samus
Top 20
Mining Cadastre: Jean Félix Mupande allegedly orchestrates financial embezzlement as he preaches good governance at Safari Beach.
Accounting operations would be dispensed with at the Congolese Mining Cadastre. Led masterfully by Jean-Félix Mupande, the management practices with the notary in mine would reveal beyond a nepotism of bad taste and a politicization of this public establishment, financial embezzlements well concocted with certain career agents in the Cami in his pay. Practices that have lasted for several years.
Indeed, in his memorandum No. Cami/DG/017/2019 of February 28, 2019, the untouchable Director General of the Mining Cadastre since 2005, indicated the numbers of the bank accounts that can receive payment of deposit fees at the Trust Merchant Bank TMB and RawBank. As for the cost of the surface right of the mining titles, the payments are made in a single and unique account of the Cami at the FBNBANK.
Investigations carried out by your media reveal that DG Jean Félix Mupande would himself violate the provisions and procedures of service in accounting matters. Practices that have become commonplace with the help of certain agents of the taxation/invoicing department in his pay over 15 years of management of the Cami. The man would have constituted around him, a vast effective network which would dribble the Congolese Public Treasury in this most juicy sector of the economy in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
The mining companies which pay the previous years of their surface rights due to the Congolese state, are directed towards other banks and other accounts of the Mining Cadastre which according to the rules of the services and accountant are not abilities to receive the expenses surface rights. Even the moribund International Bank for Africa in Congo would be in the list of banks indicated by the Director General to collect the surface right in the last 5 years. Where then do its thousands if not millions of dollars paid in arrears while the fiscal years at the state level are closed? Why are these fees paid into accounts that are not qualified to receive surface rights?
The latest fact, debit notes n°CAMI/DF/00333/DSA 2018/2018, n°CAMI/DF/00334/DSA 2018/2018, n°CAMI/DF/00335/DSA 2018/2018, all addressed to the mining company Zani Kodo on January 31, 2018, indicated the Cami account of the FBNBANK to pay the 50% of surface right due to the Mining Cadastre. Out of a total of $743,856.52, the portion of the Mining Cadastre of 50% or $371,928.26 should be paid as superficiary duty in the Cami account at FBNBANK, informs the debit notes.
Jean Félix Mupande misdirected these payments in his letter n°CAMI/DG/586/2020 addressed to the mining company Zani Kodo, without amplification to the Department of Finance and other internal services. These surface rights payments were directed to the account of the RawBank, supposed to receive the deposit fees. Zani Kodo actually paid these debit notes to Rawbank in his OP Payment Order No. 04465830 for the amount of US$371,928.26. Where then will these fees pay as well? These kinds of practices that are numerous in the Mining Cadastre after the budget year should attract the attention of the General Inspectorate of Finance in this period of economic crisis imposed by Covid-19.
Contacted by your media for investigation reasons, Mr. Bienvenu Lizebi Head of the Taxation/Invoicing Department declared: “Completely normal. The CAMI is a public establishment which has financial and administrative autonomy like all other public establishments. he has accounts in commercial banks. In accordance with its financial organization, it has specialized its accounts for reasons of traceability. It happens however that some operators for internal reasons related to bank transfer operations request and obtain from CAMI the authorization to pay in the account other than that of FBNBANK. In all cases, these payments are correctly traced in the accounts and cannot suggest any misappropriation.
The General Management and some agents of the Mining Cadastre are in good governance seminar at Safari Beach since Monday of this week.
Cadastre Minier: Jean Félix Mupande orchestrerait des malversations financières alors qu'il prêche la bonne gouvernance au Safari Beach. - CANAL KIN
Il se passerait des operations comptables flouent au Cadastre Minier congolais. Conduit de main de
canalkin.com
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
19/02/2023
@Mr Inappropriate Posted
Here’s a better translation.
"Only Article 48ter of the revised 2018 Mining Code sets the conditions for cancelling or revoking an Operating Permit. The MinMes Order on Dathcom violates this and gives the impression of a political decision without legal or technical basis, which undermines the business climate." (NGOs)
————
And here is Article 48 of the Mining Code those playing at home.
