Open letter from CEO of Herlakles Farms in response to report on ...

4. Reach a clear understand<strong>in</strong>g with the <strong>in</strong>digenous people by way <strong>of</strong> amemorandum <strong>of</strong> understand<strong>in</strong>g for the project <strong>to</strong> avert any future conflicts.This is the decision <strong>of</strong> the Court given <strong>in</strong> the matter on 27/2/2012 but Mr. Brucealso said <strong>in</strong> his publication <strong>of</strong> 20 March, 2012 that our case was dismissed. Andthese are what Mr. Bruce styles “nuisance suits”. Many more <strong>of</strong> these are on theway.In the meantime, soon after we sued SG SOC <strong>to</strong> Court they hurriedly put up adocument which they said was a <strong>report</strong> <strong>of</strong> a social and environmental impactassessment they has carried out <strong>in</strong> the project area and presented it <strong>to</strong> the thenM<strong>in</strong>istry <strong>of</strong> Environment and Nature Protection so as <strong>to</strong> pre-empt the orders whichthe Court was likely go<strong>in</strong>g <strong>to</strong> make. The said ESIA was submitted <strong>to</strong> the M<strong>in</strong>istry<strong>in</strong> charge <strong>of</strong> the Environment on the 5 th August, 2011 when our case was already <strong>in</strong>CourtOn August 23, 2011, the m<strong>in</strong>istry <strong>of</strong> environment and nature protection <strong>in</strong> violation<strong>of</strong> the provisions <strong>of</strong> Article 12(i) <strong>of</strong> Decree No. 2005/0577/ pm <strong>of</strong> 23/02/2005which stipulates that notice <strong>of</strong> public hear<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> an ESIA must be given <strong>to</strong> thepublic at least 30 days <strong>in</strong> advance <strong>in</strong> a press release <strong>of</strong> that day fixed publichear<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>in</strong> Mundemba and Nguti <strong>from</strong> August 29 <strong>to</strong> September 3 rd 2011 <strong>from</strong> 10a.m. <strong>to</strong> 4 p.m. and <strong>in</strong> addition, contrary <strong>to</strong> the law on the matter, copies <strong>of</strong> the ESIAdocuments were not given <strong>to</strong> op<strong>in</strong>ion leaders, elites and other stakeholders <strong>in</strong>advance. These public hear<strong>in</strong>gs were also fixed at a time when the roads <strong>in</strong> thearea, especially dur<strong>in</strong>g the ra<strong>in</strong>y season <strong>of</strong> last year were extremely bad and mostly<strong>in</strong>accessible mak<strong>in</strong>g it difficult for people <strong>to</strong> travel <strong>to</strong> Mundemba or Nguti.Despite all the above irregularities, the M<strong>in</strong>istry proceeded <strong>to</strong> issue SG SOCa certificate <strong>of</strong> environmental conformity on September 18, 2011, only a few daysafter the public hear<strong>in</strong>g ended on 3/9/2011.Immediately this fact came <strong>to</strong> our knowledge, we (SEFE) immediately wrote apetition <strong>to</strong> the m<strong>in</strong>ister <strong>of</strong> environment and nature protection protest<strong>in</strong>g aga<strong>in</strong>st theglar<strong>in</strong>g irregularities and illegalities committed as far as the exam<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> SGSOC so-called ESIA was concerned and called upon him <strong>to</strong> withdraw thecertificate issued <strong>to</strong> SG SOC. This is our legal procedure <strong>in</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istrative matters.When the m<strong>in</strong>ister failed <strong>to</strong> react <strong>to</strong> one <strong>letter</strong> with<strong>in</strong> the time stipulated <strong>in</strong> law, we

