WHAT:

The Munk Contract which established the Munk School of Global Affairs was signed in secret and not publicly available until a Freedom of Information request put out by two professors. The details turned out to be scandalous.

Find out why the U of T now houses a right-wing think tank. Find out what we mean when we say that Munk’s donation came with “strings attached”. Find out about Barrick’s history of threats to academic freedom. And find out what this all means in the bigger picture.

The event will be hosted by researcher and activist, Sakura Saunders, who will take you on a tour that starts with a contract and ends with the take over of public institutions, the repression of the truth, and corporate impunity.

Last week, a remediation program proposed by Barrick Gold was criticized by Mining Watch Canada and other human rights organizations for forcing victims of gang rape to sign away their rights to sue the company in exchange for redress. Barrick’s offer came two years after a 2011 Human Rights Watch report exposed a “pattern of violent abuses, including horrifying acts of gang rape”. Mining Watch’s report also criticized the fact that Barrick was offering no compensation to women who were gang raped by PNG Police, despite the fact that the police were housed, supplied and fed by Barrick during their time in Porgera.

The Globe and Mail was quick to react, releasing an editorial entitled “Barrick has done its best to improve human rights at mine in Papua New Guinea.” The article praised Barrick while insisting that it seemed “fair” that women receiving remediation could no longer sue the company. Meanwhile, it chastised Mining Watch for failing to acknowledge Barrick’s change for the better.

While the Globe acknowledged that is was “regrettable” that Barrick had not acted on the allegations of gang rape before the Human Rights Watch report was released, it failed to acknowledge that Mining Watch was one of the many organizations that had brought allegations of gang rape to the company years before Human Rights Watch was on the case, only to have these allegations repeatedly denied by the company.

This isn’t the first time the Globe and Mail has gone to bat for Barrick with fawning editorials immediately following accusations of human rights abuses. In 2011, months after the release of the Human Rights Watch report and just two weeks after 7 people were killed by security at Barrick’s North Mara Mine in Tanzania, Barrick announced that it would investigate allegations of rape at their North Mara mine. Apparently, a review of a separate human rights issue at that mine had turned up 10 women who had credible and similar stories of being threatened and coerced into sex by security guards and police near the mine. Surprisingly, after explaining some of the voluntary measures that Barrick and other companies had signed onto, the Globe and Mail concluded that “Barrick and other Canadian miners now deserve praise for their efforts (perhaps overdue) to raise industry standards.” Really? So soon?

The Globe editorial went so far as to claim that Canada’s Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Councillor, Marketa Evans (coincidentally the founding director of the Munk* Centre for International Studies at the University of Toronto), monitored the behaviour of Canadian mining companies overseas. However, a review of publicly-available government documents reveals that the Office of the CSR Counsellor had only investigated 3 cases since the creation of its post in 2009. In 2 of those 3 cases, no dialogue process took place because the companies refused to cooperate and the cases were subsequently closed.

Another blind spot in the Globe’s friendly characterization of Barrick is the fact that Barrick Gold has repeatedly been singled out by NGOs and Embassy magazine as a major lobbying force against regulatory oversight of the Canada’s international mining industry. According to Mining Watch Canada, Barrick Gold registered seven lobbyists to lobby on Bill C-300, the “responsible mining bill”, and Barrick’s lobbyists met with at least 22 Members of Parliament and 3 Senators. In October, 2010, bill C-300 lost by a mere 6 votes.

To be fair, the Globe did carry out an investigative feature by African Bureau chief Geoffrey York in 2011 that detailed and gave context to the regular killings at Barrick’s North Mara mine. However, this feature also departed from journalistic ethics to paint a picture of Barrick as ahead of the pack. Specifically, it misquoted protestbarrick.net editor Sakura Saunders as saying that Barrick “has become ‘more transparent’ than most other miners.”