CHAPTER III: THE PROCEDUREFORGRAINTGMINING AND/OR QUARRY RIGHTS AND THE ISSUE OF MINING AND /OR QUARRY TITLES
Article 48 bis: From the beginning of the period of validity
mining and/or quarry rights.
The period of validity of mining and/or quarry rights begins to run from the day of notification of the decision to grant the applicant, notification of ex officio registration or service of the judge's decision provided for in Article 46 of this Code.
Article 48 ter: Extinction of mining rights and/or
quarries Mining and/or quarry rights are extinguished by:
a. lapse;
b. cancellation. ;
c. expiration;
d. waiver;
e. withdrawal.
Mining and/or quarry rights become automatically null and void pursuant to Article 47 paragraph 2 of this Code.
They may be annulled, with retroactive effect, by decision of the administrative judge seised for annulment by an officer of the Public Prosecutor's Office or an injured third party, within three months of the publication of the award decision in the Official Journal or failing that, within three months of the date on which it became known, for illegality, in the event of lack of competence of thegranting authority, a defect in form or a misuse of powers by the granting authority.
Mining and/or quarry rights expire when they come to an end, in accordance with Articles 61, 78, 94, 106, 144 and 163 of this Code.
They are extinguished by total renunciation of their holders, in accordance with articles 60, 79, 96, 108, 145 paragraph 4 and 164 of this Code. In the event of a partial renunciation, the mining and/or quarry rights shall lapse on the part of the perimeter which is the subject of the said renunciation, in accordance with the same provisions.
At the end of the revocation of the holder, the Research Permit, the Exploitation Permit , theDsicharge Exploitation Permit and the Small Mine Exploitation Permit, the authorizations for the exploitation of permanent quarries other than those of materials of commonly used construction shall be withdrawn by the Minister, and by the provincial Minister of Mines for Permanent Quarrying Authorizations, in accordance with section 290 of this Code.
Mining and/or quarry rights may be withdrawn or revoked, without retroactive effect, by the granting authority in the event of illegality at the time of granting, within three months of the publication of the grant decision in the Official Journal or, failing that, in the three months following the date on which it became aware of its existence, either at therequest of an injured third party or on the initiative of the granting authority.
The Mining Regulation shall determine the manner in which this article is to be applied."
Off the the Mining Regs we go… (translation by chatgpt)
Chapter III: RENUNCIATION OF EXPLORATION PERMIT
Article 118: Filing and deposit of the declaration of renunciation of the Exploration Permit
In the event of total or partial renunciation of the Exploration Permit, the holder or his/her representative in mines and quarries completes and files with the central or provincial Mining Cadastre, the declaration of renunciation of his/her Exploration Permit.
The declaration of renunciation is established on a form and includes in particular the following information:
• The references of the Exploration Permit;
• The number of the grant decision;
• The date of the grant;
• The administrative location: territory, district, province;
• The surface area of the Exploration Permit;
• The geographical coordinates of the vertices of the perimeter relinquished;
• The geographical coordinates of the vertices of the perimeter retained in the event of partial renunciation.
The original Exploration Certificate of the holder is attached to the declaration of renunciation.
Article 119: Admissibility or inadmissibility of the declaration of renunciation of the Exploration Permit
Upon receipt of the declaration of renunciation of the Exploration Permit, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre checks whether it is admissible.
The declaration is admissible if it is duly established, signed, and supported by the documents required in accordance with Article 118 above.
In the event of admissibility of the declaration of renunciation, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre issues a receipt to the holder indicating his/her name and address, the date of deposit, the references of the Exploration Permit, and the number of squares renounced.
In the event of inadmissibility of the request, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre returns or sends the file to the holder, stating the reason.
Article 120: Processing of the declaration of renunciation of the Exploration Permit
Within ten working days from the date of the deposit of the declaration of renunciation, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre verifies whether:
• The Exploration Permit is valid and not subject to a force majeure case;
• The squares renounced and retained are part of the perimeter covered by the Exploration Permit;
• If applicable, the part of the perimeter retained has the form of a polygon composed of contiguous whole squares that does not contain lands that are not part of the perimeter;
• The part of the perimeter relinquished is not subject to a lease, assignment, transmission, or option or mortgage contract. If this is the case, the holder must provide proof that he/she has obtained the written consent of the creditor not to oppose the renunciation.
