Africa’s Financial Guideline for 2010.

Money is all around us people of Africa continent, it is flying in the air closely around us, but they seem so far yet so near……. we must force CHANGE and minimize the BEGGING BOWL our leaders go around the world BEGGING FOR MONEY for Africa survival. We need to develop responsible and valuable strategy for Partnership Development. We must develop critical thinking and share strategy with the rest of Civil Society of Africa, where a larger popular participation involvement are able to change our destiny for better.

This 2010, should be a year of Transformation for Africa. Without looking back, we are faced with challenges from China and other Asia communities who have taken Economic Lead in World Recovery using Africa as their platform through underworld of rip-off. A good example is of Kenya and other Africa Countries where these Chinese, Libya, Egypt and Russia ship away unprocessed raw Natural Resources such as Gold, Cobalt, Copper, Titanium, Uranium etc., As Africans we must begin to dream big and stop looking for Manna from Heaven. We must begin to look for ways and means to boost Africa Economic Growth and create job opportunities from our own Natural Resources and Minerals we have in Africa. This is how the Global Countries will respect us and develop confidence in our ability to deliver in a competitive world for prosperity?

2010 is going to be a tough year. If 2009 was the year of the unexpected, 2010 may turn out to be a year of the unwanted ghosts (the double standard criminal terrorizing leaders) where people lived in fear from intimidation of loosing dear lives and fear of no jobs or hope for the future. The ghosts in the Leadership that developed to a monster which consumed our valuables and reduced African to valueless dummies, where our dignity has been undermined and our worth, value and virtue stolen from us, must now be a thing of the past. We have been reduced to beggars and not development conscious participants, out of fear, we did not have voices to protect our resources or speak on behalf of our National financial stability or have a say on our economy, or speak up when we are sit on legally or under Civil Marginalization. The monster pushed us to the edge and reduced us to worthless International Beggars, the remaining straw as the final nail on a coffin box, is to drain us poor African to extinct.

2010 is our hope to get out of the mud of dictatorship control, we must design Way Forward, protect our Nationhood and together struggle to improve our destiny. This is a year of being optimistic for a better future. 2009 put us in a combative spirit, but as we end 2009, and after our concerted struggle, it is leaving behind a feeling of accomplishment and exhilaration. We have accomplished, through our determination, ways and means we are able to improve our dignity, value and virtue and have triumphed to have our voices heard. It did not come easy. We are still in solidarity and our Civil Society Groups continue to dare devil with facts and with the truth, so we can gain ground to move forward. We will continue to brake loose the yoke of the demon monster which is pulling Africa down. We believe this is the way to go and eventually we will gain improved hope to face challenges in 2010. In 2010, we must take Control of our Financial Destiny, and this is how:

1) Domestic Consumption:

Domestic Consumption is our priority and it must remain to be our common burden within a six months period. Government projects to be sanctioned within budges of 2010 – 11 on infrastructure budget 70% must go to Civil Society and private business sector and that brings together Civil Society business community lobby group dialogue with the Coalition Government as incentive to development structure involving partnership with the Government.

2) Geo-Politics:

Competing political temperature in Kenya where we see wrangling for power has become a theatre in every funerals fundraisings and homecoming, I must say, this is very unhealthy presently. The idea is to create confusion and cover-up our eyes so they get into underworld dirty tricks of engaging neighboring countries like Uganda and Somalia to invade Kenya and provokingly own one such island of Migingo where they threw Kenyans fishermen of Migingo into serious confusion with loss of lives and destroying community survival and income. We have seen how the Government behave like they have no idea what’s cooking at Migingo. On the other hand, pirating at the Mombasa coastal become a terrorizing menace. Such leaders thrive where there is confusion. This is impunity which the International Court must take up and give a protection and just rule. These are the leaders we do not want in our midst. They will import more problem and pain than good in our Development National Agenda.

This is cheap politics and their strategy is the divide and rule, and they thrive and prosper when they create conducive environment to unscrupulous investors who gain profitably at a time we are busy wrangling. This may arraign global opinions across dogmatic lines and distract leaders from economic issues. Kenya and Uganda have had peaceful co-existence and co-operation for many years, which is now being driven to a waste by President Museveni of Uganda and where our social economic and political cooperation is extremely important for Africa’s survival where together, we are able to provide for competitive contribution to global growth. Our neighbors are our brothers we must develop harmony for our existence……fake politicians must begin to pack off and leave mainstream politics. They have no business staying in power.

3) Emerging Economies:

We must engage in export orient and take care and watch Domestic Institution of learning including our economic market and share in forum discussions for improvement factors. We will base our success upon supportive regulatory discipline within our Policy framework for prosperity. We must move to increase volumes in secondary market as we will deploy the same. We must close open ended debt incurred by our leaders, reduce manufacture and production of AID BEGGING BOWL, but utilize AID more responsibly and effectively involving the community in planning and disbursement, so we know we are paying for what we consumed. We will go for aid only when we will profit from it as a Nation not for a few where it offer access money to politicians for their pockets. We will built trust and create sustainable bonds for long run development focus.

4) Infrastructure Development Program:

The construction of roads and Titanium, Gold and other mine diggers, as we see in Africa and specifically in Kenya, must not be done by Chinese prisoners, imported from China as expatriate manpower an opportunity that should be derived from the Public Nationals who are in huge percentage are jobless. The importation of Chinese prisoners is a slap on the face…..it is undermining the intelligence of people of Africa and is an abuse of Social ethics and community peaceful existence. It demoralizes the spirit of Country’s Republic dignity, pride and value of Citizen and ownership. Chinese prisoners are everywhere in Kenya, Tanzania, Congo and Southern Sudan…….we demand help from International Court, to help African Republic Nationals to put these African Leaders who allow such intimidation, marginalization and dictatorial rule where Citizens are exposed to dangerous criminals in their communities.

Consider Commonwealth games and meeting hosting as major opportunities for Citizens to participate in service, culture, and art as well as physical participation in small business competitive delivery as a showcase of Africa’s potential and value to the world.

5) Emergence of Green Technology:

What we can do together in a united spirit as people of Africa to save mankind from perishing and protect the environment from pollution or damage should be our goal. We must search for technologies that will preserve our African environment to a point we can have a win-win bargain for our green technology options. We must avoid toxic gases and incorporate natural fertilizer for our agriculture for example. We must be ready to plan and restore affordable and adoptable strategy to preserve a healthy generation even in the future…..this can be achieved when Civil Society Organization work in harmony with the Government to plan and discharge safe methods not arrangements that are done under-table.

Kenya and other African Leaders have done greater damage amounting to felony to the Republic of Africa. This is a serious abuse and crime against humanity through the acts of corruption, felony and impunity. These cases cannot be taken lightly or left to fate, they must be addressed thoroughly and must be concluded. We demand that the International Treaty be observed and the International Court step in for fair justice and compensation. This is because lives have been terminated, and human lives are exposed to health hazard with no remedy or precautions taken. The environmental pollution condition is also not observed. The Digo people and Kamba are prone to extinction from environmental pollution from mineral and mine digging. I must elaborate that Mine digging is done secretively and privately and public are not aware their poor health is as a result, aggravated to harsh conditions attributed to mine digging. The unfortunate part is that those leaders in the Government are ready to silence anyone who could open their mouth. So people are living in fear and have no where to go to lodge complain.

In this situation as we know it. The land was initially fenced, taken and owned by former President Jomo Kenyatta who unlawfully grabbed it from the poor inhabitants of Mijikenda Digos and Kambas who are the indigenous of the area. Kenyatta unlawfully gave some bigger portion to the Kikuyu’s to occupy those minerals producing areas at no cost. The former Member of Parliament Jembe Mwakalu suffered irrepairable loss and he finally died from frustrations of trying to complain about the grabbed land.

There is a disconnect between the people public and the Government and there is no link for dialogue or forum between the people/public including Civil Society Agency that can be applied for people DEMANDS to be heard unless the International Jurists under Human Rights steps in to fairly represent the people of Kenya and Africa against their leadership advancement of terrorism and felony over innocent people they represent. We demand that we involve International Jurist to help take this matter on behalf of the poor public land owners of Kwale & Msambweni, and the Human Rights Agency to get involved in the health welfare of people living in this areas. The Chinese are sneakily digging this area without health precaution of people living in this areas. Mining must stop in this area immediately until all health care precautions are considered and observed and until proper law governing dispensation of land is complied including resolving growing complaints by Kenyans from Land grabbing are resolved.

