Volume 3, Number 1

News for the North American community in solidarity with Intag. On the web at http://intagsolidarity.org/

To contribute information, see the end of this newsletter.
To subscribe or unsubscribe see the end of this newsletter.

——————————————————————————————–

[1] No Word from Ascendant Regarding UN Global Compact
[2] Ascendant Loses Another One
[3] Report by Wayne Erb and Ping Sim - Meeting at Canadian High Commission

——————————————————————————————–

A Note from the Editors

Given the flood of recent updates surrounding the attempted invasion of community lands in Junin, this newsletter update is relatively short. We would like to begin—once again—by asking for your continued help in funding the Human Rights Observers that ISN has maintained in Junin since late 2004. Any amount helps, $5 to $25 or whatever you can give. To donate, please visit the ISN website at http://intagsolidarity.org/. We are about $300 short of our February goal to fund Human Rights Observers.

——————————————————————————————–

[1] No Word from Ascendant Regarding UN Global Compact

Intag Solidarity Newtork is awaiting response from the United Nations Global Compact concerning the emails many of you have sent to them about Ascendant Copper’s conduct in Ecuador. The UN has sent the model letter recommended by ISN to Ascendant Copper with a request for their reply. We have not heard anything further from the UN, which calls into question the process utilized by them. Does Ascendant have a deadline to reply? If so, why are they extended such luxury in time considering the serious nature of their actions in Ecuador? Once we hear back from the UN concerning Ascendant’s response, we will respond to the company’s reply. ISN anticipates that Ascendant will spin the situation as much as possible, and is prepared to send extensive documentation to the UN illustrating the misdeeds of the company. Needless to say, ISN is not very impressed with the UN Global Contact.

——————————————————————————————–

[2] Ascendant Loses Another One

The presiding Superior Court judge in the alleged kidnapping of two Ascendant employees in September of 2006 threw out the court case for lack of evidence. The company had falsely accused Robinson Guachagmira and Alirio Ramirez of the alleged crime when the employees were held by community members after being caught inside communal lands. Robinson and Alirio were nowhere near the site of the supposed kidnapping, but were nevertheless picked up by a police traveling in a Ascendant Copper company car and illegally detained for 8 days in

Ibarra, Imbabura’s capital. Mr. Gary Davis, Ascendant’s CEO and president, at one time publicly stated that the two community members were found guilty and were in jail awaiting sentencing. Since the company earlier lost the lawsuit in a lower court, the January 20^th Superior Court decision is final, without possibility of further appeal.

This key judicial defeat of the company comes after the October 2006 higher court decision to throw out the lawsuit for arson and destruction of property filed by the company for the destruction of its mining camp in December 2005 in Chalguayacu Alto. Likewise, the

judges found lack of clear evidence to convict the five community activists charged, and ruled in the defendant’s case. Here too there is no appeal, since there was unanimity in the two court’s rulings.

ON THE GROUND, Ascendant has opted for not abiding by the Ministry of Energy and Mine’s stop-work orders, to halt its activities, and there are reports that up to 60 persons, supposedly being paid by Falericorp- the illegal company Ascendant hired to implement agricultural projects on some of its land- are continuing to work in land Ascendant claims is theirs. The presence of these individuals is greatly exacerbating tensions in the area. The communities have successfully maintained a road block in the Chalguayacu Bajo area to keep company employees from accessing the mining concessions (this is a different road block than the original one established a few kilometers away and closer to Junin)

NEW PEOPLE IN POWER. On Thursday, January 18th, a delegation composed by the Mayor of Cotacachi County, the president of the Parish-township government Association of Intag, the president of CEDHU (human-rights organization); as well as representatives from Intag’s communities and organizations, met with Alberto Acosta, the new Ministry of Energy and

Mines to discuss the present situation in Intag, and to try to find a solution. The Ministry expressed concerned by the tense situation created by the presence of workers in Ascendant’s lands and was clearly upset by the non-compliance by the company of the stop-work
orders. He promised to find a short-term solution to the problems.

——————————————————————————————–

[3] Report by Wayne Erb and Ping Sim - Meeting at Canadian High Commission

Wellington, New Zealand

December 22 2006

We presented a report to the Canada’s Deputy High Commissioner to New Zealand regarding recent events in Intag, especially the actions of a paramilitary force in Junin by a company contracted to Ascendant Copper Corporation.

