Many companies in the Philippines, mining or otherwise, regularly bribe local officials and governments to look the other way with regard to various compliance issues, and any social or environmental damage, particularly the most obvious, areas downstream of poor mining practices. People like the Environment minister see this and have a point; the systemic corruption at multiple levels allows rogue companies to get away with such practices, so one way to deal with it is to treat them all on mass, suspending any and all operations that are, for example, in a watershed upstream of agriculture (which is most), regardless of whether they are doing any environmental or other damage, or whether or not they are in compliance.
This also appeals to ideology, statements by the minister that the Phillippines is 'unfit for mining', and 'mining cannot occur in any watersheds' (which means by definition the entire land surface of the earth) reveal the style of her ideological thinking, it is a reaction against a corrupt legal and political system, and does not take into account operations on a case by case basis, which means operations which have done nothing wrong get caught up in the mess.
OGC has a strong legal case, as normally one would have to show that areas downstream are actually suffering ill effects on a case by case basis, however the law in the Philippines is not as protective of property rights as in other nations; just making allegations often seems to go further and carry more weight than actual evidence. The released statement 'potential effects on agriculture' is revealing, the operation has been ordered to be suspended on the allegation that farmers are 'potentially' affected, not actual evidence that this is the case. It is a pity the environment minister doesn't seem to understand the difference.
OGC Price at posting:
$4.19 Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