According to Saunders, nothing could have been farther from the truth. “I spoke with York for almost an hour, and if I had to characterize the theme of that conversation, it was that Barrick couldn’t be trusted: they lie, they engage in elaborate cover-ups, and they use CSR as a smokescreen to avoid accountability.” Saunders insists that she even sent York three follow-up e-mails, providing links to stories about Barrick being caught lying in Tanzanian Parliament, using lawyers to threaten activists, and detailing the tactics that Barrick used to cover up a massacre at their Bulyanhulu mine in Tanzania. The Globe and Mail refused Saunders a retraction and even refused her a letter to the editor. It wasn’t until Saunders presented the Globe with a Notice of Action pursuant of the Libel and Slander Act that they finally allowed her a letter to the editor to clear her name.

One can only guess why the Globe insists on praising Barrick in times that should be dedicated to somber reflection on an industry rife with abuse. But, in light of this clearly biased reporting, it should raise eyebrows that the Globe and Mail announced a partnership with the Munk School of Global Affairs* late last year. The Munk Fellowship in Global Journalism is turning the typical model for training journalists “on its head” by taking experts in various subject areas and giving them hands on journalism training. These students, which unsurprisingly include experts in aid and corporate social responsibility, will be the freelance journalists of the future. As the Munk School has long been criticized for the overseeing role that it grants Peter Munk’s foundation – including annual meetings with the School’s director to review the School’s program areas – one would be naive not to suspect that these trainees will promote Munk’s worldview, which favours foreign investment over aid and corporate self-regulation over mandatory standards of accountability. Additionally, this partnership – which likely includes some financial arrangement with the Globe – hints at a possible conflict of interest when the Globe releases favorable editorials about Munk’s company.

Meanwhile, gang rapes continue to be just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the abuses that stem from the militarization of Barrick’s Porgera and North Mara mines. In both places, people are killed and arbitrarily detained regularly by the police and security. In the Porgera valley, mine waste is dumped directly into the rivers, poisoning hundreds of kilometres of waterways in one instance and turning a valley into a marsh of quicksand in another. The quicksand valley is swallowing up schools and houses to landslides, forcing people to move further and further up the mountainside to live. In North Mara, 40,000 small scale miners were economically displaced for the creation of the mine, left to scavenge for survival in the waste dumps of Barrick’s mega-mine. In other words, these mines present human rights crises in themselves, that aren’t going to be resolved with a nicely worded human rights policy or a limiting remediation package.

The logic behind the Globe’s reasoning is that these mines must operate, and Barrick is doing the best that they can. While many would question if Barrick is actually doing their best, the underlying assumption here is also off. As Geoffrey York concluded his investigative feature of the North Mara mine, “As long as Tanzanians are forced to choose between dying for a living and the potential wealth that they can gain by invading Barrick’s gold mine, the bloodshed at North Mara is likely to continue. Weapons and walls are a poor solution.” Will the Globe ever acknowledge that there are some places that should be no-go areas for mining? Areas within which human rights abuses are inevitable? Areas where environmentally responsible mining practices are impossible? (as Barrick will say, the rocky terrain makes it impossible in Porgera to maintain a tailings pond, thus they dump the waste in the river).

It seems that rather than publicly scolding Mining Watch for detailing criticism against Barrick’s CSR programs, the Globe would do well to invest some resources and visit Porgera themselves. As Geoffrey York’s experience in Tanzania suggests, even a biased observer can recognize a crisis zone when they see one. Until these mine sites are understood in the context of unavoidable conflict we will not be able to soberly analyze the situation. Zooming out, society itself would do well to ask what sacrifices it is willing to make for what amounts to a luxury item with few practical uses.

*Peter Munk is the acting chairman and founder of Barrick Gold. photo by Damien Baker

Education is an ongoing process, not a product which can be sold or received. However, the degree I am being offered represents an expensive end goal, accessible only to an elite few, not on the basis of whatever academic merit we may possess, but on our access to wealth and on our willingness to play by the rules of bureaucracy. It is a symbol of the priorities and values of this University, which in recent years has increasingly sacrificed quality on the altar of efficiency, constricting the freedoms both of students and of faculty. Meanwhile, funding priorities have emphasised generating wealth for industry over providing a quality education. This is the norm whenever such commodification takes place. One simply needs to observe the classroom sizes on this campus, where now even some tutorials are held in Convocation Hall, to be convinced of the extent of the damage done to the educational experience.