We have been informed from reliable sources that, there are some coincidence of shared corrupt interest which is the reason why “Birds of the Same Feathers Flock Together” why KKK, Uhuru, Kalonzo and Ruto have a common bond to continue to corrupt and lead Kenyans in three-some corruption galore. They both want to accomplish their mission of “Fuata Nyayo”. Robert Ouko was first the Minister for Foreign affairs then came Biwott, Kalonzo and Tuju is still holding the same position so they seem to enjoy fun of dealing in corruption in Foreign and Finance Ministry. We therefore request authorities of Kenya Government and the International Intelligence for Human Rights, to prove this heartache story we have been told, that Ms. Joyce Misoi was the second last Secretary of Robert Ouko and in 1988 was sponsored to Toronto in Canada for study with all her expenses paid for her by the Government of Kenya. She stayed in Toronto Canada until 2008 where between 2006 and 2008 she paraded between Kenya and Toronto to seal the deal in a corrupt manner through Michuki and others in the corrupt circle and she spend over 2 billion trying to get license for the business where finally she confidently negotiated for a Canadian Company to undertake Titanium business in Kenya. She left for Kwale sometimes on 2008 to manage the Titanium business in Kwale, earning a whooping salary of US$ 200 per year for both the Canadian and Chinese Partnership so to protect these Company’s interest because of her connection with Michuki and Moi. Canadian Company holding is 49% while Chinese took 51%. Government of Kenya and the Republic People of Kenya got nothing. The indigenous were swindled and were not part of the negotiating deal. The deal for titanium was made at 15 billion dollars for 15 years commencing from 2008. Strangely enough, all these years she was in Toronto Canada, her salary was going to bank directly. Upon arriving to Kenya in 2006, she went through the Foreign Ministry and found her salary was still being paid to her account while at the same time, the Government was paying all her needs, pocket money and her upkeep in Toronto Canada. Upon going to the bank, she found all her money withdrawn.

If true, these are some of the corruption we DEMAND should be investigated urgently – how public money is being squandered. We DEMAND to know how much Kenya Government officially gained from this Titanium business in Kwale, why the Local Community were not involved in its negotiation (there are evidence that Maitha was advocating to his constituents not to agree to be paid lip service, they must resist). Why the DEMANDS of the Local Community was never considered? Why TIOMIN KENYA should not stop business until matters are officially resolved by a competent jurists of the International Court? Kenyan Public and Civil Society treat this deal as NULL and VOID UNTIL THE MATTER IS RESOLVED in Court. This is a half-backed-deal where people were killed and human lives is at risk, taking into account that negotiation was done under dubious circumstances – The Community has a Right to be fully Compensated for health hazard with loses incurred.

From now on, we will never ever sit back and watch while our leaders act with impunity and without consulting our experts in the Social, Economy and scholars in higher learning, Lawyers and the Civil Society Network Agency Organizations on behalf of Kenyans in Kenya. Our economy is being plundered in exchange for Chinese Prisoners some of who have committed serious criminal offence are having pathway in Kenya, Congo, Tanzania and South Sudan. Is there some dots we need to connect? What business had Ruto gone to do in Uganda with Museveni……why the coincidence with Chinese visitor to Kenya?

As Civil Society in collaboration and dialogue with Association Network of the world for Africa security, we will stay focused in collaboration with International Human Rights where we DEMAND for African Government cooperation with their Electorates, the people/public without being in a sneaky hide and seek drama from the public. We DEMAND the Governments of African Nationals be transparent and be open in their foreign undertakings which involve PUBLIC MATTERS and PUBLIC RESOURCES.

As we move forward with activities of repairing and fixing the broken pieces of the African Face through information & sensitization, Education, Agriculture booster as well as promoting Local Tourism to match the expectations of International Business Trading, we must sharpen and perfect human skillful service, talents, culture and Art, through polishing performance. We must stand in SOLIDARITY to motivate our Youth and Women to work as a team and put in committed hard work and time management to meet competition and challenges of the Social Community Welfare and by putting their DEMANDS known through their Civil Society Community Agencies including the Ministry of Social Welfare arm of the Government. So both are in harmony to improving life of Kenyans, as we try to come out of the mad.

Thanks,

Judy Miriga
Diaspora Spokesperson
Executive Director
Confederation Council Foundation for Africa Inc.,

USA
http://socioeconomicforum50.blogspot.com

Watch This in reference…..

China promises to fund construction of Lamu Port

Updated 6 hr(s) 10 min(s) ago
Related Stories
China, Africa explore new strategic partnership
India follows China, US in setting carbon targets
Access to Chinese goodies to depend on State proposals
The economics of vested interests

By Maseme Machuka

China has upped its financial support to Kenya by committing to help construct the Lamu Port.

China’s Foreign Affairs Minister Yang Jiechi who met President Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga said his country was committed to increasing its support to Kenya, further offering a grant of Sh540 million.

Earlier, the President welcomed the commitment China has shown in the development of a second port.

In a Presidential Press Service dispatch to newsrooms, Kibaki underlined the importance of the partnership between the two countries adding it was key to unlocking Kenya’s potential.
The president who met Mr Yang at his Harambee House office, described China as a true friend of Kenya, pointing out to the many infrastructure projects it funded.

The Foreign minister later addressing a press conference at Serena Hotel with his Kenyan counterpart Moses Wetang’ula where he said china was commitment to support Kenya and the rest of Africa in areas of technology, education, infrastructure and tourism.

Mr Wetang’ula welcomed the commitment and said the two held fruitful bilateral discussions in his office aimed at bolstering the local economy and which will further boost the two countries’ close ties.
Flanked by Kenya’s ambassador to China Julius Sunkuli, Wetang’ula said Kenya was aiming to receive 0.01 per cent of Chinese tourists yearly.
Kibaki on his part said Kenya appreciates the development assistance extended by China.

“The assistance has been substantial in financial terms and has a considerable impact on Kenya’s socio-economic development,” President Kibaki said.

Importance of port
He outlined the importance of Lamu Port and the second transport corridor that will link Kenya to Ethiopia and Southern Sudan via Garissa and Isiolo.

Kibaki and Yang also discussed issues centred on further enhancing the existing Kenya-China co-operation raised during the 4th Forum for China-Africa Co-operation Ministerial Conference in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, in November last year.

The ministerial meeting adopted an action plan, which lays out strategies for China-Africa co-operation over the next three years in which China seeks to build a new type of strategic partnership with Africa covering several sectors of socio-economic development.
China and Kenya have in the past signed agreements and MoUs in various fields including technical and cultural cooperation, trade, education, health, energy, agriculture and co-operative development.

The economics of vested interests

Published on 13/10/2009
Related Stories
China promises to fund construction of Lamu Port

By XN Iraki

The gospel of free enterprise has been preached for generations as the perfect solution to our economic problems. This gospel got more credibility when communism came tumbling down in late 1980s. Even China could not resist, opting for communism in politics but free enterprise in economics.

The market system as the free enterprise is often called is supposed to allow individuals pursue their own interests within the constraints of laws, regulations, morality, space, and the little time we are guests on this small planet.

Academics preach this gospel with unusual conviction, offering each generation of students, a tonic for future problems. Some ask loudly why this system with all its power cannot solve some of the world’s biggest problems from joblessness to inflation.

downplay dark side
Why are so many economic problems still plaguing the world? Economists argue almost to the point of conviction that the alternatives to market system are worse and have been tried, from feudalism to communism. However, proponents of the market system either deliberately or by chance downplay one dark side of the system, vested interests.

As the market system evolved, so did the holy unholy alliance between politics and economics. Each group realised its interests could be best served by the other.

Countries are led by political parties. The party members have vested interests. In public, they want to make the society better. In reality they want to make themselves better, then the society. The entrepreneurs or businessmen as they often called have their interests too, to make profits, lots of it.

But they are often constrained by the politicians who set rules and regulations. To better each other’s interests the two groups come together. In Kenya, it is more interesting because they are often the same people.

If there were no vested interests, some argue there would be free entry and exit into every nascent industry, including politics.
But the reality is that this entry is often restricted, legally, with players having an illusion of competition. By restricting players in any industry, more profits can be made. Lobbying is about coming up with rules that cater for vested interests.

Look carefully at any proposed bill or by-laws and you will see the shades of vested interest. Politicians like MPs and regulators (appointed by politicians) often hide under public interest like safety, to pursue vested interests.

No idea
Few political and economic proposals are neutral, completely objective, even in developed countries.

The world of regulations, laws and their complexity is the domain of the chosen view. Majority of the people have no idea what happens. They just obey the rules and talk.

The vested interests make the rules and ensure they are followed. How else do you explain that in any democratic country, small elite monopolises wealth, and prestige, leaving the majority as spectators?
The vested interests in politics, espoused by political parties cascade to other institutions mostly through associations, which ensure that if there are any new rules or regulations, their interests are taken care of.

Neutral language
Why do you think every association want representation in the constitution review process?

Such associations (including NGOs) have held the economic and political systems hostage, ensuring that if there are any reforms, they are carried out in certain ways, to ensure their vested interests are taken care of. Most of the vested interests are economic in nature, but couched in neutral language.

The current call for reforms in Kenya is driven by vested interests, each political party, has interests to protect, including the international community.

Reforms, upset the current state of vested interests espoused in terms of jobs, supply contracts, and even prestige. Why else are reforms taking so long?

Where do we go from here? The nature of man is that he will always pursue his own interests. Political systems were invented to limit this self-interest.

But in countries like Kenya, where political systems have not evolved enough, the systems are used to further self-interests. Adam Smiths’s ingenuity lies in his view that we can use this self-interest to further society’s interests.

Our economists, politicians and policy makers can do us a lot of good if they harness our self-interest (including greed) to improve the society.
Any reforms ought to benefit the greatest number of people. This view needs lots of creativity to implement, yet it holds the master key to our reform agenda. But few Kenyans can articulate reforms they need, beyond regime change and possibility of a member of his own community becoming the next head of State.