If the declaration of renunciation meets the conditions set out above, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre transmits the declaration to the Minister within the time limit provided in the preceding paragraph.
If the holder's declaration of renunciation does not comply with the above-mentioned conditions, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre notifies the holder of the inaccuracy of the declaration and suggests the necessary corrections.
Article 121: Acceptance of the declaration of renunciation of the Exploration Permit
Upon receipt of the file of the declaration of renunciation of the Exploration Permit, the Minister takes note of it by decree which he/she transmits to the central Mining Cadastre. The latter sends it to the provincial Mining Cadastre where the declaration was filed.
Subject to the provisions of Articles 119 and 120 above, if the Minister fails to acknowledge a declaration of renunciation within three months from the date of its filing, the declaration is deemed accepted.
Article 122: Notification and Posting of the Decision Acknowledging the Declaration of Renunciation of the Research Permit
Upon receipt of the order acknowledging the declaration of renunciation of the Research Permit or upon expiration of the prescribed period to acknowledge it, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre shall post the order or the declaration of renunciation deemed accepted in the public consultation room. It notifies the holder free of charge by the fastest and most reliable means.
Article 123: Modification of Entries and the Research Certificate
In the case of partial renunciation, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre shall modify the registration of the Research Permit in the register of granted rights as well as the mapping of the research perimeter on the map of mining impacts. It shall proceed to modify the Research Certificate by recording the partial renunciation and returning it to the holder within a period of five days from the registration.
Article 124: Effects of Total or Partial Renunciation of the Research Permit
The effects of renunciation are those provided for in article 60 paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Mining Code.
@Mr Inappropriate Posted
Here’s a better translation.
"Only Article 48ter of the revised 2018 Mining Code sets the conditions for cancelling or revoking an Operating Permit. The MinMes Order on Dathcom violates this and gives the impression of a political decision without legal or technical basis, which undermines the business climate." (NGOs)
————
And here is Article 48 of the Mining Code those playing at home.
CHAPTER III: THE PROCEDUREFORGRAINTGMINING AND/OR QUARRY RIGHTS AND THE ISSUE OF MINING AND /OR QUARRY TITLES
Article 48 bis: From the beginning of the period of validity
mining and/or quarry rights.
The period of validity of mining and/or quarry rights begins to run from the day of notification of the decision to grant the applicant, notification of ex officio registration or service of the judge's decision provided for in Article 46 of this Code.
Article 48 ter: Extinction of mining rights and/or
quarries Mining and/or quarry rights are extinguished by:
a. lapse;
b. cancellation. ;
c. expiration;
d. waiver;
e. withdrawal.
Mining and/or quarry rights become automatically null and void pursuant to Article 47 paragraph 2 of this Code.
They may be annulled, with retroactive effect, by decision of the administrative judge seised for annulment by an officer of the Public Prosecutor's Office or an injured third party, within three months of the publication of the award decision in the Official Journal or failing that, within three months of the date on which it became known, for illegality, in the event of lack of competence of thegranting authority, a defect in form or a misuse of powers by the granting authority.
Mining and/or quarry rights expire when they come to an end, in accordance with Articles 61, 78, 94, 106, 144 and 163 of this Code.
They are extinguished by total renunciation of their holders, in accordance with articles 60, 79, 96, 108, 145 paragraph 4 and 164 of this Code. In the event of a partial renunciation, the mining and/or quarry rights shall lapse on the part of the perimeter which is the subject of the said renunciation, in accordance with the same provisions.
At the end of the revocation of the holder, the Research Permit, the Exploitation Permit , theDsicharge Exploitation Permit and the Small Mine Exploitation Permit, the authorizations for the exploitation of permanent quarries other than those of materials of commonly used construction shall be withdrawn by the Minister, and by the provincial Minister of Mines for Permanent Quarrying Authorizations, in accordance with section 290 of this Code.