I stand in solidarity with the courageous students of Québec, who have been mounting fierce resistance against such political/economic warfare. They are clearly cognizant of where this road leads. Knowing that it is possible for us to do better, I would like to call upon my peers, in Canada and globally, to oppose the neoliberal hegemony that continues to deny what is rightfully ours: barrier-free education.

By rejecting my degree I mean no personal offence to either my peers nor the faculty at the University. I have fond feelings and the highest of respect for many who remain at this institution, and hold no ill will towards those who do not refuse their degree. However, I cannot stay true to my personal values and at the same time accept a degree from an institution which also honours and supports Barrick Gold and the World Bank. The values of this university are clear, and they are not mine. As graduating students, whether this is our first, second or third degree, we are all getting burned.

Thank you.

http://michaelvipperman.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/rejectioncover.pdf

http://michaelvipperman.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/rejectioninside.pdf

Learn about the personal journey and political fight of the Diaguita peoples in defense of their territory as they travel to Toronto, the corporate headquarters of Barrick Gold a company infamous for human rights violations and threats to intellectual freedom.

2 locations to choose from:

Wednesday January 11th at 6:30pm in the Nat Taylor Cinema (Ross Building) at
York University

Thursday  January 12th at 7:30pm in the Palmerston Library Theatre
560 Palmerston Avenue

***FREE***

Over 70% of mining companies are based in Canada, operating abroad and on indigenous territory with little environmental and social regulation and political impunity.

hosted by Mining Injustice Solidarity Network
www.solidarityresponse.net
http://cryoftheandes.com/wordpress/

For the York campus screening FB page, please click here:
http://www.facebook.com/events/213993182019794/

For the Palmerson Library screening, please click here:
http://www.facebook.com/events/232269483516292/

Extended notes

The indigenous Diaguita community in the arid Atacama region of Chile has always opposed  Barrick Gold’s Pascua Lama open pit gold and silver mine on their ancestral lands beside the border with Argentina. Now the Diaguita’s only source of water is threatened as the government prepares to allocate rights to Barrick. The filmmakers follow community leader Sergio Campusano of the Diaguita Agricultural Community Los Huascoaltinos as he seeks accountability from Barrick Gold in Toronto and from government officials in Alto del Carmen in Chile. The mining law is blamed by the Diaguita for allowing Barrick to deny access to their ancestral lands. The Diaguita complain that Barrick is doing exploration work in seven other areas of their land without permission, and pumping groundwater that would normally flow into the Huasco River.

Even though water was defined as a “national public good” in the 1981 Water Code,  it was also deemed a “market asset” and Chile gave away water rights for free to companies in the “productive” sectors: mainly multinational corporations engaged in mining, forestry, agricultural  exports, and hydroelectric development. Until now Rural Water Associations such as in Huasco have been protected by a separate law and their water has always been pristine. After large municipal water services were sold off in 1998, multinationals owned 83% of all water services. It’s close to 100 % now due to further sell-offs in 2004.

The Ontario Teachers Pension Plan controls 4 of the 13 largest water service companies. Some farmers in the Huasco Valley are not happy that Barrick is trying to buy water usage rights from other farmers. Some farmers are thinking of leaving for areas near the coast.

Even from the 16th century the Spanish made no claims on the Diaguita lands. The Diaguita community remained intact as other indigenous communities were assimilated into Chilean society. In 1902 Indian lands were measured and in 1903 Estancia de los Huascoaltinos were
given domain title to 381,000 hectares communally held ( less than in 1600). In 1997 land titles that had been double-registered from 1910 by other farmers and ranchers – regarded as illegal encroachments by the Diaguita – were made legal by the “Law of Agricultural Communities”. The Diaguita say they lost 140,000 hectares from this, and blame the government for not recognizing them as an indigenous people. In 1998 Barrick bought two ranches that had been double-registered in 1913 yet within Diaguita lands. They have closed the roads ever since and deny the Diaguita access to their grazing pastures. In 2005 the Diaguita declared their lands as a “Private Wilderness Protected Area”. In 2008 they requested to CONAMA (National Environment Commission) that their lands be recognized under existing legal framework as qualifying for protection as “Huasco Private Nature
Reserve”. CONAMA “refused to evaluate the project by declaring themselves incompetent”.