Few talk of the reforms they need to undertake in their own thinking and lives, where it might matter more than the political reforms.
Those who have lived in the West or East know the role the families play in transforming society.

Our obsession with political reforms may be our soft belly. Some of the most critical reforms cannot be legislated like the number of kids you have.

Reforms in addition to taming self-interest, has to uproot deeply entrenched cultures. Vested interests are often deeply entrenched with tentacles that at times span the globe.

Any reforms in Kenya will often touch someone economically somewhere on this small planet. Yet, we need to tame vested interests so that the vast majority can enjoy life. That is easier said than done as the 20 years journey to new constitution shows.

—The writer (xniraki@aol.com) is a lecturer at the University of Nairobi, School of Business.

China, Africa explore new strategic partnership

Published on 04/01/2010
By Yang Jiechi

At the Fourth Ministerial Conference of the Forum on China-Africa Co-operation (FOCAC) in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, one month ago, the foreign ministers of some African countries invited me to visit Africa again at my convenience, and I happily accepted.

This is my third official visit to Africa as China’s foreign minister, and I will visit five countries on this trip: Kenya, Nigeria, Sierra Leone , Algeria and Morocco.

It has been the choice of successive Chinese foreign ministers for nearly 20 years — an unwritten tradition in China’s diplomacy — to start official overseas visits with a trip to Africa at the beginning of every year. I myself fully recognise its historical connotation and realistic significance. My job now is to build on the fine tradition of my predecessors and to visit as many friendly countries in Africa as possible.

What does this mean? It means, without doubt, that China and Africa are good and old friends. It also means that China attaches importance to Africa and has never forgotten and will never forget about her old friend.

At the same time, I would be even happier to come to Africa as an ordinary Chinese, meet the people here, talk with them face to face and hear what they think of China and where they want China-Africa relations to go. In this way, I can listen to the voices of the African people and feel the pulse of the China-Africa relations from the grass roots and in the most direct way.

Strong dynamism
In recent years, China has achieved remarkable success in her quest for development. But we are keenly aware that China remains a developing country with 150 million people living in poverty. China’s roots are always in the developing world! That’s why it will remain the starting point and foothold of China’s foreign policy to enhance solidarity and co-operation with the developing world.

Having withstood the vicissitudes for more than half a century, China-Africa relations are enjoying broad popular support and a solid political foundation. We should build on the past achievements and forge a new type of strategic partnership to increase the vitality and creativity of co-operation and bring more tangible benefits.

China-Africa relations have made much progress in recent years as evidenced by deeper political mutual trust, closer co-operation and stronger people-to-people ties. Despite the international financial crisis, China and Africa have met the difficulties head-on and accelerated co-operation that has become a highlight in the international co-operation for development.

This is the success of China and Africa and of South-South co-operation. It showcases the strong vitality and great promise that will be released when the largest developing country and the largest developing continent in the world join hands and move forward.

At the turn of the century, China and Africa, in the face of the global challenges and in the spirit of South-South co-operation, jointly established the FOCAC — an important platform for collective dialogue and an effective mechanism for pragmatic co-operation. The Forum has grown in strength over the past nine years with the development of China-Africa relations, and has played an important role in advancing China-Africa co-operation to a higher level, in a larger scope and in a wider area.

The Fourth Ministerial Conference of the FOCAC in November 2009 was another significant and win-win event. The conference spelled out our commitment to cementing friendship, deepen co-operation, face challenges together and seek common development.

Premier Wen Jiabao announced eight new measures to promote practical co-operation with Africa, including tackling climate change, strengthening scientific and technological co-operation, enhancing Africa’s financing ability and increasing market access for African products. He echoed the idea of joint response to major global challenges through China-Africa co-operation. They will help to support Africa achieve sustainable development.

One important mission of my visit is to show our sincerity, discuss with the implementation actions on the ground, and bring the outcomes of the conference to the African people. We should build a new type of strategic partnership oriented towards the future.

Writer is Minister of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China.

Access to Chinese goodies to depend on State proposals

Published on 12/11/2009
Related Stories

Kenya stands better chance to enact reforms, says envoy
Officials ‘sabotage’ IDPs resettlement

By morris Aron

How much Kenya receives out of the Chinese goodie bag for Africa, unveiled recently, will depend on the strength of the proposals presented to the Chinese Government by the various ministries through Treasury.

A senior Treasury official, who asked not to be quoted citing protocol, told The Standard that the political pledge by the Chinese will be followed by proposals from various ministries intending to receive funds.
“How much we receive in the form of loans will depend on the strength of our proposals, strategic interest of the Chinese in the country, and how close our Government is to the Chinese,” said the source.

On Sunday at a summit in Egypt, the Chinese Government unveiled a raft of goodies, including a promise to double the amount of loans, to $10 billion (Sh740 billion) over the next three years.

In addition, Chinese Premiere, Wen Jiabao, said that his country will support Chinese financial institutions in setting up a $1 billion fund(Sh74 billion) for loans to SMEs and cancel more debt.

Though it is not immediately clear how much Kenya stands to gain from the goodie bag, economic analysts say that the mere fact that the Chinese have doubled the loan amounts from what it offered in 2006, is bound to fuel economic growth, seen as the next growth frontier.

At a summit in Beijing in two years ago, President Hu Jintao promised Africa $5 billion loan (Sh370 billion) in infrastructure development, and other forms of assistance.

Kenya has had its share arising from the pledge.
Among the projects include the 50km JKIA-Gigiri road upgrade, underway at a cost of Sh2.16 billion.

There is also $35 million (Sh26 billion) loan to increase electricity transmission in the country, and another Sh700 million for the construction of a second referral hospital in Nairobi’s Kayole Estate.

Diplomatic ties
At the meeting in Egypt over the weekend, the Chinese have proposed to phase in zero-tariff treatment for 95 per cent of products from the least developed African countries with whom China has diplomatic ties.
China will start with 60 per cent of products, at zero-tariff from 2010. In addition, China and Africa will together establish a partnership to respond to climate change, by building 100 clean energy projects in Africa, including solar power , biogas and small-scale hydroelectric power sources.

The Chinese also plan to boost African food security by sending 50 agriculture technology teams to Africa to train 2,000 agricultural technology personnel towards that goal.

Chinese minister jets in next week to discuss aid to Kenya
Updated 3 hr(s) 11 min(s) ago (12/31/2009)

By Morris Aron

Chinese foreign minister Yang Jiechi will tour the country next week in a move expected to determine what portion of the $10 billion (Sh740 billion) aid pledge to Africa will be apportioned to Kenya.

Chinese Ambassador to Kenya Deng Hongbo told a press conference yesterday that Mr Jiechi will arrive in the country in the first week of January and meet with President Kibaki, Prime Minister Raila Odinga and other senior Government officials to discuss the aid package.

“Top on the agenda of the visit include economic aid, bi-lateral trade issues and ways to further promote relationship between Kenya and China,” said Mr Deng.

African Countries
At a summit to promote the level of co-operation between China and African countries held in Egypt recently, the Chinese Government unveiled a raft of goodies, including a promise to double the amount of loans to African countries to $10 billion over the next three years.

In addition, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said that China will support Chinese financial institutions in setting up a $1 billion fund (Sh74 billion) for loans to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in Africa and cancel more debt. Mr Jiabao also proposed to phase in zero-tariff treatment for 95 per cent of products from the least developed African countries with whom China has diplomatic ties.

Climate Change
China will start with 60 per cent of products from African countries, at zero-tariff beginning next year.

In addition, China and Africa will establish a partnership to respond to climate change, by building 100 clean energy projects in Africa.

Tiomin says Jinchuan Kenya deal near completion
Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58am EDT
Stocks

Tiomin Resources Inc.
TIO.TO
$0.03
+0.00+0.00%
12:00am PST
* Chinese firm to acquire 70 pct of titanium project
* Tiomin says two of three conditions now met
* Jinchuan needs “comfort letter” from Kenya government
By Daniel Wallis NAIROBI, Sept 16 (Reuters) – Canada’s Tiomin

Resources Inc. (TIO.TO) said on Wednesday that two out of three conditions had been met for China’s Jinchuan Group Ltd [JCGRP.UL] to acquire a 70 percent equity interest in Tiomin Kenya Ltd.
Tiomin Kenya is a wholly owned subsidiary of Tiomin Resources and owns 100 percent of the Kwale Mineral Sands project on Kenya’s Indian Ocean coast.

Under the deal, Jinchuan — China’s top nickel producer — has agreed to finance, develop and run Kwale, and will invest a further $25 million in Tiomin Kenya for project development.

Tiomin has been studying sites in the country since 1996 and says Kwale, 40 km (25 miles) south of Mombasa port, would be one of the cheapest titanium and zirconium producers in the world.

The company hopes to mine an average of 330,000 tonnes of titanium-bearing ilmenite at Kwale, 77,000 tonnes of rutile and 37,000 tonnes of zircon per year.

In a statement on Wednesday, Tiomin Resources said it had obtained a waiver from Barrick Gold Corporation, which had relinquished its right of first refusal with respect to the Kwale project and various exploration licences.

It said it had also received a Deed of Variation from the Kenyan government (GoK) that extended to 10 years the period granted to Tiomin in 2004 to finance and build the project.