Our report was based on the well-known photographs of these paramilitary agents shooting at Junin residents and using pepper spray. We included the CEDHU report and a selection of Ecuadorian and international press that corroborated on the sequence of events.

We had a cordial half hour talking to the deputy high commissioner, who came across as very polite and considered.

She said Ascendant told the Canadian Embassy in Quito on December 13 that it is pausing in its activities in an attempt to ease the level of confrontation. I said the company was being asked to stop by the Ecuadorian government. There is certainly a difference of understanding here in cause and effect but she sounded clear that the company had spoken directly to her counterparts in Quito and claimed it was voluntarily pulling back.

She said there has been a lot of communication between Quito and Ottawa within the diplomatic corps since the December events. We did not get further details, but she said it was possible that Canadian representatives would work behind closed doors to encourage the Ecuadorian government to enforce the law.

In July 2006, a Canadian diplomatic representative told us that the company would receive support until there was clear evidence of wrong doing. Pressed on this point in the December meeting, the deputy high commissioner said “shooting villagers would probably qualify”.

She said, however that her government would not normally comment publicly in this type of situation unless events had reached the stage that someone had been killed.

She reiterated that Canadian law does not apply to Canadian companies operating abroad.

In summary, it is unclear what position the Canadian government is taking. However, in our report we requested written answers to specific questions regarding their government’s dealings with Ascendant Copper Corporation.

We anticipate receiving a response early in 2007.

I can say it felt positive for us to be able to help the people of Intag in such an active manner despite now living so far away. I do hope that our lobbying from New Zealand of all places adds a new dimension to this dispute and will have a little bit of impact on how the Canadian government proceeds from here.

——————————————————————————————–

USEFUL LINKS TO STAY INFORMED

Intag Solidarity Network [http://intagsolidarity.org]

Intag Newspaper [http://www.intagnewspaper.org/]

DECOIN [http://www.decoin.org/]

——————————————————————————————–

TO CONTRIBUTE

Members of the ISN community are anyone in solidarity with the struggle in Intag is encouraged to use this newsletter as a forum to share important information. To submit an article, an update, or just a quick note simply e-mail the text to intagsol@intagsolidarity.org.

——————————————————————————————–

——————————————————————————————–

TO SUBSCRIBE OR UNSUBSCRIBE e-mail intagsol@intagsolidarity.org.

This is an official communication from the Intag Solidarity Network for members of the North American community in solidarity with the region of Intag. All content is produced by members of this community.

Copyright, 2006. Please credit Intag Solidarity Network and when possible specific authors if using information from this newsletter.

UPDATE FROM DECOIN

This past week, the government of Ecuador ordered several subcontractors that were working in the Junin mining project for Ascendant to stop all work. The official document, dated 9 January from the Ministry of Labor and Employment, further stated that the subcontractors, including Falericorp, Daimi Services, and the international security firm “Honor and Laurel” were operating in the country illegally since they had not registered with the Ministry the past two years. The stop-work order also affected ODI, the so-called Intag community organization that Ascendant said it had signed an agreement with in late November. Two weeks ago, another government entity (Superintendency of Companies) came out with a statement saying  ODI was not a legally-recognized organization.

 Meanwhile, several government entities, including the Ministry of Energy and Mines, have investigated the presence of armed and regular Ascendant employees in the area around the community of Junin. Two such investigations have already taken place, and the presence of these individuals was confirmed. The communities, together with local government officials, are calling for the government to force Ascendant to abide by the stop-work ordered issued on December 8th, and for the area to be swept clean of armed company employees

Members of ISN,

Greetings and happy new year to everyone.  The following information comes from DECOIN.  Here’s some context.  After several months of intense struggle in Intag region, Ascendant Copper finds itself in a very tough position. We have long maintained that the company is run by people who have no idea about local dynamics as well as the people they choose to work with in Ecuador.  Ascendant’s leadership has consistently and persistently misunderstood and misrepresented the nature of grassroots resistance in Intag, especially Junin.  Their actions during the past few months has now turned Ecuadorian public opinion strongly against the company, and is contributing to strong public opinion against the concept of mining in Ecuador overall.  Ascendant has also earned enemies within the Ecuadorian government, so much so that its strongest base of support in Ecuador–the Ministry of Energy and Mines–has been forced to take a position against the company: It ordered the stoppage of all of Ascendant’s work in Intag region (something that Gary Davis insists never happened despite factual evidence to the contrary). In addition, the Ministry has rejected the company’s environmental impact study, all of which is possibly Ascendant’s death sentence in Intag.  With the administration of President Correa coming into power January 15, many people in Intag are hopeful that Ascendant’s days are limited.

