{"id":13820,"date":"2023-10-05T09:20:35","date_gmt":"2023-10-05T09:20:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/icoca.ch\/?post_type=case_studies&p=13820"},"modified":"2024-01-31T09:30:37","modified_gmt":"2024-01-31T09:30:37","slug":"excessive-use-of-force-at-the-north-mara-mine","status":"publish","type":"case_studies","link":"https:\/\/icoca.ch\/fr\/case-studies\/excessive-use-of-force-at-the-north-mara-mine\/","title":{"rendered":"EXCESSIVE USE OF FORCE AT THE NORTH MARA MINE"},"content":{"rendered":"

Background <\/strong><\/h2>\n

The North Mara Mine is located in the Tarime district of the Mara region of Tanzania. An indigenous community, the Kurya of North Mara, live in the area of the mine.<\/p>\n

Similar to the Porgera mine<\/a>, both private security forces and Tanzanian police provide security for the mine through successive memorandum of understanding agreements. Under the memorandum of understanding, the North Mara mine provides police with fuel, vehicles, accommodation, and administrative support.<\/p>\n

In November 2014, Tanzanian authorities wrote a letter to Barrick Gold calling for \u201czero intrusions and zero fatalities.\u201d The letter requested that Barrick Gold remove police guards and relinquish certain areas of small-scale mining operations in order to accomplish this goal.<\/p>\n

According to interviews conducted by Human Rights Watch, villagers in the area recounted that they had to pay the mine\u2019s private security and police\u00a0 bribes to enter certain areas of the mine. Further, in a 2017 Human Rights report on the mine, the US State Department noted that the \u201cmost significant human rights issues\u201d included alleged excess use of force, deprivation of life, and lengthy pretrial detention. Another report in 2017, from Acacia (now owned by Barrick Gold), reported that there had been 7 allegations of excessive use of force by private security during 2016, and 16 allegations of the same nature in 2015.<\/p>\n

In August of 2018, MiningWatch noted that there was a decline in security related deaths in and around the mine, which a member of the mine\u2019s Grievance Committee attributed to the new practice of expelling officers implicated in cases of excess use of force.<\/p>\n

The Incident <\/strong><\/h2>\n

At the North Mara Mine, alleged incidents involving the use of excessive force by police and security resulted in six deaths and other injuries in 2008. One man was paralysed involving an alleged gunshot to his spine. According to Acacia Mining, whose parent company is Barrick Gold, the majority of the claims originated from an incident involving \u201cviolent intruders who invaded the mine.\u201d<\/p>\n

Legal Aspects <\/strong><\/h2>\n

Court cases<\/strong><\/h3>\n

In 2013, a group of Tanzanians filed a lawsuit in the UK High Court against Barrick Gold and North Mara Gold mine. The claimants allege that the companies were complicit in killings and injuries of villagers by police and security at the mine, in that the companies failed to prevent the use of excessive force.<\/p>\n

After the UK legal proceedings were initiated, a Barrick Gold subsidiary initiated legal proceedings in a local court of Tanzania, asking the court to declare that the company could not be held liable for the actions of the police and security.<\/p>\n

After learning about the Tanzanian legal proceedings, the Tanzanian claimants obtained an injunction from the UK court barring the defendants from initiating duplicate proceedings in Tanzania. The English judge criticised Barrick Gold\u2019s Tanzanian proceedings as an attempted \u201cTanzanian Torpedo\u00a0\u00bb designed to pre-empt the English proceedings. Thus, the proceedings were able to continue in the English High Court.<\/p>\n

The International Code of Conduct <\/strong><\/h3>\n

The International Code of Conduct<\/a> requires that Personnel of Member and Affiliate companies take all reasonable steps to avoid the use of force, and if force is used, it should be proportionate to the threat and appropriate to the situation. (Rules for the Use of Force : paragraph 29, Use of Force : paragraph 30-32).<\/p>\n

Resources on Use of Force<\/a><\/p>\n

Additionally, security personnel are only allowed to apprehend persons to defend themselves or others against an imminent threat of violence following an attack or crime against Company Personnel, clients, or property under their protection. Apprehension and detention must be consistent with international and national law, and all apprehended and detained persons must be treated humanely and consistent with their status and protections under applicable human rights law and international humanitarian law. (Detention: paragraph 33)<\/p>\n

Resources on Apprehending Persons<\/a><\/p>\n

Resources on Detention<\/a><\/p>\n

Further, the International Code of Conduct requires stringent selection and vetting of personnel, assessment of performance and duties (paragraphs 45 to 49), and training of personnel of the Code and relevant international law, including human rights and international criminal law (paragraph 55). Meeting the requirements of the Code of Conduct, can help private security companies and their clients ensure that private security personnel are qualified, trained, supported, informed, and responsible.<\/p>\n

Meeting the requirements of the Code of Conduct can help private security companies and their clients ensure that private security personnel are qualified, trained, supported, informed, and responsible.<\/p>\n

Impact<\/strong><\/h2>\n

In an interview with the Financial Post, Mark Bristow, president of Barrick Gold, acknowledged that the company had neglected its relationship with the community, and emphasised a desire to build a mining company \u201cthat\u2019s acceptable to future generations.\u201d<\/p>\n

In 2015, the lawsuit between the 13 Tanzanian villagers and Barrick Gold regarding deaths and injuries at the North Mara Mine was confidentially settled out of court.<\/p>\n

In 2012, Barrick Gold acknowledged the rape problem at the Porgera Mine and created the Porgera Remedy Framework, a non-judicial process organized by the company to hear claims of sexual violence.<\/p>\n

Discussion and Reflection Questions <\/strong><\/h2>\n

What can a private security company do to \u201cwin back the trust\u201d of a community after an incident occurs?<\/p>\n

What can a private security company and their client do to handle property intrusions while avoiding unnecessary use of force?<\/p>\n

How can private security companies and their clients prevent sexual abuse and exploitation of vulnerable populations?<\/p>\n

Related Incidents<\/strong><\/h2>\n