Now all that was outstanding was a standard ‘comfort letter’ that Jinchuan had requested from the Kenyan government. Tiomin said it was in communication with the authorities in Nairobi and that it believed such a letter would be forthcoming.

“In 2006 Tiomin raised more than $200 million in debt and equity to build the Kwale Project, but the GoK’s failure to complete key actions according to schedule led to disastrous consequences,” Robert Jackson, president and chief executive office of Tiomin, said in the statement.

“Although the GoK subsequently addressed numerous issues successfully, a comfort letter from the GoK will clearly demonstrate the continued commitment by the GoK to the Kwale Project. We sincerely hope that the GoK learned from the 2006 experience and will deliver this letter on time.”

Tiomin said it had scheduled special meeting of shareholders on Oct. 29 to obtain their approval of the transaction. “The closing of the Jinchuan investment transaction should close shortly after obtaining shareholder approval,” the firm said.

Jinchuan initially took a 9.9 percent stake in the Kwale project in April 2006 for $6.47 million and raised its shareholding to 20 percent for $9.52 million a year later. (Editing by Mike Nesbit)

US disappointed by Chinese leader’s visit to Sudan
Friday 9 February 2007 00:30.
Printer-Friendly version Comments…

Feb 8, 2007 (WASHINGTON) — The U.S. special envoy to Sudan criticized Beijing on Thursday for not putting economic pressure on Sudan over Darfur and said he was disappointed by the Chinese leader’s last visit to Khartoum.

JPEG – 8.5 kb
Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir (R) and Chinese President Hu Jintao wave during a visit to the Chinese-built Khartoum oil refinery, February 2, 2007. (Reuters)

Envoy Andrew Natsios urged China to join the United States and others and use diplomatic and economic pressure to push Sudan’s government to accept an international force in its Darfur region and stop what the United States says is genocide.

“China’s substantial economic investment in Sudan gives it considerable potential leverage and we have made clear to Beijing that the international community will expect China to be part of the solution,” Natsios said in testimony to the House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs.

During a visit to Sudan last week, Chinese President Hu Jintao signed several economic deals with Sudan, including an interest-free loan of 100 million yuan, about $13 million, for Sudan to build a new presidential palace. He also wrote off up to $70 million in Sudanese debts to China.

“I was a little disappointed with what happened recently in terms of the visit. I have to be very candid, I was hoping for a little bit more diplomatic pressure from the Chinese,” Natsios said.

New Jersey Rep. Christopher Smith, a Republican, said China was “enabler-in-chief” when it came to atrocities in Darfur, where more than 200,000 people have died in the past four years and more than 2.5 million have been displaced from their homes.

“I doubt that Sudan’s leaders lost much sleep after their meeting with the Chinese president. Perhaps that night they dreamed of building the new railway line straight to Darfur to hasten the genocide,” said Democratic Rep. Tom Lantos of California, a survivor of the Holocaust.
Natsios, who visited China last month to press the U.S. view on Darfur, said he believed Beijing understood it was in their interests to resolve the deteriorating situation there.

“PLAN B”
At the end of last year, the United States threatened an unspecified “Plan B” if Sudan’s government refused to accept an international force in Darfur, comprising troops from the African Union and the United Nations.

As part of this plan, the U.S. Treasury is studying how it might block the financial transactions of more Sudanese people and companies if Khartoum bars the UN/AU hybrid force.

Natsios said “Plan B” was classified but he confirmed a Washington Post report that financial steps were part of a secret, three-tiered package of coercive measures that Washington will implement if Sudan fails to stop the Darfur violence.

“What was in the newspaper is accurate but it is not complete,” he said, declining to provide details.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said at a separate hearing the United States had a number of options, including actions that could be taken by the U.S. Treasury.

“We have to keep pressing Khartoum,” she told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Some lawmakers want the United States to take military action in Darfur, including Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, who told Rice that Khartoum “yielded their sovereignty” by taking part in genocide. Khartoum rejects there has been genocide.

But Rice said unilateral action had “considerable downsides” especially as the United States tried to maintain world support for Darfur.
(Reuters)

October 28, 2009
Jinchuan Purports to Terminate Purchase of Tiomin Kenya

TORONTO — October 28, 2009 — Tiomin Resources Inc. (‘Tiomin’ or ‘the Company’) reports that Jinchuan Group Limited (‘Jinchuan’) of China, purports to have terminated the Investment Agreement to purchase 70% of Tiomin Kenya Limited (‘TKL’) and the Kwale project.

Tiomin seeks clarification from Jinchuan concerning its notice of intent to terminate the transaction, which was scheduled to close on October 29, 2009.

Bob Jackson, CEO, said “This decision by Jinchuan to attempt to terminate the deal two days before closing should be of considerable interest to any mining company contemplating a transaction with Jinchuan. We have battled bureaucracy and corruption in Kenya for over a decade and our remaining concern was to obtain a Comfort Letter from the Government of Kenya (‘GoK’). We finally obtained this yesterday. This effectively completed our list of material requirements to close the transaction. Jinchuan’s decision, after 15 months of process, citing a previously unraised concern that “Jinchuan is not satisfied with the Disclosure Schedule” should be of particular interest to other companies and governments. We find this decision astonishing given that the GoK finally delivered on its material commitments to getting this deal done. Observers may speculate that Jinchuan continued the process with Tiomin while it negotiated supply contracts elsewhere. We intend to proceed with our shareholders meeting to approve the transaction on October 29 regardless of this event”. Tiomin is considering its alternatives for Kwale.

At June 30, Tiomin had Cdn$13.8 million in cash and subsequently concluded a deal that added an additional $2.5 million in marketable securities, at current valuations, plus $855,000 of debt owed to it. These figures effectively support the current share price while Tiomin seeks a company-making transaction. In addition, Tiomin owns 49% of the substantial Pukaqaqa copper gold deposit in Peru and 30% of Kivu Gold, which is focused on sub-Saharan Africa.

To find out more about Tiomin Resources Inc., please visit the company website at www.tiomin.com.

For further information on Tiomin please contact:
Robert Jackson, CEO
E-Mail: rjackson@tiomin.com
Phone: 416-350-3779, ext. 230

Certain of the information contained in this news release constitutes ‘forward-looking statements’ within the meaning of securities laws. Such forward-looking statements, including but not limited to those with respect to the prices of metals and minerals, estimated future production and estimated costs of future production involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any forecast results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Such factors include, among others, the actual prices of mineral sand products, copper and gold, the actual results of current exploration, development and mining activities, changes in project parameters as plans continue to be evaluated, as well as those factors disclosed in the documents of the Company filed from time to time with the Ontario Securities Commission.

You can view the Next News Releases item: Mon Nov 9, 2009, Tiomin Reports Third Quarter Financial Results

You can view the Previous News Releases item: Thu Oct 1, 2009, Tiomin Closes Freegold Debt Conversion Transaction And Updates Status Of Jinchuan’s Proposed Investment In Tiomin Kenya

Chinese President to visit Kenya
Written By:PPS , Posted: Tue, Apr 25, 2006

The President of the People’s Republic of China Mr. Hu Jintao will from Thursday 27th April make a three day State Visit to Kenya. This will be the final leg of his five-nation tour that began in the U.S. last week, and marks the culmination of efforts to strengthen ties between Kenya and the worlds fastest growing economic power house. The Plane carrying President Jintao and First Lady Mrs. Liu Yongqing is expected at the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport on Thursday at 9.25 P.M. On Friday 28th April President Jintao will be received by His Host President Mwai Kibaki at State House Nairobi during an official state welcoming ceremony at 10 A.M. The two leaders will then proceed for private talks and later join their respective delegations for bilateral talks. The two leaders will then witness the signing of agreements by Foreign Ministers of Kenya and China and the issuance of a joint communiqué. In the afternoon, President Jinato will travel to the United Nations Complex, Gigiri, Nairobi for a familiarization tour. Later in the evening, the Chinese leader and First Lady will proceed to State House, Nairobi where a State banquet in their honour will be hosted by President Mwai Kibaki and First Lady Lucy Kibaki. During his visit, the Chinese leader is expected to tour a number of tourist destinations in the country. The Chinese leader and First Lady Liu Yongqing are expected to depart the Jomo Kenyatta International airport for Beijing, China, on Saturday afternoon. The visit by His Excellency President Hu Jintao of the People’s Republic of China is part of a wide range of efforts that have been going in the last three years aimed at strengthening bilateral relations between Kenya and China. Over the last three years, the Kenya Government has dispatched several delegations to the People’s Republic of China. In the same period, Kenya has hosted several high-powered delegations from China. During these interchanges, important instruments that have set out the direction of bilateral relations between the two countries have been signed. The efforts towards strengthening relations between the two countries culminated in the State Visit by President Kibaki to China in August last year. During this visit, important agreements aimed at strengthening relations and opening a new chapter of strategic trade and investments relations were signed. During the visit, President Kibaki held talks with various leaders including President Hu Jintao, Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, Chairman Wu Bangguo of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress of China, the Chief Executive of Hong Kong, Mr. Donald Tsang and African Ambassadors accredited to China. Among the agreements signed was the Framework Agreement on provision of Concessional Loan by China to Kenya. Within this agreement, China agreed to extend to Kenya a grant of 600 million Kenya Shillings and a concessional loan of approximately 2 billion Kenya Shillings in support of development projects in the country. The two countries also agreed to cooperate in the area of information and telecommunications and exchanged letters on Radio Cooperation between the State Administration of Radio Film and Television of China and the Ministry of Information and Communication of Kenya. An Air Services Agreement was also signed in which Kenya Airways was granted landing rights in several cities in China. Since Kenya was granted the Preferred Tourist Destination Status, arrivals from China have more than doubled, and the numbers are expected to surge following direct flights to China by Kenya Airways. Other agreements signed included the Agreement on Economic and Technical Cooperation and the Collaborative Agreement between the Central Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China and the Kenya Bureau of Standards. The Government’s keen focus on the Far East, and especially China, is based on the realization that the region offers vast economic opportunities. China alone has a population of 1.3 billion people, which translates into a massive market for Kenya’s goods and services. Media organizations interested in covering the visit should liaise with the Press Division at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

We won’t spare those who stole FPE funds, says Kibaki
Related Stories

Heed people’s views and provide unifying laws, Kibaki tells CoE
Poor performers need more options

By Standard Team
President Kibaki says the Government will take stern action against those who misappropriated Free Primary Education (FPE) programme funds.