We are enthusiastic that Correa has nominated some key people to his cabinet.  These include a leading human rights activist to be minister of government (oversight of policing in Ecuador) as well as an economist who came up with the idea of ecological debt (what the first world owes the third for centuries of resource plunder and ecological destruction) to be Minister of Energy and Mines.  We think it will be nearly impossible for Ascendant to get its environmental impact study approved under the new regime.  Of course, anything is possible in Ecuador and many times in the past we have seen progressive politicians cave in under intense international pressure, led by the United States.  The changing political context adds to the many weaknesses in Ascendant’s presence in Ecuador.  The following DECOIN document offers many key points of analysis and a useful summary for those of us engaged in campaigns to stop Ascendant.

************************************************************************

Ascendant Copper Corporation and its Troubles in Ecuador

Ascendant Copper Corporation has launched an impressive public relations campaign in an effort to make light of very serious problems it is facing with its Junin mining project.  These are the facts:

VALIDITY OF THE CONCESSIONS. No matter how much the company invests in public relations, the truth is that the legality of its mining concession in Ecuador is still very much undecided.  True, in 2003 the Constitutional Tribunal rejected- by one vote- the injunction that sought to declare the concessions unconstitutional, but the Tribunal ruled only on a technicality, and left the constitutional question pending. (The Tribunal basically ruled that the government of Cotacachi had taken too long to present the injunction.)  The Constitution of Ecuador makes it mandatory for the state to consult with communities before it makes decisions that could impact the communities’ environment.  Since this constitutional mandate was not observed prior to the government issuing the mining concessions, the concessions are unquestionably unconstitutional.  It is only a matter of time before they are so declared.

STOP WORK ORDER. On December 19th, the company incorrectly told the public that the government had not ordered it to stop its activities within the Junin project concessions.  Yet, the document from the Ministry of Energy and Mines dated December 8th 2006 plainly asked the company to stop its activities, until its Environmental Impact Study was approved, a process that could take many months or a year to complete. It’s important to highlight that the Ministry did not limit the stop-work order to just mining activities. This drastic step was taken principally because of the environment of violence and terror generated when Ascendant Cooper’s contractor, Falericorp–financed by Ascendant Copper Corporation–hired armed personnel to force their way, with guns and tear gas, into Ascendant’s concessions. They were unsuccessful. Ascendant has falsely claimed Falericorp is an agricultural company; in reality it sells communication equipment. The use of armed thugs and violence turned the press and public against the company.  It also shattered virtually all the support the company had within the government, Intag and the rest of the country.

LOCAL OPPOSITION.  One of the most troubling aspects about Ascendant’s distortion of information is how it has kept from Canadian regulators and its investors the facts about the nature of the local opposition it faces.  Ascendant has continually claimed that it is just a few radical people—“ecoterrorists” in their parlance–and mainly one local organization, DECOIN, that oppose its project.  Yet every single Township government in the Intag region, both Cotacachi County and the Provincial governments, not to mention most communities within and adjacent to the company’s mining concessions, have publicly expressed their opposition to the mining project.  This makes local government opposition unanimous, something seldom achieved in Ecuador’s history of resistance to mining. In addition, approximately 90% of the NGOs working in Intag and Cotacachi County (where the Junin project is located) also have expressed their opposition.

VIOLENCE.  One of the central themes of the company’s misinformation campaign is to lay blame on anti-mining forces for the violence in Intag.  It was the company, however, through its contractor Falericorp, that in November used tear gas against defenseless local people. It was also Ascendant that hired an army helicopter and financed the hiring of the armed military and ex-military personnel who tried unsuccessfully to storm the company’s concessions on December 2nd of this year.  And it was pro-mining forces, allegedly led by several Ascendant employees, who, on the 6th of December 2006, threw stones, Molotov cocktails and burning tires and fired shots at a anti-mining group.  These were directed at the Mayor of Cotacachi and the Governor of the province of Imbabura, who, together with journalists and a large anti-mining group, were trying to reach the community of Junin.  This violence came on top of the October 17th pre-dawn raid to the home of a well-known anti-mining activist by nineteen heavily armed police. The police came bearing arrest and search warrants as a result of completely trumped-up robbery charges made by someone supposedly working for Ascendant. They came in unmarked cars, some of which were identified as belonging to the company.