Critics have asked for a new environment agency, a department qualified to do environmental impact studies, and an agency responsible for enforcing regulations.

The Diaguita are aware of the severe water shortages caused by mining in the almost desert-like Atacama and Antofagasta regions to the north. The nearest  large town of Copiapo, where the mining disaster happened two years ago, used to be supplied by three rivers, but two have dried up. People buy water from mining companies that build desalination plants on the coast. BHP Billiton is building one for their Escondida copper mine for $4.3 billion. Water is used by the Collahuasi mine to pump iron ore slurry via 8 inch pipe 203 km. The largest power plant in South America is being built between Alto del
Carmen and Copiapo: the coal-fired Hacienda Castilla 2354MW, $4.4B plus $300M for a port.

In Feb. 2010 a complaint (filed in 2005) against Chile by Diaguita Agricultural Community Los Huascoaltinos was deemed admissible by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). Thus, this international body recognizes that the Chilean state committed alleged violations of rights enshrined in the American Convention on Human Rights when Chile approved Barrick Gold’s Pascua Lama mining project. The testimonies began Oct. 2011.

In Nov. 2011 a coalition of NGO’s in Chile presented a report to Barrick investors US EXIM Bank and EDC of Canada that declares Pascua Lama is in direct violation of the Equator Principles, which are global norms laying out conditions for responsible investment.

But what are the implications of this donation? How much influence will Munk have over the University’s curriculum and bias? Who is Peter Munk and what is his company Barrick Gold’s reputation worldwide?

This website has been created to provide facts to inform these discussions. In it, you will find a profile of Peter Munk and his company, Barrick Gold, as well as an analysis of the Munk Memorandum of Agreement with UofT and an analysis of this donation within the larger context of transnational corporate impunity and the struggle for corporate accountability within Canada.

Intended to empower students with the information necessary to demand a cancellation and renegotiation of this contract, this campaign is more than a source of information, but a link to an on-going campaign to achieve that end.

To learn more and get involved, please attend…

WHAT: Munk and UofT info session
WHERE: OISE 2279, 252 Bloor, UofT Campus
WHEN: Friday, Sept 30, 4-5pm

Recommended reading/viewing to get the facts!

The petition! See our demands of the University and register your support!

The Munk Primer:  a full, 6-page Munk Primer with a 6-point, bullet-proof critique of the Munk Contract. Namely, that:

• The Contract Was Negotiated and Approved in Secret
• The Contract has strings attached, compromising academic integrity
• The Donor has a Conflict of Interest in the School’s Area of Focus
• The Donor’s company has a reputation worldwide for Human Rights Abuses and Environmental Devastation
• The Donor has a History of Intimidating and Threatening Academics
• The Contract demands that UofT House a Right-wing Think Tank

Peter Munk in his own words: the must see video that exposes the truth and rhetoric behind Barrick Gold. view here.

Contact: MunkOUTofUofT@gmail.com if you have any questions or want to get involved!

(photos: Mining Injustice Solidarity Network: solidarityresponse.net)

Approximately 70 people gathered today at a commemoration held for the seven individuals killed in Tanzania at African Barrick Gold’s North Mara Mine. Public outcry over this violence has been amplified by recent reports that local security/police forces employed by the mine have attempted to ban a memorial ceremony for the deceased. To the horror of many local families, these security forces also stole 5 of the 7 peoples’ bodies from the mortuary.

The company has claimed that this violence was in response to an invasion of 1500 local people looting for gold ore. For others however, the real crime can be linked to the history of large-scale mining in the region. Editor of ProtestBarrick Sakura Saunders comments: “This mine was built on displacement and dispossession of the local people. These communities have a long history of small-scale mining for their livelihood that has been taken from them. Now, these same communities are being criminalized for using the survival-mechanisms that they know. They are being killed for ‘stealing’ the same gold-laced sand that used to be theirs.”