The warning follows an earlier directive by the President that the Kenyan Anti-Corruption Commission investigate the Sh100 million loss.
“We will take stern and decisive action against any individual found to have misappropriated funds meant for the benefit of our children,” said Kibaki in his New Year message to Kenyans.

Yesterday, Education Minister Sam Ongeri remained confident schools would reopen next week amid fears that there maybe delays because of the missing funds. Ongeri called for calm from parents and stakeholders, saying all was well despite the ongoing investigations. Donors, including UK’s Department for International Development (DfID), have suspended funding FPE until Government takes action against the looters.

“This January the first group of pupils who have enjoyed the full benefits of free primary education would be joining Standard Eight,” said Kibaki.

He commended all teachers, parents, pupils and well-wishers who ensured success of the free primary education. He assured Kenyans that he remains fully committed to the continuation of the programme and its total success.

Meanwhile, leaders from Nyanza Province want education officials and head teachers from the region reshuffled “for sleeping on the job”.

Reality
MPs James Rege (Karachuonyo) and Oyugi Magwanga (Kasipul Kabondo) accused the Provincial Director of Education’s office of lacking focus.

“There is no inspection of schools in Nyanza Province so teachers engage in businesses during class hours. We must act now to change the academic downward trend,” said Rege.

Magwanga said head teachers and officials who had overstayed in their stations must be moved.

“There are some head teachers who feel they are untouchable and do not obey transfer orders yet they do not deliver. They must be moved and demoted,” said Magwanga.

Yesterday, the Nyanza Provincial Director of Education Geoffrey Cherongis admitted lapses in inspection of schools and poor performance. The region produced only eight pupils among the top 100 nationally.

Nyanza has for the last five years remained in position seven — out of eight — and continues to perform dismally in Kenya Certificate of Primary Examination (KCPE).

Rege asked the education officials to prove what they had done to improve performance in the region.

Elsewhere, leaders from pastoral communities have called for more funding and adequate relief food to boarding schools to push up enrolment.

The leaders from Turkana and West Pokot districts attributed the good KCPE results boarding schools posted to retention of children in school.
The leaders singled out Lodwar Primary School, a boarding public school, which posted good results despite enrolling a high number of candidates — 300.

Sigor MP Wilson Litole urged the Government to prioritise girl child education in West Pokot and Turkana districts.

“We urge the Government and non-governmental organisations to promote education of girls by supporting boarding schools and rescue centres,” he said.

Reports by Beauttah Omanga, Anderson Ojwang’, Osinde Obare and Job Weru

Audit reveals taxpayers losing millions in anti- poverty projects
Handouts to the poor will create a lazy nation Kenyan workers are poorer today than they were in 2007

By Robert Nyasato

The taxpayer could be losing millions of shillings in grants through the Njaa Marufuku Kenya (NMK) programme, an initiative of the Government to eradicate poverty.

An audit ordered by the Internal Auditor General says laxity in monitoring disbursement of funds and their use was to blame for the rot.

The report notes most groups fizzled out after they received grants contrary to their proposal, which facilitated the funding.

“The groups might have misinterpreted the word ‘grant’ to mean the money was given out freely by the Government. This compromised accountability and transparency,” the audit report states in its findings.
For instance in Nyanza Province, an audit conducted in Nyamira District between November 2 and 10, among 21 self-help groups that received grants from NMP since 2005, shows the taxpayer had lost more funds to individuals. The groups received grants amounting to over Sh2.6 million. And the figures are alarming in other provinces.
The report affirms that supervision from the ministries of Agriculture and Livestock was not adequate after facilitation allowance was exhausted.

Diversion of funds
This is why the diversion of funds has been rampant, notes the report. The affected groups include Morara Self Help Group, Nuru Integrated self-help group and Tusaidiane Youth Group, Kiabokire Youth Group.
The Morara self-help group lost Sh70,000 to a civic aspirant. At the same time an organisation which approved the groups proposal blocked it from meeting the NMK after it approved their proposal and gave them Sh369,000.

“It is evident that supervision by the ministries of Agriculture and Livestock was insufficient after facilitation funds got depleted,” the report adds.

The audit recommends that there is need to review the name grant and substitute it with one of transparency and accountability to public.
It further recommends steps to be taken to recover funds from groups that received the same and can’t account for it.

The Nuru Integrated self-help group that had embraced commercial poultry farming disintegrated after receiving Sh120,000 in December 2007. The group shared the grant among its members contrary to their proposal, the audit revealed. It is not clear why it deposited Sh40,000 with a jua kali savings and credit cooperative society embroiled in managerial problems, the report adds.

Sharing the grant
Another group, Tusaidiane Youth Group that received Sh120,000 funds in April, 2006 for poultry keeping shared out the funds among its 10 members then dissolved.

At Monfly SHG, which received Sh120,000 for tomato production in April 4, 2006, its members shared out the grant and disintegrated. Others groups on the audit list of fraudsters are Kiabokire Youth Group (Sh120,000), Egetonto Adventist Choir Women Group (Sh120,000), Mwananchi Banto Women Group(Sh120,000) among others.

When contacted, NMK Nyamira District Chairperson Constrata Rabera denied knowledge of any misappropriation of funds by the groups. “As far as I am concerned the fund has helped alleviate poverty to some level and improved food security,” she said in an interview.

In Kisii District the story is the same. Local District Agriculture Officer John Katimbwa says some groups started loaning out money after they were given the grants contrary to their initial proposals.
He said the groups received in excess of Sh2.5 million and an audit of the same was on in the country.

Kenya — Rodgers Muema Nzioka v. Tiomin Kenya Ltd (97 of 2001) High Court of Kenya at Mombasa

Posted September 21st, 2001 by Anonymous
in

* Cases
* Environmental Impact Assessment
* Mining

Attachment Size
kenya.tiomin.case.pdf 1.18 MB
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MOMBASA
CIVIL CASE NO. 97 OF 2001
RODGERS MUEMA NZIOKA & 2 OTHERS PLAINTIFFS
Versus
TIOMIN KENYA LIMITED DEFENDANTS

RULING
From the affidavit of the second plaintiff FRANK MUTUA NGUATU sworn on 8.11.2001 is an annexture entitled “Final Report” which is an Environmental impact assessment of Titanium Mining in Kwale District May 2000 prepared by named scientists organised by a coalition of Non-Governmental and Community Organisations interested in the project to mine titanium in Kwale. The report says in part,
KWALE is an administrative district of Kenya lying on the South Coast of the country between longitude 38°.31 and 39° 31 East, and latitudes between latitudes 3°.30 and 4°.45 South. It borders on the Republic of Tanzania on the North East of that country and adjoins Mombasa Town. It is 8322 Km. in area and 62 Km. About (0.73%) of its area is covered with either fresh or salty water and from its waters fish and drinking water for humans and animals depend. On its Coastline runs 3 to 5 Km. Of Living coral reef and a Coastline with mangrove swamps.

It says on page 6 thus:
“In the Vumbu-Maumba area the Titanium ore deposits constitute about 5.7% of the Magarini sediments the concentration reduces southwards to 3% in Nguluku area. The Titanium deposits mainly occur in aliments and retile with specific gravity of 4.72 and 4.2 to 4.3 respectively. The Zirconium containing mineral in this case is Zircon, which has a specific gravity of 3.9 to 4.7. The specific gravity shows that these are heavy minerals and hence are deposited at similar sites through sedimentation in reverine, laccestrie and marine water.
“The Msambweni complex of mineral deposits has about 2.8 million tonnes of ilmenite. 1.0 million tonnes of tutile and 0.6 million tonnes of Zircon. They occupy an area which is about 3 Km. Long, 2 Km. Wide and are generally 25 to 40 m deep. First the Iimenite contains up to 47.9% titanium oxide. Iron contents is also high being about 51.1% and there are low levels of calcium, magnesium and manganese. Secondly the native is a highgrade source of Titanium containing about 96.2% of the metal, finally Zircon in Msambweni contains about 66.0% of Zirconium.”

