Assuming Feliz Tshisekedi wants to drain the swamp he cannot do it on his own. He doesn't control all the government but had to share power with the FCC the party of Joseph Kabila who still retain (by all accounts I've read or seen) most of the political power.
Zoe Kabila is still the governor of Tanganjika province in which Manono resides. I don't imagine Zoe Kabila's connection to AVZ was via Simon Cong (though possibly that too) but more directly via Guy Loando who was recently resigned as a director of AVZ to take up his appointment as a DRC Senator. He stated or it was stated on his behave via AVZ announcement that his ownership of shares was constitutionally incompatible with his appointment as Senator (or words to that effect).
If swamp draining is desirable and is what is in the interests of the DRC people and in the interest of AVZ shareholders to get the best value for their shares and the best deal in a free and open (as opposed to a corrupt and bribery facilitating) marketplace why would Dathcom going from a SAS structure to a SA (an anonymous) structure be a condition of this deal. How can anonymity of ownership of Dathomirs remaining part of Dathcom be in AVZs interest. Isn't it obvious that hiding the ownership is against the impetus to drain the swamp? Isn't it obvious that a DRC politican would be able to avoid DRC laws better in a structure that allows for hidden ownership? Who else benefits from going to a hidden ownership structure of Dathcom - it certainly doesn't seen to do anything for Cominiere or AVZ?
I've laid out these arguments largely before in this post
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/running-discussion-on-sp.4111732/page-23893?post_id=41640172
I can show you the Der Guist tweet that shows Zoe Kabila mentioning Lithium interests. But I think you've seen it already.
And I can show you the section of the report All the President's Weath - where Zoe Kabila is reported to have worked with Klaus and co in the Moto gold days.
This post shows me that AVZ shareholders (or a significant minority of them - those that voted for a first strike on the remuneraton report ) are aware that being custodians of their own best interests is not the same as being a downramper.
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/an...eral-meeting.5108272/page-47?post_id=41725053
If you are determined to only attend to those things which support a positive narrative then you make yourself vulnerable to risks you might have mitigated by being slightly less trustful and slightly more diligent.
I suspect, but cannot prove, that Guy Loando was an associate of Zoe Kabila and was essentially minding Zoe Kabila's business when he was a director for AVZ. Then the Kabilas wanted to sure up their powerbase so Guy Loando got a Senate appointment. Can't prove it - but it makes sense and fits the broader narrative of the DRC trying to move from a less lawful to a more lawful state. But politicians in a grey world also looking after their own interests as best they can and sometimes not in the best interests of their country.
Besides the question of how does Dathcom going to an anonymous ownership structure help the DRC rather than hinder it? I'd ask how is it in the interest of the DRC for Cominiere to give up chunks of its ownership in Dathcom - it might have obtained revenue and a share of the profits for the life of the mine if one is developed at Manono so why sell for a few million of so (assuming parity with the Dathomir transaction) now?
These deals to me have the feel to them of a politician of set of politicians and or bureaucrats or civil servants doing deals that benefit themselves (and which would be illegal and the very opposite of swamp draining) rather than the DRC people over the longer term.
Yes the DRC needs development capital. But Cominiere and Dathomir didn't really deliver on their part of the deal with respect to roads and power plant from the time Klaus was making deals.
And Felix Tsisedeki - lets give him the benefit of as much doubt as possible - did not unwind the changes to the mining code that removed the stability clauses. I can give you a link to the IMF report for that. If the DRC can change its laws retrospectively when it changes its governments and its Presidents (how long will Felix be there?) then it doesn't really matter what special economic zones agreements are made - if they can't be relied on to be honored. A country that can revoke laws in a mining code retrospectively once - when the political wind changes - can do it again. Unless they've a strong reason not to. And that reason would be to show they are open for business. But rather than being open shareholders of AVZ are being asked to approve a deal that sees Dathcom go to a more closed - an anonymous structure.