Unfortunately, this is not an isolated case. According to Carlos Jimenez a member of the Mining Injustice Solidarity Network, local mining communities often feel negative impacts and experience economic losses. He also expresses other concerns as a U of T student. He states, “It is disgusting that the University of Toronto chooses to accept donations from an industry which destroys communities and legitimizes it under the rhetoric of development. We must evaluate what kind of influence mining companies have in communities both at home and abroad.”

U of T alumni soon-to-to be graduate student Kwanza Msingwana agreed. “Barrick Gold should be held accountable . . . rather than just take the goods of Tanzania and leave the people impoverished leaving the environment in a bad state so that people cannot continue to benefit from the environment.”

President of Science for Peace, Judy Deutsch also expressed concern for human rights violations as well as the toll that mining has on the environment as a whole. She states, “The focus needs to be on preserving cultivable land and preserving water, not sacrificing young people to enrich entrepreneurs such as what just happened at the North Mara mine.”

The names of the individuals killed in North Mara mine were read out loud: Emanual Magige, 27; Chacha Mwasi, 25; Chacha Ngoka, 26; Chawali Bhoke, 26; Mwikwabe Marwa, 35. Statements were also read from Tarime residents and advocates who work in the region.

Despite receiving formal invitations, no administrators of the Munk School of Global Affairs were available for comment.

A man stands by a house in what used to be a rural area. It has almost since been overtaken by waste rock from Barrick's North Mara mine.

By Sakura Saunders

leer el artículo en español aqui.

On May 16, over 1,000 people entered a mine in northern Tanzania, desperate to collect whatever gold they could from the modern industrial site that used to be their bread and butter. But instead of providing the displaced artisanal miners with a boost to their meager income, the day ended in horror.

The next day, African Barrick Gold, a subsidiary of Toronto-based Barrick Gold, released a statement admitting that seven people were killed and twelve injuried at their North Mara mine in Tanzania. The killings came at the hands of Tanzanian police, who Barrick originally claimed were under sustained attack by 800 “criminal intruders” (a number Barrick revised to 1,500), who illegally entered the North Mara mine to steal gold ore. Since this fatal confrontation, tensions have been high in the Tarime District, with an increase in the number of police, the deployment of water cannons, the arrest of journalists and two members of parliament for “instigating violence,” and the theft of five of the seven bodies from the mortuary by police.

Confrontations between local people and the mine’s security forces are not uncommon near Barrick’s North Mara mine in Tanzania. As Bloomberg journalist Cam Simpson reported in a December 2010 feature story about the mine, before this latest massacre “at least seven people have been killed in clashes with security forces at the mine in the past two years.” These security forces, according to company documents, include police who Barrick pays to guard its North Mara mine.

“They are not arresting them or taking them to court,” said Machage Bartholomew Machage, a member of the Tarime District Council, the highest local government body, in an interview with Simpson. “They are just shooting them.”

One week after the most recent spate of killings, the police stormed a local mortuary and stole the bodies of four of the dead. This move, according to locals, was to prevent the villagers from holding a planned memorial service at the mine on Tuesday.

Police also arrested and charged two members of Parliament, a legal advisor, and journalists for “instigating people to cause violence.” MP Tundu Lissu, who was among those arrested, was in Tarime to assist with post-mortem medical examinations of bodies to identify exactly which parts of the bodies of the deceased were shot by the police.

“Normally if you shoot a person on the head it means you intended to kill them. However, if you shoot them on the leg it means you tried to stop them from doing something… this exercise will help us to know the police’s intention,” he explained to local journalists. Tundu was arrested two days later at the funeral of the local villagers killed by Barrick security.

At this time, Lissu and six others remain in police custody and their bail has been denied. Meanwhile, the four journalists, MP Esther Matiko, and opposition cadre John Heche posted bail and were released after six hours in custody.

According to George Marato of Tazania’s Guardian newspaper, these violent confrontations can be blamed in part on corruption amongst the security forces at Barrick’s mine. According to his interviews with locals following the latest killings, police and company staff conspire to facilitate illegal entry into the premises to scoop sand with gold concentrates. For example, one group would pay one million shillings (around $650) in exchange for a half-hour of scooping sand from the ground.