TIOMIN KENYA LTD. the Defendant here is a local company, incorporated in Kenya and is a fully owned subsidiary of the Candanian Company called TIOMIN RESOURCES INCORPORATED of Canada it has taken up licences to prospect for the above mineral and now is poised to mine. It is at this stage that the local inhabitants the majority of whom are the plaintiffs have filed a case against the said mining company in a representative capacity.

The substantial case has two main prayers, first, an injunction to restrain the plaintiffs from carrying out acts of mining in any part of land in Kwale District and secondly a declaratory order that the mining being carried in Kwale is illegal and thirdly for General Damages. The suit was filed on 27.2.2001 and this was filed simultaneously with a Chamber Summons of same date for injunction under Order 39 rr (1)(2) of Civil Procedure Rules for order that the court do restrain the defendant from undertaking any action of mining on any land in Kwale District. Supporting affidavits are by Rodgers Muema Nzioka sworn on 27.2.2001, Frank Mutua sworn on 27.2.2001, further affidavit by Rodgers M. Nzioka sworn on 19.3.2001 and lastly by Munyalo Sombi and some other supplementary affidavits. They state that they act on behalf of other plaintiffs who are mere ordinary rural farming inhabitants of the area of Kwale now designated for mining. From there they say they have eked a living enabling them to support themselves and that they have boreholes there from where they draw water, that when titanium was discovered there the plaintiff mining company promised a reasonable compensation to land owners on giving their land, that the inhabitants would be relocated to some other place and that there would be no acquisition until Land Control Board had consented. It is the concern of the applicant that notwithstanding the understanding the Defendants have arm twisted the inhabitants and caused them to accept very low compensatory rate of Ksh. 9000/= per acre for re-allocation and Ksh. 2000/= per acre per year in rent. The applicants are sorely apprehensive that the excavation of titanium is likely to trigger multifarious environmental and health problems. They have relied on the researched report rendered by scientists from the Kenyatta University which is annexed to their affidavit of support.
In his arguments the Counsel for the Plaintiffs says his clients are not opposed to the mining but want their environment and health to be secure. They want the Mining Company to give them reasonable compensation and to settle them in a new place to build schools and hospitals there and to be resettled like it was done by the Japanese Electric Development Project in Sondu Miriu River in Nyanza, Kenya. Counsel argued that the Defendant is operating illegally in various ways, that Tiomin Resources Inc. of Cananda is the prospecting licence holder yet it is Tiomin Kenya Limited doing the prospecting and or mining. That in their drafted Environmental Impact Assessment Report (para 29 CF 170) the area of activity is said to be 5 sq.km. Yet the area is actually 56 sq km. That the Respondents have started using the land before obtaining consent of the owners and also consent for change of user under Section 26 of the Land Control Act Cap 302, that the foreign company Tiomin Corporation of Canada fully owns Tiomin Kenya Limited and therefore any land transaction involving such a foreign company being controlled transaction ought to get Presidential exemption. (He refered to Sections 22 & 26 of Land Control Act Cap 302). That the Defendant has not drawn a comprehensive resettlement plan, nor shown what plan it has put into place to avoid the effects of exposed titanium, to redress radioactivity, or sulphurdioxide pollution, or dust pollution. That the Defendant Company has not submitted appropriate Environmental Impact Assessment Plan and has not been licenced under Section 58 of E.M.C. Cap 8 of 1999 and therefore its activities are illegal. The applicants quoted several authorities from the COMPENDIUM OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS ON MATTERS RELATED TO ENVIRONMENT UNEP/UNDP and discussed the provisions of EMC Act No.8 of 1999.
From these arguments the applicant relies on the principle of GIELLA VS CASSMAN BROWN CO. LTD. 1978 EA 358 to show that they have a prima facie case with probability of success and that the environmental damage likely to be occasioned cannot be adequately compensated in damages but if court is in doubt to decide the matter on a balance of convenience.

Mr. Ochwa, Learned Counsel for the Defendant assisted by Mr. Ogola and Mr. Mogaka opposed this application relying on 4 affidavits of COLLIN FORBES and 322 annextures. The affidavits are sworn variously on 6.3.2001, 16.3.2001, and 23.4.2001. The case for the Defendant from the affidavits and arguments of Counsel is that they are not mining but in fact are merely prospecting and that the terms “mining” and “prospecting” are distinct in meaning within the Mining Act Cap 306 of the Kenya Laws and that the Commissioner of Mines and Geology has infact issued special licences No. 157, 158, 170 and 173 to the Defendant. That the licences can be assigned to a Nominee. Referring extensively to the licence C.F.3 Counsel argued that the Defendant has duly complied with the terms of the licence given to it under the Mining Act Cap 306 and that there is nothing that it has done which is not authorised by the provisions of that Act. That Tiomin Kenya Limited the Defendant Company is agent of Tiomin Resources Inc. of Canada and so licences Numbers B/7295/9025 are being assigned to Tiomin Kenya Limited and in any case Mining Act Cap 306 allows prospector to act through an agent. The Defendant says that the special licence contains all the conditions a prospector licensee is required to observe and there is no alleged breach of those conditions and in fact a Government Provincial Administration Officers have been supervising its operations.

The Defendant says that the application is premature because what is being done so far is merely testing compliance with prospecting terms of the licence yet applicants say that they are mining. With regards to the ill effects of titanium the Defendant claims that there is no evidence that harmful effects have been so far experienced and that Defendant has not even as yet obtained mining licence. The Defendant demonstrated how it has met all the time with the local provincial administration officers and the local people affected and discussed the relevant issues like that of compensation and the issuance of Title Deeds and explaining to the local people the companys` initiatives in those meetings. Of land owners who in fact had signed their consent, he said they ought to be estopped from being party to this suit and from disclaiming the amount they had accepted in compensation through written contracts of transfer with knowledge of valuation done by Fairlane Valuers Limited. The defendant argued that the plaintiffs are mere squatters and lack proprietary interest and should be none-suited. The Defendant has already prepared and submitted Impact assessment report to the Government using all available material.

I have been referred to several authorities on this matter by Counsel for the parties who both argued this case with erudition and circumspection and the court is obligated to them for their thoroughness.

The application is for prohibitive injunction and normally in exercise of its general jurisdiction the court goes by the traditional principles enunciated by the Court of Appeal per Spry Ag. J.A. in GIELLA VS CASSMAN BROWN & CO. LTD. (1973) EA 358.

First the position is that granting of interim injunction is an exercise of Judicial Discretion and in East Africa those conditions for granting of interlocutory injunction are now settled as I have stated above.
The question may well be asked if legal cases based on Environment are to be resolved on any distinct principles but the answer is that if there is distinct law of Environment it is not exclusive, and most environmental disputes are resolved by application of principles of Common Law like law of tort, property, injunctions and those principles of administrative law, but the applicable law is the statute law which in this case is THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND CO-ORDINATION ACT NO.8 OF 1999 (thereinafter referred to EMC). It is imperative to resort to this statute to decide whether the claimant not only has entitlement to an action but a case for injunction with probability of success.

Section 3(1) of the EMC Act provides:-
“3.(1) Every person in Kenya is entitled to a clean and healthy environment and has the duty to safeguard and enhance the environment.

(2) The entitlement to a clean and healthy environment under subsection (1) includes the access by any person in Kenya to the various public elements on segments of the environment for recreational, education, health, spiritual and cultural purposes.

(3) If a person alleges that the entitlement conferred under subsection (1) has been, is being or is likely to be contravened in relation to him, then without prejudice to any other action with respect to the same matter which is lawfully available, that person may apply to the High Court for redress and the High Court may make such orders, issue such writs or give such directions as it may deem appropriate to –
(a) prevent, stop or discontinue any act or omission deleterious to the environment;
(b) compel any public officer to take measures to prevent or discontinue any act or omission deleterious to the environment;
(c) require that any on-going activity be subjected to an environment audit in accordance with the provisions of this Act;
(d) compel the persons responsible for the environmental degradation to restore the degraded environment as far as practicable to its immediate condition prior to the damage; and
(e) provide compensation for any victim of pollution and the cost of beneficial uses lost as a result of an act of pollution and other losses that are connected with or incidental to the foregoing.

(4) A person proceeding under subsection (3) of this section shall have the capacity to bring an action notwithstanding that such a person cannot show that the defendant`s act or omission has caused or is likely to cause him any personal loss or injury provided that such action –
(a) is not frivolous or vexatious; or (
b) is not an abuse of the court process.

(5) In exercising the jurisdiction conferred upon it under subsection (3), the High Court shall be guided by the following principles of sustainable development;
(a) the principle of public participation in the development of policies, plans and processes for the management of the environment; (b) the cultural and social principles traditionally applied by any community in Kenya for the management of the environment or natural resources in so far as the same are relevant and are not repugnant to justice and morality or inconsistent with any written law;
(c) the principle of international co-operation in the management of environmental resources shared by two or more states;
(d) the principles of intragenerational and intergenerational equity; (e) the polluter-pays principle; and
(f) the pre-cautionary principle.

The provisions show that this court is empowered by the section quoted to adjudicate on the matter and has wide powers to effect, redress, but the complainants ought to show that his rights or any of them reserved in Section 3(1) of the EMC Act Cap 8 of 1999 is contravened.