As a result of actions such as the above, national and international human rights bodies, including the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Amnesty International and Global Witness, are looking into the violence and human rights violations affecting individuals and organizations opposed to Ascendant’s project in Intag.

Land purchases.  Many of the properties Ascendant purchased around the Junin site are illegal, either because the company bought land that is supposed to be used exclusively for agricultural purposes, they lie within protected forests (Chontal), or because government entities illegally adjudicated state land within mining concessions. Already several land titles have been declared invalid in this area and the authorities are currently looking further into corruption issues. Although DECOIN has been unable to confirm the persistent reports of kickbacks involving land deals, it is a very well known fact that Ascendant has paid up to 30 times the real worth of properties, and purchased some outside the mining concessions.

THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY. Ascendant’s publicity news releases have repeatedly stated that the EIS was finished, had been presented to the government, and that approval was expected in a matter of weeks (in the company’s 2005 annual report it stated that it had completed the EIS, and that it would be submitted in April of 2005 [it is interesting, to say the least, that the Terms of Reference for the EIS was approved in June 2006!!]) Yet, in the June 2006 Financial Statement the company stated that the EIS had not yet been submitted.  On December 8, 2006, the Ministry of Energy and Mines informed Ascendant’s Ecuador General Manager that their Junin Environmental Impact Study was so flawed that they were unable even to process it. They pointed out, among other things, that the company had not socialized its content with communities most at risk.  The company, they stated, will have to comply with (tough newly created) regulations controlling the consultation process with the communities.

If done properly, an EIS can take months and hundreds of thousands of dollars to complete. With the change in government, there will be new officials in the Ministry of Energy and Mines who will be more stringent in seeking complete compliance. No more friends in High Places for the company. It is also certain that the new progressive government will annul many of the country’s mining concessions, granted after Ecuador’s 1998 Constitution came into effect, which requires communities to be previously consulted.

ECOLOGICAL, SOCIAL, ARCHEOLOGICAL AND OTHER FACTORS.  The Junin mining project is adjacent to two legally protected areas: the Chontal Bosque Protector, and the Cotacachi-Cayapas Wilderness Area.  In spite of what Ascendant has been saying, most of the concessions encompass PRIMARY cloud forests, which are part of the Tropical Andes Biological Hotspot, the hottest of all Hotspots.  The threatened forests protect dozens of pristine streams and rivers, are home to dozens of endangered mammal, amphibian, bird and plant species.  These include Jaguars, Ocelots, Spectacled Bears, Pumas, the critically endangered Brown-headed Spider Monkey, and Plate-billed Mountain Toucan, to mention only some of the most prominent.  The threat to the spider monkey, which requires mature forests, constitutes a major obstacle to the project, as was highlighted in the scientific work at the nearby Los Cedros Biologial Reserve in 2006. After reviewing all the information regarding the project’s environmental impacts, our organization concluded that there is no other mining project in the world that threatens so many endangered species.

ECOLOGICAL ORDINANCE. In April of 2000, Cotacachi County, where the Ascendant’s concessions are located, created a strict environmental ordinance that prohibits activities that threaten the County’s native forests, or to contaminate its water resources with heavy metals, such as Ascendant’s project threaten to do.

Social Impacts.  The earlier Japanese Environmental Impact Study carried out for the Junin mining project, and based on four years of drilling, and a small portion of the total of the 2.3 million tons of copper they inferred they discovered, called for the relocation of four communities to make room for the mine (this is nearly 4X less than Ascendant’s estimate) All of these communities oppose the mining project, and they have stated they will not relocate peacefully.

ARCHEOLOGY.  Parts of the mining area are rich in pre-Incan archeological sites–including earthen pyramids and thousands of tombs.  This was confirmed in Ascendant’s own Environmental Impact Study. What possibly Ascendant has kept from you is that Ecuadorian law prohibits mining in archeological areas.