Mining and/or quarry rights may be withdrawn or revoked, without retroactive effect, by the granting authority in the event of illegality at the time of granting, within three months of the publication of the grant decision in the Official Journal or, failing that, in the three months following the date on which it became aware of its existence, either at therequest of an injured third party or on the initiative of the granting authority.
The Mining Regulation shall determine the manner in which this article is to be applied."
Off the the Mining Regs we go… (translation by chatgpt)
Chapter III: RENUNCIATION OF EXPLORATION PERMIT
Article 118: Filing and deposit of the declaration of renunciation of the Exploration Permit
In the event of total or partial renunciation of the Exploration Permit, the holder or his/her representative in mines and quarries completes and files with the central or provincial Mining Cadastre, the declaration of renunciation of his/her Exploration Permit.
The declaration of renunciation is established on a form and includes in particular the following information:
• The references of the Exploration Permit;
• The number of the grant decision;
• The date of the grant;
• The administrative location: territory, district, province;
• The surface area of the Exploration Permit;
• The geographical coordinates of the vertices of the perimeter relinquished;
• The geographical coordinates of the vertices of the perimeter retained in the event of partial renunciation.
The original Exploration Certificate of the holder is attached to the declaration of renunciation.
Article 119: Admissibility or inadmissibility of the declaration of renunciation of the Exploration Permit
Upon receipt of the declaration of renunciation of the Exploration Permit, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre checks whether it is admissible.
The declaration is admissible if it is duly established, signed, and supported by the documents required in accordance with Article 118 above.
In the event of admissibility of the declaration of renunciation, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre issues a receipt to the holder indicating his/her name and address, the date of deposit, the references of the Exploration Permit, and the number of squares renounced.
In the event of inadmissibility of the request, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre returns or sends the file to the holder, stating the reason.
Article 120: Processing of the declaration of renunciation of the Exploration Permit
Within ten working days from the date of the deposit of the declaration of renunciation, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre verifies whether:
• The Exploration Permit is valid and not subject to a force majeure case;
• The squares renounced and retained are part of the perimeter covered by the Exploration Permit;
• If applicable, the part of the perimeter retained has the form of a polygon composed of contiguous whole squares that does not contain lands that are not part of the perimeter;
• The part of the perimeter relinquished is not subject to a lease, assignment, transmission, or option or mortgage contract. If this is the case, the holder must provide proof that he/she has obtained the written consent of the creditor not to oppose the renunciation.
If the declaration of renunciation meets the conditions set out above, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre transmits the declaration to the Minister within the time limit provided in the preceding paragraph.
If the holder's declaration of renunciation does not comply with the above-mentioned conditions, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre notifies the holder of the inaccuracy of the declaration and suggests the necessary corrections.
Article 121: Acceptance of the declaration of renunciation of the Exploration Permit
Upon receipt of the file of the declaration of renunciation of the Exploration Permit, the Minister takes note of it by decree which he/she transmits to the central Mining Cadastre. The latter sends it to the provincial Mining Cadastre where the declaration was filed.
Subject to the provisions of Articles 119 and 120 above, if the Minister fails to acknowledge a declaration of renunciation within three months from the date of its filing, the declaration is deemed accepted.
Article 122: Notification and Posting of the Decision Acknowledging the Declaration of Renunciation of the Research Permit
Upon receipt of the order acknowledging the declaration of renunciation of the Research Permit or upon expiration of the prescribed period to acknowledge it, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre shall post the order or the declaration of renunciation deemed accepted in the public consultation room. It notifies the holder free of charge by the fastest and most reliable means.
Article 123: Modification of Entries and the Research Certificate
In the case of partial renunciation, the central or provincial Mining Cadastre shall modify the registration of the Research Permit in the register of granted rights as well as the mapping of the research perimeter on the map of mining impacts. It shall proceed to modify the Research Certificate by recording the partial renunciation and returning it to the holder within a period of five days from the registration.
Article 124: Effects of Total or Partial Renunciation of the Research Permit
The effects of renunciation are those provided for in article 60 paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Mining Code.