That entitlement is stated as follows:-
Every person in Kenya is entitled to a clean and healthy environment and has the duty to safe guard and enhance the environment.
3(2) The entitlement to a clean and healthy environment under subsection (1) includes the access by any person in Kenya to the various public elements or segments of the environment for recreational, educational, health, spiritual and cultural purposes.
And “element” is described in Section 2 of the same Act as:
“any of the principal constituent parts of the environment including water atmosphere, soil, vegetation climate sound, adour aesthetics fish and wildlife.”

It means that anybody who is entitled to these elements have a right to prosecute his cause in court. It would therefore not support the argument that some of the plaintiffs do not have sufficient entitlement to bring the case to court or that they have no Title Deeds or that they are squatters. More Section 11 (2) of EMC says that plaintiff does not need to show that he has a right or interest in the property environment or land alleged to be invaded.

That seems to be the law.
After observing these preliminary matters the main issue I see in this case is that for the applicants to show a prima facie case they ought to show that what the Defendants are proposing to do is unlawful. Injunction cannot be applied to restrain what is lawful. That seems to be the [text omitted]
The Defendants have shown that whatever they have done has been under licence properly issued in accordance with the provisions of Mining Act Cap 306 of the Kenya Laws and when they came to do what is yet not done they will likewise have to be licenced and there is no evidence that they are threatening to act outside the law. They have also submitted researched professional Environmental Impact Assessment Report under Section 58 of the Environmental Management Co-ordination Act No. 8 of 1999 under that Act. Everybody that intends to do anything under second schedule to the Act inclusive of mining, quarrying and open cast extraction of precious metals, gemstones, metalliferous ores, coal, limestone, dolomite, stone and slate, aggregate sand and gravel, clay, exploration for the production of petroleum in any form and extracting alluvial gold, with use of mercury and processing of minerals reduction of ores and minerals, smelting and refining of ores and mineral etc. before such undertaking submit a project report to the National Environment Management Authority in the prescribed form then the proponent of the project is to submit an environmental Impact Assessment study and report to enable the authority to determine the effect and impact of the project on the environment. It is an offence punishable with 24 months imprisonment per Section 138 of the EMC Act No. 8 of 1999 not to do so.

It is the Defendants case that it has prepared and submitted its contents to the authority but the authority has not replied. Under Section 58(9) if Director General fails to reply in 3 months then the applicant may start his undertaking not withstanding but this may need circumspection.

The Defendants/Respondents have not shown that they have submitted their project report and their Environmental Impact Assessment report. They displayed the EIAR but no evidence of Project Report, which does appear to be prerequisite to the submission of the assessment report. It may be the reason why the defendant has not taken up the liberty under Section 58(9) to proceed with the project unilaterally.

If the Defendant has not fulfilled the requirements of Section 58 of EMC Act 8 of 1999 then it is immaterial that it is licensed under Mining Act Cap 306 because Section 58 of the same EMC Act Cap 8 of 1999 provides that:
“58(1) Notwithstanding any approval, permit or licence granted under this Act or any other law in force in Kenya, any person, being a proponent of a project, shall, before financing, commencing, proceeding with, carrying out, executing or conducting or causing to be financed, commenced, proceeded with, carried out, executed or conducted by another person any undertaking specified in the Second Schedule to this Act, submit a project report to the Authority, in the prescribed form, giving the prescribed information and which shall be accompanied by the prescribed fee.

Proponent must comply with Section 58 of EMC Act. But even had this not been provided, I would hold it as a matter of statutory interpretation that the EMC Act No. 8 of 1999 being a more recent Act must be construed as repealing the old Act where there is inconsistency.

If the Defendant has obeyed the terms of the Mining Act Cap 306 as it appears can his acts be avoided by the later Act? In this case the Defendant has in effect acted as though on the later Act but has equally complied with the old Mining Act Cap 306 but where it conflicts with EMC Act 8 of 1999 I think EMC Act 8 should prevail. Two judicial pronouncements (one local another English) strengthen my view here:-
“that where the provision of one statute are so inconsistent with the provisions of a similar but later one, which does not expressly repeal the earlier Act, the courts admit an implied repeal.”

It is not possible to read compliance in the old Mining Act Cap 306 when it is an offence in the later EMC Act No.8 of 1999 to fail to submit approved Impact assessment report. The two Acts cannot stand together unless the sections of the later Act are made to prevail over those sections of Cap 306 that are parallel to the new Act. Those that sanction what the new Act condemns are to be regarded as repealed.

In the Kenyan decision of Harris J. in KARANJA MATHERI V. KANJI [1976] KLR 140 the Judge after finding that Land Control Act (Cap 302)
was passed on 11.12.1967 and came into operation on 12.12.1967 and that Limitation Act (Cap 27) was passed on 19.4.1968 and by Section 1 was deemed to have come into operation retrospectively on 1.12.1967 said;
“Accordingly, the later of the two Acts came into operation first a factor which must in the application of the principle of interpretation that in the case of conflict, the later two statutes in date of enactment may be regarded as constituting an amendment of the earlier….”
I think the position now with regards to the interpretation of the entire Cap 306 is that where it is inconsistent with Act No. 8 of 1999 the later Act must prevail.
Section 58(2) of EMC Act 8 of 1999 states:
“The proponent of a project shall undertake or cause to be undertaken at his own expense an environmental impact assessment study and prepare a report thereof where the authority being satisfied after studying the project report submitted under sub-section 1, that the intending project may or is likely to have or will have a significant impact on the environment so directs.”
(3) The environmental impact assessment study report prepared under the
sub-section shall be submitted to the authority in the prescribed form giving the prescribed information and shall be accompanied by the prescribed fee.”
Section 59 provides that the authority after being satisfied as to the adequency of an environmental impact assessment study evaluation or review report, issues an environmental impact assessment licence on such terms and conditions as may be appropriate and necessary to facilitate sustainable development and sound environmental management.
It is imperative that a project like the Kwale project where the effect of uranium and titanium a radioactive mineral whose effects to environment does affect not only environment but health ought to pass through evaluation stated in EIA is stated elsewhere as
“The EIA is a structured process for gathering information about the potential impacts on the environment of a proposed project and using the information, along side other consideration to decide whether the project should or should not proceed, either as proposed or modifications.”
(See Confirmation of Judicial decisions on matters related to environment National Decision Vol.1 pp 78)
The EMC Act describes it as follows:-
Section 2 “environmental impact assessment” means a systematic examination conducted to determine whether or not a programme, activity or project will have any adverse impacts on the environment;”
Section 58(5)
“Environmental impact assessment studies and reports required under this Act shall be conducted or prepared respectively by individual experts or a firm of experts authorised in that behalf by the Authority. The Authority shall maintain a register of all individual experts or firms of all experts duly authorized by it to conduct or prepare environmental impact assessment studies and reports respectively. The register shall be a public document and may be inspected at reasonable hours by any person on the payment of a prescribed fee.”
Although the Respondents say they had submitted EIA this is not clear because if they had then they would have started the project after 3 months of DG failing to respond (see Sections 58, SS. 8 and 9 of EMC Act No.8 of 1999) but this can only be done if they had submitted “a project report.” Their failure to take advantage of the action granted in the Act creates a reasonable presumption that they have not submitted the correct Report timeously.
Submission of both Project Report and Environmental Impact Assessment is crucial and failure to do so is a criminal offence under Section 138 of the Act. Without delivery of these studies any project that affects environment like the present mining project cannot be assessed. Its potential danger can be as vast and as gruesome as can be imagined nor can it be positively contained within principle of sustainable development. In fact without these assessments the project is against that principle of sustainable development as it was argued that this project is an investment and is beneficial, but this is not near to saying that no changes can be made on environment. Yet sustainable principle in the law of environment means not having less economic development, or preserving environment at all cost but what is required is as it was as stated by LEESON in “Environmental Law”
a Text Book, that:-
“What it does require is that decisions throughout society are taken with proper regard to their environmental impact.”
The writer further states that conservation of natural resources extends beyond the immediate environment to global issues so that principles to be observed such as –
(a) Decision to be based on the best possible scientific information and analysis of risk.
(b) Where there is uncertainty and potentially serious risks exist, precautionary measures may be necessary.
(c) Ecological impacts must be considered, particularly where resources are none renewable or effects may be irreversible
(d) Cost implication should be brought home directly to the people responsible in the polluter pays principle, are considered in the
Report because such assessment and interrelation of a ray of disparate factors require the evidence from EIA to support a sound judgement.
A case based on facts that support any project without that assessment cannot be able to qualify in Giella Vs. Cassman Brown Ltd. test.

The issue of Damages compensating anyone does not arise because environmental damage is not only an individual loss but intrinsic in the globe. Although the principle of polluter pays may be argued in aid of the second principle of Giella Versus Cassman Brown Ltd. but again without EIA it cannot be assessed.

The implication of the phrase is that the cost of preventing pollution or of minimising environmental damage due to pollution should be borne by those responsible for the pollution, but that does not guarantee that payment will be adequate. There are some environmental damages that are irreversible, again you need EIA to make a determination on that.

