Source: Island Business News

A verbal warfare is developing between the Pacific Network on Globilization (PANG) and regional organisation SOPAC over its role in the drafting of the controversial new laws on seabed mining.

In a statement issued today, PANG is calling on SOPAC to respond to criticism of its role in the drafting of controversial new laws on experimental seabed mining and to clarify its relationship with the mining industry.

PANG’ statement said: “On March 6 SOPAC requested PANG remove an article “US giant using SOPAC and Fiji regime to access seabed minerals in international waters" from its website. PANG is not the author of the article, but believes it raises a number of key concerns that SOPAC should publicly respond to.

“PANG has made clear its position; legislation is unnecessary and dangerous at this point in time. PANG view’s the "draft Fiji International Seabed Mineral Management Decree 2013" as a classic example of what is fundamentally wrong with SOPAC’s seabed mining project: supposed consultation processes are a farce; there are serious questions over whose interests SOPAC is representing, there is preferential treatment given to foreign multinational corporations; and, there is a complete failure to defend and ensure inclusive, transparent and fair processes.

“The SOPAC project gave a green light to foreign companies but the consultation process was a total farce with civil society groups given less than 3 days to comment. In breach of all of the fundamental principles of legislation the decree has been drafted specifically for one commercial entity that has been given priority access to be consulted on the document.

“SOPAC maintains it is mandated by Pacific Island Countries and Territories yet comments from its own staff on Locheed Martin’s position in Fiji’s draft decree raise serious questions as to whose interest SOPAC is representing. As the "agency mandated to provide development assistance to Pacific Island Countries and Territories”, particularly with a project that seeks to regulate foreign companies, SOPAC cannot be, or even give the appearance, that it is facilitating, meeting or giving preference to these multinational foreign companies.

“In yesterday’s Fiji Times, SOPAC’s Hannah Lily is quoted as saying that, “it was important for countries to put in place strict laws and regulatory mechanisms to manage deep sea minerals before any negotiations took place”. PANG finds it hard to believe that any negotiations will be meaningful when the party you are negotiating with has commented and taken an active part in drafting the legislation before national democratic processes have been undertaken. Nowhere in the comments posted on the draft by SOPAC staff do we see any push back by SPOAC or alternative recommendations.

“Finally, SOPAC asserts that one of the key aims of its project is to ensure transparency, dialogue and inclusiveness of all actors. However in the draft decree, SOPAC does not even attempt to make a case for the deletion of Clause 46 which would make illegal and criminal any attempt by civil society groups to voice opposition. Surely SOPAC cannot condone such a provision? The silence by SOPAC on this clause makes a mockery of SOPAC's claims for transparency, dialogue and inclusiveness,” the statement.