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
19/02/2023
CHINESE CORRUPTION STILL RAMPANT IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO AS ZIGIN MINING ATTEMPTS TO BLACKMAIL THE STATE AND THE CHINESE EMBASSY INSULTS JULES ALINGETE AND THE IGF REPORT
The question remains…. How high up does the Chinese corruption go in the DRC Ministry
CHINESE CORRUPTION STILL RAMPANT IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO AS ZIGIN MINING ATTEMPTS TO BLACKMAIL THE STATE AND THE CHINESE EMBASSY INSULTS JULES ALINGETE AND THE IGF REPORT
The question remains…. How high up does the Chinese corruption go in the DRC Ministry
Last edited:
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
@Frank Posted
A copy of the IGF Report is publicly available via https://igf.gouv.cd/rapports.
An English translation of the IGF report is published on AVZ’s website. http://bit.ly/3F5wKBA
The DRC General Inspectorate of Finance had been authorised to investigate the following matters:
• whether Cominière’s purported sale of its 15% interest in the issued shares Dathcom Mining SA (Dathcom) to Jin Cheng Mining (Jin Cheng Sale) was proper and appropriate;
• any liability in connection with the Jin Cheng Sale;
• the legality of Cominière’s and Dathomir’s other recent conduct.
By way of summary, the IGF Report includes the following conclusions reached by the DRC General Inspectorate of Finance:
• Cominière has acted in violation of its articles of association in respect of its transfers of mining titles to “external partners” without obtaining financial guarantees;
• Cominière has acted contrary to the DRC Mining Code in respect of its transfers of mining licences without such transfer having undergone the required prior assessment by a competent DRC governmental authority;
• the Jin Cheng Sale was subject to a number of irregularities including the failure to select the Government’s technical body for the valuation of the 15% interest the subject of the Jin Cheng Sale, and the failure to consider the definitive feasibility study valuation completed in respect of the Manono Project; • Cominière had inappropriately allocated ~USD6,800,000 out of the total USD33,440,000 in proceeds from the purported Jin Cheng Sale for operating needs (including for commissions, fees and exceptional remunerations of all those who would have otherwise contributed to the operation) to the detriment of productive investments;
• Dathomir failed to comply with its obligations under the incorporated joint venture agreement in respect of Dathcom Mining SA (Dathcom) dated 27 January 2017, as amended from time to time (Dathcom JVA); and
• Dathcom allegedly transferred mining exploration permits 12436, 12449 and 12450 illegally to third parties.
In response to the findings of the DRC General Inspectorate of Finance, AVZ confirms:
• AVZ acquired valid and legal title to the 60% of shares issued in Dathcom, including, for the avoidance of doubt, as a consequence of the waiver of any rights of Cominiere and Dathomir under the Dathcom JVA by virtue of their entry into that same agreement;
• following AVZ’s acquisition of its initial 60% of shares issued in Dathcom, AVZ performed the funding obligations under the Dathcom JVA; and
• neither it nor any of its representatives had any involvement in, nor any prior knowledge of, the transfers of mining exploration permits 12436, 12449 and/or 12450 to any third party.
AVZ further confirms that it is continuing to cooperate with all competent DRC governmental authorities regarding the findings within the IGF Report. This announcement was authorised for release by the board of directors of AVZ Minerals Limited.
A copy of the IGF Report is publicly available via https://igf.gouv.cd/rapports.
An English translation of the IGF report is published on AVZ’s website. http://bit.ly/3F5wKBA
The DRC General Inspectorate of Finance had been authorised to investigate the following matters:
• whether Cominière’s purported sale of its 15% interest in the issued shares Dathcom Mining SA (Dathcom) to Jin Cheng Mining (Jin Cheng Sale) was proper and appropriate;
• any liability in connection with the Jin Cheng Sale;
• the legality of Cominière’s and Dathomir’s other recent conduct.
