Press Release from Special Mine Lease Osikaiyang Landowners...

Press Release from Special Mine Lease Osikaiyang Landowners Association Inc (“SMLOLA”)

12 July 2017

HAVING FAILED TO WIN A SOCIAL LICENSE, BCL NOW SAYS IT WILL INTENSIFY COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT – TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE

Finally Bougainville Copper Limited (“BCL”) acknowledges it has again failed to win a Social License and now says it will “step up its on-the-ground activities in Bougainville” which should have been obvious much earlier, given the recent road block which stymied their efforts to have a support agreement signed and the petition that was signed by approximately 550 people living in and around the old minesite saying “No to BCL”. The petition was formally delivered to President Momis and the Autonomous Bougainville Government (“ABG”) in April this year. There is an ever growing community discontent about the way they are being treated and you do not get any understanding of that when you read BCL’s announcement.

Interestingly, they also suggest they have every confidence the outstanding issues can be resolved and yet they have never met with the owners of the minerals, the Special Mine Lease Osikaiyang Landowners Association (“SMLOLA”) in an effort to negotiate and engage in a discussion with regard to their desire to benefit from and more particularly, develop our minerals. In fact, in complete contrast, they had an exploration licence for 2 years, which expired back in September last year and they failed to negotiate a land access agreement.. We invited them to meet to negotiate a land access agreement, and yet they refused to engage, doing nothing productive, including no remedial environmental work, for the whole term of the exploration licence.

Mr Miriori, Chairman of the SMLOLA says “all we see is the same arrogant treatment as we saw in the past. They did nothing to remedy the horrific environmental and social damage left behind in Bougainville, for over 27 years, and they are now repeating the same heavy handed conduct. They called us “impediments” rather than respectfully acknowledging the important wishes of the landowners and the changes in Bougainville, we now own the minerals not the State or the Government. Why do they simply engage with the Autonomous Bougainville Government (“ABG”) (who now clearly have a massive conflict of interest – given they have a significant shareholding in BCL) and not us? The issue here is not one of a leadership dispute as they suggest, but of the owners of the minerals being opposed to the return of BCL.”

“We have shown a willingness to act reasonably, and introduced a developer with an impressive track record, when both BCL and the ABG have said BCL cannot develop Panguna and will have to find a development partner” said Mr Miriori.

To further illustrate the disrespect we feel, Mr Burns says it was unfortunate that there is some dispute over the leadership of the SMLOLA. This is not the central issue but the way
BCL are ignoring the wishes of the mineral owners. We would respectfully point out that I, Mr Philip Miriori, am the Court approved and officially elected Chairman of the SMLOLA and have been since December 2015. The issue is that, understandably, we do not support the return of BCL and accordingly BCL has been seeking to work with another member of the SMLOLA, to appoint him as the Chairman of the SMLOLA to push through their agenda, and that of the ABG. The Court has already issued a restraining order against that individual holding himself out as an authorised representative of the SMLOLA or conducting any negotiations or discussion with any party holding himself out as such.

Further, BCL in its public statements places significant reliance on the reference to the other landowner groups. This is misleading, as the SMLOLA is the only landowner association that owns the minerals and accordingly the only landowner association that can consent to access for the grant of an Exploration License - without our consent nothing will happen.

Mr Miriori said “we firmly believe all Bougainvilleans must benefit from the Panguna mine this time around but at this stage, given we own the minerals, our consent is the only critical hurdle and to date, they continue to ignore our wishes and treat us disrespectfully. The ABG has before them, two redevelopment proposals, one from BCL and one from the SMLOLA. Only one of those has the critical landowner support – ours. The ABG has no option in these circumstances but to respect the Show Cause Notice and cancel the BCL Exploration License as they will never be able to satisfy the conditions of the license without Landowners’ consent. We hope they will take on board our position and find a way to work with us constructively to resolve this.”

Again the Court has also confirmed this position stating that a recent Memorandum of Association (“MOA”) supporting the appointment of BCL as the developer of Panguna, which was proposed to be signed, again by a person illegally holding himself out as an authorised representative of the SMLOLA, could not be signed by any party until the members of the SMLOLA consented; ie the members of the SMLOLA is the critical consent required.
Mr Miriori said “I find it disrespectful of BCL to the Court that none of the orders of the Court have been referred to by BCL in their formal statement. .”

Finally, we noted the contention by BCL that they have “a first right to develop the Panguna tenement” which is “clear and unambiguous under the Bougainville Mining Act 2015”. One of the central themes underlying the new Mining Act was that landowners would now be in control of their own destiny given the horrors of the past. Our legal advice is that BCL’s position may be better described as simply a renewal application for the previous exploration licence (that was even then subject to a Show Cause Notice for an event that cannot be cured retrospectively). The fate of that application is not in the control of BCL but in the hands of the SMLOLA (whose support is critical) and the ABG, who must follow strict rules under the Mining Act 2015 to determine whether amongst other things, BCL is a fit and proper person to hold the exploration licence and determine if landowners are in support of the issue. Given the ABG has a proposal from BCL which does not have the critical landowner support and an alternative proposal (which is more generous to the landowners) that does have the landowner support, the choice is clear.

Mr Miriori says “we believe there are many valid and obvious concerns with the BCL renewal application, not least of which is the lack of landowner support. We do however, recognise the ABG has a personal interest in the outcome and therefore plead with the ABG to act carefully with our future, as the SMLOLA will not support a redevelopment of Panguna where BCL is in control and accordingly the mine will go nowhere for years should this happen.”

Mr Miriori says “he is disappointed in the treatment of the SMLOLA including trying to force through a MOA against the SMLOLA wishes with an illegal party. We appreciate the Court stepping in to protect our interests and giving the SMLOLA the final say. BCL speak of having to intensify community engagement – if only they had done that earlier. We do however remain committed to finding an equitable solution for all and encourage all parties to meet and find a solution to this very important issue for Bougainville.”
Philip Miriori Chairman - SMLOLA