But Environmental cases arise from disparate problem and sources.
They are unique and in most cases novel, there are no recognised general principles of application, except that with time this will logically follow with sophistication of application, but for now courts must apply what is provided for under Section 3 of EMC Act 8 of 1999 and although elements of the common law are of application such as injunction laws tort and criminal law, the environmental statute has provided certain statements of principles which I believe in a purely environmental case like this one needs to be considered for application if necessary in conjunction or if appropriate in exclusion of old principles. Here I rely on the old principles in conjunction with the statutory principles I am enjoined to take into consideration.
Those general principles described in the Act fall into two categories without being distinct. On the book of ENVIRONMENTAL LAW by John DLeeson [talking of a similar English statute] page 34 the writer states:
“On the one hand there is the predominantly environment centered view where remedying the pollution or preventing its occurance is the primary aim. This category includes the concepts (like) “the polluter pays” and sustainable development. The second approach is centred more on the economic and/or technical practicality of any
remedy. Within this category are to be found “best practicable means, and best available techniques not entailing excessive cost.”
So regarding the first principle of polluter pays, it is necessary to use the term to cover obligation on any person to conduct their affairs in an environmentally sympathetic fashion .. anyone conducting activity ought to be aware of and accept responsibility for the environmental consequences of that activity, with regards to sustainable development. Constructive view of the phrase should be development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generation to meet their own needs, (hence intergenerational equity and intragenerational equity).

For the best practicable means one would like to consider whether one has or can do what is practicable in terms of prevention or reduction where the Defendant has discharged the obligation bestowed on him the nuisance or pollution may be allowed to continue.”
Again LEESON adds in the same book,
“The application of this principle to existing activities precludes cessation of the business or process because of its environmental impact … The definition and interpretation of the phrase is therefore important in determining the extent of the obligation to remedy and the consequent degree of pollution permitted in a particular situation.”
On consideration of these principles in an environmental case it is not advisable exclusively apply simpliciter the old principles of injunction because whereas activity may be objectionable and ought to be stopped by injunction yet applying the principle in the statute of best practicable means, it would be still a defence under the Law of Environment that the defendant has done what he can practically do to prevent and or reduce the nuisance or pollution and may still continue with the activity in a manner not resulting in cessation of the objectionable activities because of its environmental impact.
In my judgement I would say that the breaches of Environmental statute should be looked at without exclusive trappings of equity in applying the law of injunction under Environmental Management and Co-ordination Act No.8 of 1999 but to apply them with close adherence to what the Statute Law prescribes. Section 3 prescribes general principles of application by the court in adjudicating over this kind of case. First the court is given wide discretion to make such orders by issuing such writs or give such directions as it may deem appropriate including an order to restore the degraded environment.
In normal traditional consideration for INJUNCTION the Giela Vs Cassman Brown & Co. Ltd. (1978) EA 358 one has to prove that his legal rights has been unlawfully invaded. Here he does not need to show all that, because under the EMC such person whose rights would be prejudiced, under Section 3 of Act 8 of 1999 any one.
“Shall have the capacity to bring an action notwithstanding that such a person cannot show that the defendants acts or omission has caused or is likely to cause him any personal loss or injury provided that such 20 action is not frivolous or vexatious, or is not an abuse of courts process.”

That is a departure from the application of Giella Vs Cassman Brown because here he may not be having any material legal right.”
Here the court is to be guided by principles of public participation, cultural and social principles and principles of international co-operation, principles of intergenerational and intragenerational equity, Polluter pays principle and precautionary principles.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT is a requirement of law under Section 58 of EMC and is important. The establishment of any undertaking or works that interrupts nature in any way always possesses certain inevitable forms of impact on its surrounding so it is by studying the report when it is possible to assess their effect and therefore determine whether the project should be determined, allowed or stopped or be raised. The purpose of E.I.A. is to enable resolution to be made on known facts regarding environmental consequences .
In USA the Supreme Court there has adopted the approach, that what is to be proved is mere breach of the statute. In the case of ATCHISON TOPEKA & SANTA FE SAILWAY CO. V. CALLAWAY 392 F. Supp.
610 (DDC 1974)420 US 908, 95 Sup ct 826 (1975). The court has approved granting of an injunction without a balancing of the equities in order to give effect to declared policy of Congress embodied in legislation.

And in the case in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia Civil Action No. 75 – 1040 SIERRA CLUB NATIONAL AUDIBON SOCIETY: FRIEND OF THE EARTH INC. INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GAME FISH AND CONSERVATION COMMISSIONERS VS WILLIAM T. COLEMAN JR. NORBERT TIEMANN.
The court said:-
“A number of courts have previously considered the requirment for a preliminary injunction in the case of an alleged deficiency in compliance with NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (NEPA) 42 USC para 4321 which is equivalent to our (Environmental Management and Cordination Act No.8 of 1999)
The court said:-
“That this court agrees that when federal statutes have been violated it has been a long standing rule that a court should not inquire into the traditional requirement for equitable relief.”
In this USA case the court found that the Defendant (developer) (Federal Highway Administration) had made 3 breaches In complying with NEPA requirements. [Similar to our EMC] The court found that they started building Highway before decision is taken on statement were began when such ought to have been made only after decision makers had fully adverted to the environmental consequences of the action.

In this case the Defendant has started work without submitting a project report to the authority. Secondly it has not presented to the satisfaction of the authority an Environmental Impact assessment report against Section 58 of the EM &C.

So the question to be asked is what environmental factors has the proponent of the project taken into account? None.
This is crucial because in making a decision on environmental case as herein the court is to be concerned. NOT so strictly with harm to the environment but rather the failure of decision makers to take environmental factors into account in the way Environmental Management and Coordination Act No. 8 of 1999 prescribes. (Particularly that Environmental Impact Assessment Report.) Therefore even if one relied on the principle of Giella Vs. Cassman Brown a case would still be made out.

As for balance of convenience it is admitted that environmental degradation is not necessarily individual concern or loss but public loss so in a matter of this kind the convenience not only of the parties to the suit, but also of the public at large is to be considered so that if the injunction is not issued it means that any form of feared degradation, danger to health and pollution will be caused to the detriment of the population, whereas if I do not REFUSE injunction only the investor will be kept at bay but life will continue for the population safely without risk.

It is better to choose the latter other than the former.
A court has in applying the principle of balance of convenience to take into account consideration of the convenience NOT only of the parties but also of the public at large.
At this stage not all the facts are in and final decisions cannot be made, but on the balance of probabilities I think the applicants have made a case for injunction which I hereby grant with cost to them.
23 Delivered this 21st day of September, 2001,
A. I. Hayanga
JUDGE
© 2009 Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (ELAW)
U.S. Office: 1877 Garden Avenue, Eugene, OR 97403 USA
Phone: +1 541 687 8454
Fax: +1 541 687 0535
elawus@elaw.org
Kenya’s economy stagnates
Aerial View of the city of Nairobi, Kenya’s capital city. KNBS attributed the poor performance mainly to a reduction in key sectors of the economy, especially agriculture and forestry, manufacturing, transport and communications, and construction. Photo/FILE

Aerial View of the city of Nairobi, Kenya’s capital city. KNBS attributed the poor performance mainly to a reduction in key sectors of the economy, especially agriculture and forestry, manufacturing, transport and communications, and construction. Photo/FILE
By JUSTUS ONDARIPosted Thursday, December 31 2009 at 15:58
Kenyans have little to cheer about on the economic front as they mark the New Year with news that the country’s economy failed
to grow for the three months to September 30. “After recovery during the first and second quarters of 2009, the economy stagnated with zero growth in the third quarter,” the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) said in its report released on Wednesday.

Related Downloads

* Stocks & Forex Download

The statistics by the bureau, which is the Government’s agency mandated to collect and analyse data to aid in planning and managing the economy, come at a time when the economy is projected to grow by 2 to 3.5 per cent in 2009.
In 2008, it grew by a mere 1.7 per cent down from a high of 7.1 per cent in 2007. Incidentally, the zero per cent growth up to September is its worst performance in recent times, way below even the 3.2 per cent growth recorded over the same period last year, one of the most difficult years for the economy, following the post-election violence.
KNBS attributed the poor performance mainly to a reduction in key sectors of the economy, especially agriculture and forestry, manufacturing, transport and communications, and construction. Like in the previous two quarters of the year, persistent drought, high energy prices and the global economic recession were the main factors that restrained economic growth in the three months.
“Output in agriculture and forestry, and electricity and water were the main casualties of the drought,” the bureau said of the factors that saw agriculture, which contributes about one quarter of the country’s total wealth, decline by 3.5 per cent during the quarter.
Over the same period, forestry, manufacturing, transport and communications, and construction declined by 2.4, 1.8 and 1.1 per cent, respectively. Other sectors that declined during the quarter include electricity and water, which fell by 7.4 per cent, fishing at 0.3 per cent and mining and quarrying at 9.0 per cent.
In addition, subdued external demand particularly for horticultural products weighed further on production in the agriculture sector. Similarly, reduction in domestic and external demands coupled with effects of higher costs of energy, restrained growth in the manufacturing sector.
“Construction was negatively impacted on by diminishing household savings, slowing the housing boom that has been witnessed since 2005,” KNBS said. However, hotels and restaurants, financial intermediation, real estate, renting and business services and wholesale and retail trade grew by 44.4, 8.9, 2.7 and 1.8 per cent, respectively during the period.