|
| Guyana:
Controversial Barama certificate further tarnishes FSC’s reputation
A new FSC certificate of a major logging operation has again raised eyebrows among foresters, environmentalists and human rights activists. In Guyana, the Swiss certification company SGS Qualifor has just granted an FSC certificate to the Malaysian-Korean logging giant, Barama Company Limited (BCL), which operates a 1.69 million hectare concession in North West Guyana. BCL is co-owned by the South Korean trans-national Sun Kyong and by the controversial Malaysian logger, Samling Timbers Sdn Bhd, whose logging on the ancestral lands of the Penan people in Sarawak, Malaysia, continues to spark protest. When BCL was first awarded the concession in Guyana under less than transparent circumstances in 1991, the agreement granted it an extensive tax holiday on terms that were so generous that besides being loudly denounced as a sell out by opposition politicians, amidst allegations of corruption, also led to it being questioned by institutions like the World Resources Institute. Even the British government, which later gave support to the ‘development’ of Guyana’s forestry sector, admitted that the contract was too generous and should be revised. During the 1990s, BCL ran its logging operations from the northern end of its concession driving roads south into the forests around Arakaka and Matthew’s Ridge and shipping the extracted logs by barge out of Port Kaituma, downriver, east along the coast and then having them processed nearer the capital, Georgetown, at its plywood factory at Land of Canaan. The logging operations were denounced by the Amerindian Peoples’ Association, the main national indigenous organisation, which documented how BCL operations had ignored indigenous rights, bulldozed gravesites, forcibly relocated Amerindian villagers to make way for the log pond and allowed the local environment to be depleted by hunters and wildcat miners entering along the logging roads. It took ten years for the government to regularise the tenure of the Carib Indians at Baramita on the western edge of the concession but a number of other Amerindian settlements in the concession remain untitled and unrecognised to this day. Meanwhile the plywood factory near Georgetown has suffered a constant rumble of intractable labour disputes. BCL alleged that it had
trouble making money out of its massive concession in the
North West as the forests there just yielded relatively small
diameter baromalli trees. It began buying higher quality timbers
from other concessionaires including entering into controversial
and ill-regulated deals with Amerindian communities that led
to documented over-harvesting and community divisions. Local foresters were alarmed
at the hasty way that BCL was going about getting a certificate.
While BCL joined other forestry companies and conservationists
in a national initiative to develop Guyanese FSC standards,
BCL simultaneously sought certification under the FSC generic
standard, locally adapted to Guyana by SGS Qualifor through
consultations,. There was a fracas in 2003 when allegations
were circulated that BCL had insisted on Amerindian complaints
about BCL’s operations being expunged from the minutes
of a multi-stakeholder meeting. Guyanese foresters also questioned
the good faith of BCL in the national standards development
process. Why wasn’t the company waiting for the national
interpretation of the Guyana National Initiative for Forest
Certification and was instead pushing for a certificate under
the SGS Qualifor generic one, they asked ? Announcing the FSC certificate to a press conference on 26th March in Georgetown, the capital of Guyana, BCL claimed that its operations have not turned a profit in 15 years of operation! (Reminding cynical observers of the famous Japanese and Malaysian logging operations in Papua New Guinea which have likewise managed to show no profits, mainly by the auditors’ trick of ‘transfer pricing’). BCL’s alleged lack of profitability begs the question, so how come the company got certified when one of FSC’s key principles is that operations should be ‘economically viable’? And if the company has not benefited from logging nearly 1/5th of Guyana’s ‘permanent forest estate’, then who has? The tax holiday enjoyed by the company means that Guyana’s exchequer has got next to nothing. The Amerindians have been vociferous in their complaints since the operation started. For their part, Port Kaituma residents lament that the temporary boom in local jobs of the 1990s is already over and they are left with depleted game, ruined forests and crumbling infrastructure. Is this the ‘sustainable forest management’ that the FSC is meant to promote? The BCL certificate has been loudly, maybe not correctly, trumpeted as the ‘single largest block of tropical forests in the world certified by the FSC’. Please pass the sick bag….. By Marcus Colchester. Forest Peoples Programme, e-mail: marcus@forestpeoples.org For SGS audit see: http://www.sgs.com/9205-gy_-_barama_ma2005-10_-_ad36a-03_gm.pdf |