seized the adm<strong>in</strong>istrative Bench <strong>of</strong> the Supreme Court <strong>of</strong> Cameroon where thematter is presently pend<strong>in</strong>g hear<strong>in</strong>g.Soon after the court rul<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> 27/2/2012, Counsel for SG SOC filed anapplication at the Ndian High Court by which he was pray<strong>in</strong>g the court <strong>to</strong> rule thatSG SOC has complied with the orders <strong>of</strong> the court. He attached as exhibits <strong>to</strong> thesupport<strong>in</strong>g affidavit three documents, a <strong>letter</strong> <strong>to</strong> SG SOC <strong>from</strong> the m<strong>in</strong>ister <strong>of</strong>environment and nature protection dated 05/08/2012, a copy <strong>of</strong> a certificate <strong>of</strong>environmental conformity dated 18/9/2011 and a document titled “Commoncommitment” dated 31-08-2011 emanat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>from</strong> the <strong>of</strong>fice <strong>of</strong> the senior Divisional<strong>of</strong>ficer for Ndian Division. It is uon this evidence that they had complied with itsorders <strong>of</strong> 27/2/2012. Incidentally, the same judge who came <strong>from</strong> Buea whodelivered the rul<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> 27/22012 <strong>in</strong>sisted on hear<strong>in</strong>g the application though he hadceased <strong>to</strong> be a judge <strong>of</strong> the High Court. On the date fixed for the hear<strong>in</strong>g I raisedprelim<strong>in</strong>ary objections <strong>to</strong> the application on po<strong>in</strong>ts <strong>of</strong> law. Surpris<strong>in</strong>gly, the judgeoverruled me and proceeded <strong>to</strong> rule on the substantive application without hear<strong>in</strong>garguments <strong>of</strong> counsel. The judge ruled that on the basis <strong>of</strong> the three documents Ihave mentioned above, SG SOC had complied with the court’s orders <strong>of</strong>27/2/2011. I wonder whether anyone can comply with a court’s orders before thoseorders are made. We waisted no time <strong>to</strong> apply aga<strong>in</strong>st the said rul<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> 9/4/2012and the matter is now on appeal at the South west Regional court <strong>of</strong> Appeal, Buea.It is worthy <strong>of</strong> note that SG SOC have done noth<strong>in</strong>g as regards comply<strong>in</strong>gwith order 2,3 and 4 <strong>of</strong> the court’s rul<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> 27/2/2012, yet Mr. Bruce claims thatthey had complied with the orders <strong>of</strong> the court. It is also important <strong>to</strong> po<strong>in</strong>t out thatunder Cameroon law, an appeal except that <strong>to</strong> the Supreme court stays execution <strong>of</strong>the judgment. What this implies is that the execution <strong>of</strong> the court’s orders <strong>of</strong> April,2012 is suspended s<strong>in</strong>ce there is an appeal aga<strong>in</strong>st the rul<strong>in</strong>g. The subsist<strong>in</strong>g ordersare those which the court made on 27/2/2012 which SG SOC have done noth<strong>in</strong>g <strong>to</strong>comply with. There is no ga<strong>in</strong> say<strong>in</strong>g, therefore the company is operat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>illegality.Mr. Bruce assertion that the Cameroon government would not allow them <strong>to</strong>operate <strong>in</strong> illegality is hollow. Everyone knows that many people do the wrongth<strong>in</strong>gs until somebody bothers <strong>to</strong> compla<strong>in</strong>. So the fact that the government <strong>of</strong>Cameroon has not compla<strong>in</strong>ed does not necessarily means that the company is notviolat<strong>in</strong>g the law and float<strong>in</strong>g court orders with impunity.

