solomon star 13/11/2013, page-4

Sniper88

I am talking about:

"He said the Director of Environment had already granted mining lease to Sumitomo mining company, therefore the landowners have the right to block it."

If this paragraph is correct like this, then that's great! As far as I understand, Axiom KB has strong support from the landowners (at least all the news articles we have been lately reading suggest that). So, if SMM win the court case (heaven forbid) than landowners could just simply block the "already granted mining lease". Why would we then really have to worry about the outcome of the court case?! All we really need is just 100% support from the landowners and we should be sweet, no?!

If you change the paragraph to:

"He said the Director of Environment had already granted mining lease to Sumitomo mining company, therefore the landowners DON'T have the right to block it."

That would just make more sense (not from a legal stand point; just the way it's worded). I am just confused about the "therefore" in that paragraph. Just somehow doesn't read right.

Don't get me wrong; I hope the paragraph is correct and landowners simply can block the already granted mining lease. I just can't imagine that it can be that simple.

Please correct me if you think I am wrong.

Cheers