By way of summary, the IGF Report includes the following conclusions reached by the DRC General Inspectorate of Finance:
• Cominière has acted in violation of its articles of association in respect of its transfers of mining titles to “external partners” without obtaining financial guarantees;
• Cominière has acted contrary to the DRC Mining Code in respect of its transfers of mining licences without such transfer having undergone the required prior assessment by a competent DRC governmental authority;
• the Jin Cheng Sale was subject to a number of irregularities including the failure to select the Government’s technical body for the valuation of the 15% interest the subject of the Jin Cheng Sale, and the failure to consider the definitive feasibility study valuation completed in respect of the Manono Project; • Cominière had inappropriately allocated ~USD6,800,000 out of the total USD33,440,000 in proceeds from the purported Jin Cheng Sale for operating needs (including for commissions, fees and exceptional remunerations of all those who would have otherwise contributed to the operation) to the detriment of productive investments;
• Dathomir failed to comply with its obligations under the incorporated joint venture agreement in respect of Dathcom Mining SA (Dathcom) dated 27 January 2017, as amended from time to time (Dathcom JVA); and
• Dathcom allegedly transferred mining exploration permits 12436, 12449 and 12450 illegally to third parties.
In response to the findings of the DRC General Inspectorate of Finance, AVZ confirms:
• AVZ acquired valid and legal title to the 60% of shares issued in Dathcom, including, for the avoidance of doubt, as a consequence of the waiver of any rights of Cominiere and Dathomir under the Dathcom JVA by virtue of their entry into that same agreement;
• following AVZ’s acquisition of its initial 60% of shares issued in Dathcom, AVZ performed the funding obligations under the Dathcom JVA; and
• neither it nor any of its representatives had any involvement in, nor any prior knowledge of, the transfers of mining exploration permits 12436, 12449 and/or 12450 to any third party.
AVZ further confirms that it is continuing to cooperate with all competent DRC governmental authorities regarding the findings within the IGF Report. This announcement was authorised for release by the board of directors of AVZ Minerals Limited.
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
ITS NO SURPRISE THAT GLENCORE IS A DIAMOND SPONSOR AND KAMOA COPPER SA (JOINTLY OWNED BY ZIGIN AND IVANHOE MINING COMPANIES) IS A PLATINUM SPONSOR AT THE 2023 DRC MINING WEEK EVENTS ORGANISED BY THE VUKA GROUP
www.canadianminingjournal.com
GLENCORE WAS CHARGED WITH SEVEN COUNTS OF FRAUD BY THE UK SERIOUS FRAUD SQUAD. THE US MINER PLED GUILTY TO VIOLATING THE FOREIGN CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT, AGREEING TO PAY MILLIONS IN FINES AND FORFEITS TO US AUTHORITIES
IVANHOE MINES CONFIRMED A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WHERE IT STRUCK A DEAL WITH VIDIYE TSHIMANGA LAST YEAR
www.mining.com
Glencore charged with bribery in London, pleads guilty in the U.S.
Mining and commodities trader Glencore (LON: GLEN) has settled probes into bribery and market manipulation in the U.K. and U.S., which have hung over […]
www.canadianminingjournal.com
GLENCORE WAS CHARGED WITH SEVEN COUNTS OF FRAUD BY THE UK SERIOUS FRAUD SQUAD. THE US MINER PLED GUILTY TO VIOLATING THE FOREIGN CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT, AGREEING TO PAY MILLIONS IN FINES AND FORFEITS TO US AUTHORITIES
IVANHOE MINES CONFIRMED A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WHERE IT STRUCK A DEAL WITH VIDIYE TSHIMANGA LAST YEAR
Ivanhoe Mines confirms link to Congo aide in copper corruption case
Ivanhoe struck a deal last year with Vidiye Tshimanga, a top aide to Congo’s President Felix Tshisekedi, the firm said in a statement on Dec. 14.www.mining.com
Last edited:
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
I have to repost these here to make it easier to find because it will be an ongoing theme until we get our full mining rights
A Vuka Group delegation led by its Event Manager, Patricia Kazaka was received in audience this Tuesday, November 22, 2022 by the National Minister in charge of mines, Antoinette N’Samba Kalambayi in her office in Kinshasa Gombe.