FUTURE CHANGES TO THE MINING LAW. For mining companies doing business overseas, modifications to mining legislation can be a company’s worse nightmare. The recent violence surrounding Canadian mining companies in Ecuador–including the violence of armed groups in Junin financed by Ascendant–not only shocked the nation, but led government officials to propose major changes to Ecuador’s mining legislation.  The press has pointed out the serious flaws in the law that makes mining highly injurious to Ecuador’s national interests. A complete overhaul of the law is expected, which will do away with many of the pro-industry incentives that have made mining so attractive for the industry.                     

FINANCIAL ISSUES. If you still feel this is a viable project and company, consider the following: Ascendant has raised approximately 20 million dollars since its creation 30 months ago, with little to show by way of positive accomplishment. The company’s March 31st 2006 first quarter report stated that “The Company currently has approximately US $5 million earmarked this year for a 22 hole, 15,000 meter, drilling program for Junin once the EIS process is complete…..” (*see above for EIS irregularities). The report further noted that, “The work program will concentrate on the exploration and development of the Junin property. Maintenance fees will be paid and the Chaucha concession will be maintained in good order”, (p. 10; Outlook Section). The Company’s short-term objective is to gain access to the Junin property for commencement of exploration, through exploration to upgrade the existing inferred resource and demonstrate continuity of grade, to complete a pre-feasibility study to determine if the project is economically viable and, if warranted, prepare further work programs leading to completion of a bankable feasibility study on the project (this same paragraph was repeated identically in the June 30th 2006, and earlier Financial (and Unaudited) Reports) (Taken from: Management’s Discussion and Analysis  For the Three Months Ended March 31, 2006; and for June 2006).

Although 2006 has come and gone, The Environmental Impact Study has not been approved (nor has it any real prospect for approval).  Ascendant has not been able to gain access to the Junin property (not even at gunpoint) There has been no exploration at the Junin property No pre-feasibility study has been carried out.

An investor might well question where the 5 million, or the other millions, went. Perhaps it went here. Ascendant Copper has carried out several questionable deals with other directors, either hiring them or their companies directly for management support or the like, or buying mining concessions outright on Ascendant’s home turf from companies owned by common directors. For example, on May 10th of 2006, Ascendant purchased the Magdalena mining property from Ascension Gold, a company partly owned by Paul Grist, for $ 25,000, and ceded a 2% net smelter royalty fee for Ascension. Grist was one of Ascendant’s directors at the time of the transaction. Had Ascendant itself done the concession paperwork, it would have cost a fraction of what was paid, and it would not have had to give up any royalty rights.  In most parts of the world, these kind of deals would likely qualify as conflict of interest.  Perhaps it helps that Ascendant’s quarterly financial statements are unaudited.

Investors should also take note of the guesswork involved in Junin’s inferred mineral deposit.  Under Canadian law, a ‘Qualified Person’ is obliged to undertake a site visit when preparing the technical report to determine a mining property’s inferred mineral deposit. In the case of the Junin property, the visit was to determine the amount of the inferred copper and molybdenum deposit.  However, in a letter dated July 12, 2006 Ascendant’s CEO admitted to the Canadian Ambassador that the company had, to date, been unable to access its “legally-owned concessions” in the Intag region (the Junin property) Yet the supposed site visit, an obligatory part of the appraisal of the mineral deposit, allegedly took place more than a year prior to the letter being written.

Earlier this year, based on the above information, the Canadian Environmental Law Association presented a claim to the Ontario Securities Commission. The results of the ongoing investigation could seriously undermine the inferred amount of minerals at the Junin property.

RISKY BUSINESS? In June of 2006, RAB CAPITAL (UK) sold all of its 2.3 million Ascendant shares (amounting to 11.8% of Ascendant’s shares) The question begs itself: which one of the multitude of risk factors finally forced the prestigious investment firm to rid itself of Ascendant’s investments.

The above is only a sampling of the abundant examples of troubling financial information coming out of Ascendant.  We hope it’s enough to motivate you to ask Ascendant Copper a few tough questions.

 Prepared by DECOIN, Defensa y Conservación Ecológica de Intag, January 1, 2007. For additional information, please see: wwww.decoin.org, miningwatch.ca; ascendantalert.ca, intagsolidarity.org, ascendantcopper.com, and sedar.com