What returns <strong>to</strong> the people <strong>of</strong> Cameroon?I have heard over and over aga<strong>in</strong> Herakles <strong>Farms</strong> talk <strong>of</strong> the social and economicbenefits which will accrue <strong>to</strong> the local communities <strong>from</strong> the establishment <strong>of</strong> theoil palm plantation <strong>in</strong> their area. The actual nature <strong>of</strong> these so-called benefits lieonly <strong>in</strong> the m<strong>in</strong>ds <strong>of</strong> the promoters <strong>of</strong> the company. No matter what good <strong>in</strong>tentionone may harbor <strong>in</strong> m<strong>in</strong>d <strong>in</strong> respect <strong>of</strong> a given situation, those <strong>in</strong>tentions amount <strong>to</strong>noth<strong>in</strong>g if they are only the m<strong>in</strong>d <strong>of</strong> the person who forms them. As one em<strong>in</strong>entEnglish judge said a long time ago a man’s m<strong>in</strong>d cannot be tried for even the devilhimself knows not the heart <strong>of</strong> man. Intentions are thus worth noth<strong>in</strong>g if notmanifested <strong>in</strong> some overt act. In the <strong>in</strong>stant case, the contractual obligations <strong>of</strong>Herakles <strong>Farms</strong> operations <strong>in</strong> Cameroon are as conta<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> the establishmentconvention. Any one read<strong>in</strong>g this document cannot escape <strong>to</strong> note the astuteness <strong>of</strong>the bus<strong>in</strong>essman <strong>in</strong> its provisions. The document is so craftily drafted and alldetails carefully taken care <strong>of</strong> <strong>to</strong> protect the <strong>in</strong>terests <strong>of</strong> Herakles <strong>Farms</strong> that themotive <strong>to</strong> maximize pr<strong>of</strong>it is obvious.Indeed the establishment convention is so drafted that <strong>in</strong> almost all its provisions, itis the government <strong>of</strong> Cameroon which has <strong>to</strong> pay if anyth<strong>in</strong>g goes wrong with theproject. Is this document, as it is, a social charter? Where <strong>in</strong> this document have the<strong>in</strong>terests <strong>of</strong> the local populations been taken care <strong>of</strong>? Any objective person whoreads the establishment convention would agree with me that it appeared as if thosewho drew it up assumed that there were no people liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the area for they werecompletely forgotten.Mr. Bruce’s assertion, therefore, that <strong>in</strong> the development <strong>of</strong> their oil palmplantation it will not be necessary <strong>to</strong> move people or take over their farms islaughable. How is that practically possible <strong>in</strong> an area which he himself admits hasmany villages? What plan have Herakles <strong>Farms</strong> put <strong>in</strong> place <strong>to</strong> handle the situationif it becomes necessary <strong>to</strong> move people or take over their farms? In the“establishment convention” it is even provided that the company may rely on thecoercive force <strong>of</strong> the state <strong>to</strong> remove people who refuse <strong>to</strong> move voluntarily. HasMr. Bruce even bothered <strong>to</strong> have a survey conducted <strong>to</strong> know exactly how many<strong>in</strong>dividual farm hold<strong>in</strong>gs are <strong>in</strong> the project area, <strong>to</strong> whom they belong and wherethey are located?

As their social corporate responsibly is concerned Herakles Farm hastaunted people before with the so-called memoranda <strong>of</strong> understand<strong>in</strong>g with thelocal populations. Mr. Bruce himself says that they have a memorandum <strong>of</strong>understand<strong>in</strong>g with each village which is false. There are only two documents- oneallegedly signed for the people <strong>of</strong> the Nguti segment <strong>of</strong> the project and the otherfor Mundemba and Toko Sub Divisions. Even a beg<strong>in</strong>ner <strong>in</strong> the study <strong>of</strong> the law <strong>of</strong>contract will have no difficulty <strong>in</strong> dismiss<strong>in</strong>g the documents as be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>validcontracts. When I first read these documents, I could hardly associate them withHerakles <strong>Farms</strong> which had produced a document such as the “establishmentconvention”And as I have said on several occasions before these documents were not signed onbehalf <strong>of</strong> SG SOC, and as such, they are not legally b<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g even if other issuessuch as the capacity <strong>of</strong> those who purported <strong>to</strong> sign the documents on behalf <strong>of</strong> thecommunities are ignored.e. Irrevocable Environmental Impact: So much has already been said by specialistson the issue <strong>of</strong> the unsusta<strong>in</strong>ability <strong>of</strong> the SG SOC oil palm project because <strong>of</strong> itsprobable negative impacts on the environment <strong>of</strong> the area. Herakles <strong>Farms</strong> claimsthat they are environmentalists and that they have conducted all necessary studies<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g HCV. I do