Barrick Gold’s Tanzanian Troubles: A Comedy of Errors or a Serious Matter?
Well, well, well! If it isn’t Barrick Gold strutting its stuff in court like it’s auditioning for a drama series but with worse PR. The Canadian mining company is facing a lawsuit in Ontario for some rather explosive allegations tied to its operations in Tanzania—specifically, links to violence that should make anyone question its corporate ethics. But hold onto your hard hats! Barrick believes that Canadian courts have about as much jurisdiction here as a cat at a dog show. Talk about a twist in the mining saga!
The Plot Thickens
Lawyers for Barrick Gold, likening themselves to beleaguered heroes in a courtroom drama, insist that the plaintiffs are painting a picture that’s as distorted as a funhouse mirror. They argue that we are discussing events that happened in Tanzania, and quite frankly, the company’s little Toronto office has nothing to do with it. It’s a classic case of “not my circus, not my monkeys.” Their subsidiary, North Mara Gold Mine Limited, is where the magic (or mayhem) happens. If that’s not a plot twist, I don’t know what is!
Imagine this: a group of indigenous people from Tanzania known as the Kurias are holding Barrick accountable for the somber toll of at least 77 deaths due to clashes with local police. Now, that’s not exactly the kind of headline you want next to your golden arches, is it?
The Defense: A Tangled Web
In the courtroom, Barrick’s chief lawyer, Kent Thomson, paraded his arguments like a peacock. He insisted this case is a Tanzanian affair that should stay in its homeland. You know, like that awkward cousin who shows up uninvited at every family gathering. Meanwhile, Joe Fiorente, representing the plaintiffs, slammed back like a tennis champ, reminding everyone that Barrick Gold is a creation of Canadian law. You can’t just dodge responsibility like a kid avoiding chores!
“You can’t say ‘We do all these things,’ without asking, ‘Have you actually done them?’” – Cory Wanless
Let’s Talk Policies, Shall We?
So, Barrick Gold claims a zero-tolerance policy for human rights violations. Sounds good on paper, right? But Cory Wanless raised an eyebrow (and some serious questions) about how that policy translates into action. The plaintiffs argue that Barrick is clutching the reins of decision-making tighter than a kid with their first bike! They suggest that Barrick executives had their hands in agreements with Tanzanian police, effectively making them the puppet masters of chaos.
“This is not a description of the policy I subscribe to.” – Cory Wanless
The Tanzanian Justice System: A Comedy of Errors?
Ah, the Tanzanian legal system—considered by Barrick to be on par with a fine Swiss watch. Kent Thomson assures us there’s nothing to question about its impartiality—because who doesn’t trust an overworked judicial system in a developing country? Meanwhile, the plaintiffs’ side practically threw confetti saying, “If it’s not heard here in Ontario, it stands a good chance of not being heard at all!” Oof, shots fired!
“If this case is not heard in Ontario, it will not be heard at all.” – Joe Fiorante
A Monstrous Legal Challenge
As the attorneys volley back and forth, it’s clear this trial could end up being as complex as teaching quantum physics to a toddler. Barrick’s lawyers describe the multitude of witnesses and evidence to collect as “monstrously complex”—a fitting description for what might end up being a legal labyrinth. And let’s not even get started on the logistics of pulling Tanzanian police into a Canadian courtroom. Sounds easier than finding a parking spot at a sold-out concert, right?
Conclusion: A Golden Opportunity?
So, where does this leave us? Barrick Gold, a company with a reputation that some might say shines like a freshly minted gold coin, now finds itself on a slippery slope. As the proceedings unfold, we’ll be keeping an eye on whether justice—or just a cacophony of corporate evasion—triumphs. Here’s hoping they sort this out before the plot thickens even further!
Stay tuned, folks—this legal drama is far from over!
While Barrick Gold is being sued in Ontario for allegations of violence in connection with its activities in Tanzania, it believes that Canadian courts do not have jurisdiction in this matter. In Toronto, she defended her point of view during three days of hearings this week.
Lawyers for Canadian mining company Barrick Gold have maintained a clear line of defense before the Ontario Superior Court: according to them, the plaintiffs paint an inaccurate picture of the reality on the ground of the North Mara gold mine and the Tanzanian legal system.
