Alyansa Tigil Mina (ATM)
Position Paper on the Rapu-Rapu Polymetallic Project
Presented before the Rapu Rapu Fact Finding Commission
April 5, 2006

We, the Alyansa Tigil Mina (ATM), an alliance of Peoples’ Organizations (POs), Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) and mining-affected communities, extend our deepest appreciation and recognition to this commission for its pursuit of the truth in what happened to Rapu Rapu. ATM is a dynamic coalition and part of a broader social movement that is demanding for the repeal of the Philippine Mining Act 1995, the enactment of an alternative mining law and a moratorium to large-scale mining in the Philippines,

With the good bishop of Sorsogon, Bishop Arturo Bastes presiding, the way in achieving the truth has never been clearer. By way of your collective applied expertise and background research, a few weeks of questioning and investigations have exposed the unfortunate reality of the spill that poisoned the Albay Gulf. Without a doubt, this tragedy has dealt a severe blow to all the fishermen and their families whose livelihood depends on clean waters and an equally severe shock to the ecology of the area.

As we face this commission, we would like to reiterate our position against the eventual resumption of Lafayette’s mining operations. Our arguments can be summarized in three points:

1. Ecological considerations. One of the more solid scientific basis of arguing against the mining operation is the small-island ecology of Rapu Rapu. Given this characteristic, special and focused consideration should have been extended on the distinctive impacts that an extractive activity like large-scale mining would have brought to the island, including adverse effects on coastal areas. The other strong point against the project is the presence of rich marine life that traverse Albay Gulf. The death of a dwarf sperm whale and last weekend, of a dolphin, has elicited strong emotional reactions. With the absence of hard evidence, we are hard put to categorically blame Lafayette. The fishkills that happened however cast more clouds of doubt. We will not anymore mention the impact of the actual spills that happened. I will leave it to Greenpeace and HARIBON who are in a better position institutionally to articulate this concern.

2. Corporate deception and conceit. Touted as the state-of-the-art of Philippine mining, Lafayette and its Rapu Rapu operations has been exposed for its falsehoods. The would be world-class mine has not implemented the best practices that it has arrogantly projected to the government, the media and even its own investors. It is the height of irony that amidst the strong projection in the media of the Rapu Rapu project as the “model” mining project, a simple matter of a claimed heavy downpour would force a systems failure. And adding insult to injury, Lafayette appeared to have been more concerned with its performance in the stock markets rather than confronting the issue at hand. A few weeks ago, they had the gall to issue a press release, stating that they expected the Rapu Rapu project to resume its operations around March 21, after “complying” with the conditions set forth in the Cease-and-Desist Order (CDO) issued against it. Expectedly, Lafayette shares rose by almost 10% percent in value a day after the press release. This despite the very clear mandate that this Commission had until April 10 (or 30 days) to complete its investigation, and that the CDO will be sustained within the timeframe.

3. Inadequate regulation. It is an accepted reality that government bureaucracy is understaffed, underpaid and overworked. But it is doubly frustrating for civil society groups to be confronted by government agencies which are either confused or conflicted. Meant to protect the public welfare, but perilously appearing as either unprepared, tentative or worse, hesitant to perform the expected duties, the case in Rapu Rapu is a microcosm of how some government agencies can unwittingly become practically the spokesperson of an extractive industry. The multi-stakeholder mechanisms that were supposed to provide oversight in monitoring has been questioned. MGB and BFAR took days too long to respond to the spills, insisting on re-testing the waters, and at times, appearing too ready and content to accept as truths whatever Lafayette told them. The perils of belief have come up, with conflicting stories told by mine officials, government agencies and local communities. The very revealing exercise yesterday in fact begs two more important questions for us NGOs and support groups – what else has been swept under the rug? And what corners has the mining company cut to generate more profit?

These situations perfectly illustrate the state of the mining industry in the Philippines - all glittery promises, profit for the few, disaster for the environment, and displacement for affected communities.

Lafayette’s Rapu Rapu mine site has been touted as the gold standard for this administration’s new era of mining in the Philippines. Unlike the last era of mining which ended with Marinduque struck by an immense environmental disaster, the administration, in its relentless push to get the Filipinos to accept the return of mining, has promised that nothing of the sort will happen. And of course, something almost like that happened again, when the mine tailings dam that had filled to near capacity was emptied into the waters of Rapu Rapu in October last year.

Of all the investigations that have been initiated, it seems this commission is that most sincere in its desire to bring the truth of the matter to light. With Sorsogon poised to bear a considerable brunt of the fall-out due to marine-coastal contamination, its bishop was empowered to convene this commission. And they have unearthed a great deal of things that expose the practices of mining and what is to be expected from a government that is all too ready to take mining’s money, but not its consequences.

It is not cynical to believe that a corporation puts profit before people – almost all corporation operate in such a manner, and the resource extractors are the worst of all. If the government would hold up Lafayette’s Rapu Rapu mine as an example, then we must take it as that – a perfect example of how mining is practiced in the Philippines – with deception and little regard for the safety of the community and the integrity of the environment. It also exposes just how far the effects of mining are, with Sorsogon feeling the impact of a decision made on Rapu Rapu.

This brings to light one of the stronger stance against mining that has emerged more recently. We stand by the pastoral statement issued by the CBCP last January 29, 2006, and articulated clearly by Bishop Claver last March 10, 2006 – mining, as it is done right now in the Philippines is unsafe, unsustainable and should be put to a halt. The Philippine Mining Act of 1995 requires s serious and rigorous review, if not an outright repeal. The Alyansa Tigil Mina proposes that all mining sites across the nation be subject to their own fact-finding commissions.

The administration cannot simply force its policy, in this, as in all things, the Filipino demand the truth of the matter.

ALYANSA TIGIL MINA
APRIL 5, 2006