not know if Mr. Bruce has forgotten so soon that the so calledHCV <strong>report</strong> they purported <strong>to</strong> have conducted on the SG SOC concession receivedan unfavourable review by the HCV Resource Network Technical Panel PeerReview <strong>of</strong> April 2012.Furthermore, SG SOC <strong>in</strong> their bus<strong>in</strong>ess plan state that they <strong>in</strong>tend <strong>to</strong> build five oilmills <strong>in</strong> the project area. Neither the chosen locations <strong>of</strong> the mills nor their impactson the environment are mentioned <strong>in</strong> their environmental and social ImpactAssessment <strong>report</strong> which they published <strong>in</strong> August, 2012. Is this what Herakles<strong>Farms</strong> mean when they claim <strong>to</strong> be environmentalists?d. Opposition <strong>to</strong> the Project: I wish also <strong>to</strong> correct some mistakes made by Mr.Burce <strong>in</strong> his analysis <strong>of</strong> the events that occurred <strong>in</strong> Fabe. He gives Fabe primacyout <strong>of</strong> proportion <strong>in</strong> his calculations <strong>of</strong> the acceptance and opposition <strong>to</strong> the SGSOC project. There is noth<strong>in</strong>g peculiar about Fabe village apart <strong>from</strong> the fact that itis one <strong>of</strong> the villages host<strong>in</strong>g one <strong>of</strong> the oil palm nurseries. Mr. Bruce ismis<strong>in</strong>terpret<strong>in</strong>g the usual euphoria and excitement shown by people when strangers

come <strong>in</strong><strong>to</strong> their village as a general acceptance <strong>of</strong> their project. That is verymislead<strong>in</strong>g. What happened <strong>in</strong> Fabe is that not long after the <strong>in</strong>itial excitementbegan <strong>to</strong> go down the people began <strong>to</strong> see the SG SOC masquerade- promisesmade which were never <strong>in</strong>tended <strong>to</strong> be met, lies and <strong>in</strong>fluence peddl<strong>in</strong>g. Thepeople came <strong>to</strong> realize that their chief had led them by the nose <strong>in</strong><strong>to</strong> accept<strong>in</strong>g theestablishment <strong>of</strong> SG SOC nursery <strong>in</strong> their village. They, therefore, rose <strong>in</strong> revolt.They blocked the road lead<strong>in</strong>g <strong>to</strong> the nursery, placed traditional <strong>in</strong>junctions thereonand asked that the workers <strong>of</strong> the company liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the village <strong>to</strong> leave. This was aspontaneous reaction <strong>of</strong> the villagers without the <strong>in</strong>fluence <strong>of</strong> any outside person ororganization.What happened on June 6, 2012? A few days before June 6, it was announced thatthe newly appo<strong>in</strong>ted Governor <strong>of</strong> the South West was go<strong>in</strong>g <strong>to</strong> make a maiden visit<strong>to</strong> Toko on 06/06/2012. Toko is the headquarters <strong>of</strong> Toko Sub Division <strong>in</strong> NdianDivision. SEFE decided <strong>to</strong> seize the occasion <strong>of</strong> the visit <strong>of</strong> the august guest <strong>to</strong> theSub Division <strong>to</strong> draw the attention <strong>of</strong> the government <strong>to</strong> the fact that the people <strong>of</strong>the area were not satisfied with the SG SOC oil palm project. This is what nongovernmentalorganisations do normally <strong>to</strong> draw government attention <strong>to</strong> thecauses they stand for. Thus SEFE with<strong>in</strong> the short time mobilized its followers <strong>to</strong>stage a peaceful demonstration at Tokoon the day <strong>of</strong> the Governor’s visit, ands<strong>in</strong>ce it was most unlikely that the Ndian adm<strong>in</strong>istration would allow SEFErepresentatives <strong>to</strong> have any dialogue with the Governor, it was decided that silentmessages by way <strong>of</strong> banners, T-shirts and placards with the <strong>in</strong>scriptions mentionedby Mr. Bruce be used as means <strong>of</strong> pass<strong>in</strong>g across the SEFE message. So, thedemonstrations <strong>of</strong> 6/6/2012 did not take place at Fabe village whichadm<strong>in</strong>istratively is even with<strong>in</strong> Mundemba Sub Division.CONCLUSION:I would like <strong>to</strong> advice Herakles <strong>Farms</strong> that it is not by mudsl<strong>in</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g that they willdevelop their oil palm plantation. They need <strong>to</strong> acknowledge that, may be due <strong>to</strong>improper advice and <strong>in</strong>sufficient knowledge, their concept <strong>of</strong> the project waswrong <strong>from</strong> the beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g. If they still desire <strong>to</strong> go on with the project, they have<strong>to</strong> re-design it all over, and they should be grateful <strong>to</strong> all persons and <strong>in</strong>stitutions

who have po<strong>in</strong>ted out the th<strong>in</strong>gs which are wrong with the project, for they wouldhave wasted their <strong>in</strong>vestment and only <strong>to</strong> realize so when <strong>to</strong>o late <strong>to</strong> make amends.Malle Adolf September 2012