Over the last 6 years in the DRC, AVZ have carried out Soil Sampling, Field Mapping, Consulting, Drilling, Metallurgical Testing, Completing a FEED Study, Environmental Study and Impact Assessment Reports including Groundwater Management, a 160 page Definitive Feasibility Study, a SEZ Agreement, Tendering for Mining Infrastructure, Legally Obtaining and Paying For an Increased Share of Dathcom, Obtaining Several Offtake Agreements for both Lithium and Tin, Raising Capital, Negotiating Funding with Pan African DFI’s and a Funding and Offtake Agreement with CATH, Presenting at the Battery Minerals Conference, Legally Fulfilling all Requirements to Obtain the Mining License, Including Receiving the Ministerial Decree to Award the Mining License and producing an 85 page Sustainability Report, Spending millions of dollars and Supporting the Local Community….
State owned mining company Cominiere caught fraudulently selling its shares to Chinese company Zigin by the Inspector General of Finance and it’s Director General and Technical Director charged.
Now State owned Cominiere is working the Minister of Mines and corrupt Director General of the DRC Mining Cadastre (CAMI) to deny granting AVZ Minerals a Mining License
Remember this when investing in mining in the DRC
VUKA GROUP'S DRC MINING
AND CORRUPTION WEEKS
JUNE & SEPTEMBER 2023
SPONSORED BY ZIGIN
AND CORRUPTION WEEKS
JUNE & SEPTEMBER 2023
SPONSORED BY ZIGIN
ANTOINETTE N’SAMBA KALAMBAYI DISCUSSED WITH THE VUKA GROUP DELEGATION ABOUT DRC MINING WEEK 2023
A Vuka Group delegation led by its Event Manager, Patricia Kazaka was received in audience this Tuesday, November 22, 2022 by the National Minister in charge of mines, Antoinette N’Samba Kalambayi in her office in Kinshasa Gombe.
Over the last 6 years in the DRC, AVZ have carried out Soil Sampling, Field Mapping, Consulting, Drilling, Metallurgical Testing, Completing a FEED Study, Environmental Study and Impact Assessment Reports including Groundwater Management, a 160 page Definitive Feasibility Study, a SEZ Agreement, Tendering for Mining Infrastructure, Legally Obtaining and Paying For an Increased Share of Dathcom, Obtaining Several Offtake Agreements for both Lithium and Tin, Raising Capital, Negotiating Funding with Pan African DFI’s and a Funding and Offtake Agreement with CATH, Presenting at the Battery Minerals Conference, Legally Fulfilling all Requirements to Obtain the Mining License, Including Receiving the Ministerial Decree to Award the Mining License and producing an 85 page Sustainability Report, Spending millions of dollars and Supporting the Local Community….
State owned mining company Cominiere caught fraudulently selling its shares to Chinese company Zigin by the Inspector General of Finance and it’s Director General and Technical Director charged.
Now State owned Cominiere is working the Minister of Mines and corrupt Director General of the DRC Mining Cadastre (CAMI) to deny granting AVZ Minerals a Mining License
Remember this when investing in mining in the DRC
Last edited:
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
WELCOME TO THE
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CORRUPTION
DON"T FORGET TO BOOK YOUR SEAT WITH THE VUKA GROUP
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CORRUPTION
DON"T FORGET TO BOOK YOUR SEAT WITH THE VUKA GROUP
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
20/02/2023
@9cardomaha Posted
Dathcom submits application to CAMI to relinquish North on April 1.
Ministerial decree 'expedited' and awareded April 22.
Looking for correspondence around March/April where there is direct request to relinquish the north for awarding the ML on the south.
Not sure if there are meant to be more pages, only have the two here
i was hoping it'd be the smoking gun implicating the MOM/MOP requesting for the trade...
Another point I didn't convey before is that the Ministerial decrees also came out in the same order.
@9cardomaha Posted
Dathcom submits application to CAMI to relinquish North on April 1.
Ministerial decree 'expedited' and awareded April 22.
Looking for correspondence around March/April where there is direct request to relinquish the north for awarding the ML on the south.
Not sure if there are meant to be more pages, only have the two here
i was hoping it'd be the smoking gun implicating the MOM/MOP requesting for the trade...Another point I didn't convey before is that the Ministerial decrees also came out in the same order.
- First 00080 approving the split
- then 000145 awarding ML
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
Last edited:
MoneyBags1348
Top 20
Last edited:
Similar threads