The violent confrontations occur, according to Marato, when disagreements arise over the amount of compensation for company insiders, often due to hikes in “gold theft fees.” He writes, “Ensuing wars of words turn into confrontations that provoke policemen to fire at the very people who had been co-conspirators not long previously.”

This situation, according to Marato, is then compounded by local youngsters who attempt to force their way to the compound to scoop the sand free of charge.

Tensions with the locals can be traced back to the mine’s early history of displacement and dispossession. Before the mine opened, an estimated 40,000 people living in the area, a large majority of the population, depended on small-scale mining for their livelihoods, according to a history compiled by the mine’s first proponent, Afrika Mashariki Gold Mines Ltd.

Small scale miners, represented by five villages, had mineral rights to the lands that they mined, but were forced to sell these claims to Afrika Mashariki under illegal and irregular circumstances, according to a legal complaint launched in July 2003 by the Lawyers Environmental Action Team (LEAT) on behalf of 1,273 former small-scale miners. In another lawsuit, 43 landowners alleged to have been paid no compensation, while being forcefully evicted from their lands.

Since then, there have been multiple fatal confrontations at the mine site. In December 2008, one such incident resulted in a civilian uprising where locals set fire to $7 million worth in mine equipment. This number, which was originally estimated at upwards of $15 million, is disputed by locals. As now, Barrick blamed the damage to equipment on “well-organized groups” that raided the mine site. However, signed affidavits [1, 2] from witnesses to the event claim that angry villagers had only set one Caterpillar loader on fire on a road outside the mine, after they had heard of the killing of their compatriot. These affidavits and others [3, 4] describe this incident in detail, as well as documenting the history of violence and impunity at the mine site, and the criminalization of community advocates following the murders.

 from PorgeraAlliance.net  

A recent landmark decision of the National Court that gives Porgera Joint Venture Company exclusive rights of occupancy to its Special Mining Lease (SML) could affect thousands of landowners living in major resource development project areas throughout the country. Meanwhile, landowners from Porgera have traveled to the United Nations to advocate for the humane resettlement of the people still living within the SML.

The lawsuit, against the Wapini sub-clan living in the SML area of Barrick Gold’s Porgera mine, sought permanent injunctions against the landowners who were continually tearing down a fence that the company was building around the SML.

Danny Gonol, the lawyer representing the Wapini landowners, submitted on behalf of the landowners that the company was constructing the fence through their village and this would result in their displacement, as well as destruction to their homes, food gardens and economic trees.

The resettlement of people still living inside the SML area of the Porgera Mine has been a key demand brought by the landowners association for many years.

“We are forced to live like squatters in our own land. The company’s mining activity, through the mine waste and now this giant fence, has overtaken all of the land that we once used to live in and grow food,” said Mark Ekepa, chairman of the Porgera Landowners Association. “With this legal decision, the national government is legitimizing Barrick’s use of force in evicting indigenous landowners from their own land. We have no where to go, so we are taking our struggle to international bodies”

In 2008, the Porgera Landowners Association joined forces with other Porgera-based groups to form the Porgera Alliance. Since that time, the Alliance has made annual trips to Barrick’s Annual Shareholders meeting, the Canadian Parliament, and the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Peoples (UNPFII) to advocate for resettlement of landowners who live inside the SML.

“Our government is weak and depends on companies like Barrick to provide revenues from resource extraction,” said Jethro Tulin of the Porgera Alliance. “While we try to work with our government in PNG, we have found that the government speaks like the company and the company speaks like the government. Meanwhile, there is a human rights crisis on the ground that neither body wants to acknowledge.”

Mr Gonol said that his lawfirm is contemplating lodging a Supreme Court appeal against the National Court decision.

Confrontations between local people and mining security are not uncommon near Barrick’s North Mara mine in Tanzania. As Bloomberg journalist Cam Simpson reported in his Dec ’10 feature story about the mine, “Security guards and federal police allegedly have shot and killed people scavenging the gold-laced rocks to sell for small amounts of cash, according to interviews with 28 people, including victims’ relatives, witnesses, local officials and human-rights workers.”