Since 2022, Barrick Gold has been pursued in Ontario by around twenty indigenous people from Tanzania, the Kurias, settled near its North Mara gold mine. This mine is located in the north of the country, near the border with Kenya.
Start of widget. Skip widget?End of widget. Return to start of widget?
According to the suit, Barrick Gold is linked to allegations of violence, and its relationship with local police is problematic. It refers in particular to the death of at least 77 people around and inside the mine during clashes with the Tanzanian police. Its goal is to hold Barrick Gold accountable for these human rights violations.
Barrick Gold believes that the Ontario court does not have jurisdiction to judge this civil case and this is the point that was debated from October 15 to 17.
The wrong defendant in the wrong jurisdiction
Before Judge Edward Morgan, Barrick Gold’s lead lawyer, Kent Thomson, repeated what the mining company has always said on all platforms and in all forums: this case concerns Tanzanians for alleged acts in Tanzania, and Its subsidiary, North Mara Gold Mine Limited (NMGML), is located on site.
Barrick Gold owns 84% of the North Mara mine through this subsidiary, with the remaining 16% owned by the Tanzanian government.
According to the lawyer, Barrick’s small Toronto office has no connection with or participation in the management or operation of the North Mara mine. The mining company’s headquarters is in fact in Toronto.
Open in full screen mode
The head office of Canadian mining company Barrick Gold is located in the TD Canada Trust Tower in Toronto. (Archive photo)
Photo: Radio-Canada / Rozenn Nicolle
Joe Fiorente, one of the plaintiffs’ lawyers, dismissed this argument out of hand during his pleading: Barrick is a creature of Canadian law. Its corporate name is defined by Canadian law.
However, for his part, Mr. Thomson mentioned the case of Loblaws, prosecuted after the collapse of the Rena Plaza clothing manufacturing factory in Bangladesh in 2013, which left more than 1,000 dead.
The key issue was similar to that discussed before Justice Morgan in Toronto and, ultimately, the Supreme Court decided not to hear the case.
Furthermore, Barrick Gold’s lawyers have insisted that it is rather the Tanzanian police and Barrick Gold’s subsidiary, North Mara Gold Mine Limited, who should eventually be prosecuted.
It was the Tanzanian police who allegedly shot, killed, injured and tortured. Keep this in mind, insisted Mr. Thomson.
That being said, it should be noted that the two firms representing Indigenous people in this matter have already won important battles in similar cases.
Thus, in 2017, they managed to convince the Court of Appeal of British Columbia about another mining company registered in Canada, Tahoe Resources, which pleaded the same argument, regarding allegations of violence against against Guatemalans near its Escobal mine. The mining company finally opted for an out-of-court settlement in 2019.
Joe Fiorante did not fail to return to this issue.
The responsibility of Barrick Gold and its links with the police
For plaintiffs’ lawyers, Barrick Gold remains at the top of the decision-making chain. Thus, Barrick executives were directly involved in the agreements with the Tanzanian police forces […]. Although Barrick is not a formal party to the agreements with the Tanzanian police, it is intimately involved.
According to Cory Wanless, another lawyer who represented the plaintiffs, Barrick’s fingerprints are all over these agreements.
In his pleading, he insisted that these agreements were reviewed and approved by Mark Bristow, Barrick’s CEO, and other senior Barrick Gold executives and not by its subsidiary. Their signatures appear at the bottom of the agreement.
Open in full screen mode
Mark Bristow, President and CEO of Barrick Gold. (Archive photo)
Me Thomson [un des avocats de Barrick,NDLR] said something that I found alarming in stating that the role of the police is to protect the employees of North Mara and to protect the property of North Mara, Mr. Wanless continued.
This is not a description of the policy I subscribe to.
A quote from Corey Wanless, plaintiffs’ attorney
Mr. Wanless took many minutes to demonstrate Barrick Gold’s duty of care based on the internal and posted policies of the mining company itself.
The plaintiffs’ lawyers pointed out that it is Barrick Gold, and not its local subsidiary, which claims to have a zero-tolerance policy for human rights violations wherever it operates.
For these reasons, they believe that these policies place responsibility for respecting human rights and safety standards at the highest level of the company structure.