These conflicts take place in the context of forced displacement, destroyed livelihoods and farmlands, and the on-going poisoning of local residents that characterizes Barrick’s North Mara mine.

While Barrick has recently begun to admit to the killings of “trespassers” near the mine, they continue to deny that a 2009 toxic spill that resulted in the death and poisoning of many villagers near the mine site. In fact, while local news reports linked the toxic spillage to increased rain, Barrick once again blamed “vandals”. According to the company’s Corporate Social Responsibility reports “vandals stole PVC plastic lining from a waste water containment pond, allowing acidic waste water to seep from the pond.” Even though local reports in media and with the North Mara Ward Authority reported that 20-43 people in North Mara died within weeks of the spill, Barrick continues to assert that “this event was an isolated incident and to date there is no evidence that there has been ‘serious human health impacts or even deaths’ associated with this event.”

For context to the health concerns and on-going conflict in the North Mara region, please see the following reports:

North Mara’s message to government, by Beldina Nyakeke of The Citizen (Tanzania) May 2011

Tanzania: Killings and Toxic Spill Tarnish Barrick Gold, by Zahra Moloo May 2011

REPORT: Africa Barrick: Clean Up Your Act! people and livestock threatened in tanzania May 2011

FOR COMPLETE CONFERENCE SCHEDULE PLEASE VISIT: http://www.solidarityresponse.net/mining-injustice-conference/conference-agenda-2011/

***bring your own cup and a blank t-shirt if you can!***
…
This conference reflects the collective effort of several organizations and grass roots groups in Toronto, in collaboration with peoples, communities and organizations facing and resisting the entrance of corporate mining mega-projects into their territories.

****************************************************
Friday May 6th, 7 pm: Conference ‘soft-launch’ – meet and greet with affected community members and activists at Beit Zatoun (612 Markham Street)
RSVP here so we know how much food to bring!: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=180292898686837

****************************************************
Saturday May 7th, 1:15 pm: keynote speaker Winona LaDuke and concurrent sessions as well as workshops and caucuses! (Sidney Smith Hall)

Official conference launch, 8 pm – 2 am: dance party (193 Dowling Street @ Queen Street West)

********************************************************
Sunday May 8th, 10 am: concurrent sessions as well as workshops and caucuses (cont.!) (Sidney Smith Hall)

********************************************************
Particular themes that will be discussed this year include:
• Gendered violence, inequity and feminist perspectives
• Militarization and forced displacement
• Indigenous knowledge and spirituality as forms of resistance
• Labour rights and the rhetoric of development
• Criminalization of dissent and protest
• Environmental contamination effects and health
• Food security and water rights
• The cycle of supply and demand of uranium in the North
• Tar sands and the petroleum industry in the North and South

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Stay tuned for a list of speakers or visit our website at www.solidarityresponse.net

Endorsed by: AccentsBookstore, Barrio Nuevo, Bayan Canada, Canadians Against Mining in El Salvador, Centre for Research on Latin America and the Caribbean, Common Frontiers, CUPE 4400, CUPE 3903, Environmental Justice Toronto, First Continental Encounter of the Peoples of the Abya Yala-Ecuador, First Nations Solidarity Working Group, Guatemala Community Network – Toronto Kitchener-Waterloo Mayan Project – Tzijolaj-Ottawa, Health for All, Indigenous Environmental Network, Latin American and Caribbean Solidarity Network, Latin American Trade Union Coalition, Migrante, MiningWatch Canada, Munk OUT of UofT, NooneisIllegal, Ontario Coalition Against Poverty, Opirg Toronto, Osgoode Environmental Law Society, Philippines Solidarity Network of Canada, ProtestBarrick, Rights Action, Science for Peace, Students for a Free Tibet, Toronto Bolivia Solidarity, Todos por Guatemala, Workers Assembly.

If you would like to endorse this event please email Mining Injustice Solidarity Network at miconference2011@gmail.com