It’s not enough to say, “We do all these things,” you have to ask, “Have you actually done them?”
A quote from Cory Wanless, plaintiffs’ attorney
What justice in Tanzania?
According to Barrick Gold, the arguments of the plaintiffs’ lawyers would call into question the capacity of the Tanzanian justice system to handle this case. On numerous occasions, Mr. Thomson reiterated that there was no proof to this effect.
Tanzania has a well-established, impartial and independent justice system.
A quote from Kent Thomson, counsel for the defendants
During the hearing, Steven Frankel, another Barrick Gold lawyer, even went so far as to give examples of Tanzanian procedures that do not exist in Ontario. He also recalled that it is not because a judicial system is different that it should be looked down upon.
Open in full screen mode
Barrick Gold has several gold mines around the world, including North Mara, Tanzania. (Archive photo)
Photo : Site internet de Barrick Gold
For their part, the plaintiffs’ lawyers have regularly repeated that the Tanzanian system deprives the most deprived of access to justice. The Kurias are among the poorest populations, according to lawyers, especially since mining companies settled on their territory in northern Tanzania.
Joe Fiorante began his argument by citing the testimony of a Kuria woman whose son was allegedly murdered by what the lawyers and plaintiffs call the mine police.
I don’t have confidence in the Tanzanian justice system. And even if I were confident in that, I wouldn’t have enough money to afford a lawyer. I keep my money to provide for the needs of my children, he argued, citing this woman.
Open in full screen mode
The mine is located near the surrounding villages.
Photo: Courtesy: RAID
In their summary, the plaintiffs’ lawyers add that Tanzania’s courts do not offer […] a fairer or more effective forum than that of Ontario and that this country is simply not equipped to handle complex cases of this type, citing the head of Tanzania’s largest legal aid office on this subject .
If this case is not heard in Ontario, it will not be heard at all.
A quote from Joe Fiorante, plaintiffs’ attorney
Note that no civil suit has been filed in the Tanzanian courts in connection with the police shooting in North Mara and no police officer has been charged to date.
However, Barrick Gold’s lawyers argue that the plaintiffs have never provided evidence that they even tried to sue its subsidiary NMGML or the Tanzanian police in court in Tanzania.
The climate prevailing in Tanzania was also raised by the Kurias’ lawyers. They cite in particular an expert who explained that lawyers [tanzaniens] are frequently subject to reprisals when they represent clients deemed unfavorable by the powerful. In 2023, the Canadian Bar Association itself denounced the harassment and detention of lawyers in Tanzania.
Corruption or injustice, these are only suppositions, argue Barrick Gold’s lawyers.
A monstrous trial
As the prosecution concerns several allegations of murder and injury, Mr. Thomson assures that the number of witnesses to question or the number of evidence to collect would make the case very complex. Imagine the volume of evidence needed for each case. It would be a monstrously complex file, he said.
[M. le juge]do you see yourself or one of your colleagues having to decide this complex question of Tanzanian law when there are 50 judges in Tanzania who could easily do it? This places a burden on this court which it should not accept.
A quote from Steven Frankel, attorney for the defendants
Me Frankel also returned to the interrogations of several witnesses carried out by his team in Tanzania. He cited complicated organizational issues, given the geographical remoteness of the region where the mine is located.
Open in full screen mode
Barrick Gold owns 84% of its subsidiary which operates North Mara, the remaining 16% belongs to the Tanzanian government.
Photo : RAID
He added that even those who speak English have pronunciation problems. While the official languages of this country are Swahili and English, more Tanzanians speak Swahili.
These language barriers simply would not arise in Tanzania, due to the ability of Tanzanian courts to accept testimony in Swahili, Frankel said.
The lawyers also raised the issue of the time difference between Tanzania and Canada. What judge in this court would want to get up at 3 a.m. to participate in a virtual trial with witnesses using three Swahili interpreters from Tanzania? they said.
Moreover, according to Mr. Thomson, it will be extremely difficult to gather all the witnesses, including the Tanzanian police officers, because it is unlikely that the Tanzanian police will allow dozens of officers to take leave.
It is not known how soon Judge Morgan’s decision will be rendered.
