Volume Three B, Chapter One
Chapter One, Mineral Resources, their Use and their Impact on the Conflict and the Country
Introduction
1. The management of state resources is central to the quality of governance in any country. This is particularly the case in Sierra Leone, a country whose economy depends essentially on revenues from its mineral resources. The Commission deemed it important to examine how mineral resources were used by successive governments and how they may have contributed to the war. Furthermore, the Commission set out to explore the extent to which the combatant groups exploited mineral resources to sustain themselves and replenish their war-making supplies.
2. Despite its huge mineral resources, Sierra Leone has remained one of the poorest countries in the world.1 Extensive alluvial and kimberlitic diamond deposits, as well as bauxite, rutile and gold, are found in the east and the south of the country. Gold, iron and more recently bauxite have been discovered in the north. Iron ore at Marampa was a major foreign-exchange earner until mining there was closed down in the mid-1990s. In the past, these resources have benefited a small elite group of Sierra Leoneans as well as Lebanese, Senegalese, Gambian, Guinean and Nigerian traders and a sprinkling of other groups from the sub-Saharan region.
3. The most important mineral resource in Sierra Leone is diamonds. This chapter will focus predominantly on diamonds and refer to other minerals where appropriate.
4. Throughout the world, diamonds are objects of desire and admiration. In Sierra Leone, diamonds were indirect causes and fuelling elements of the war. The misuse of diamond resources in an essentially single-product economy like Sierra Leone's has created huge disparities in socio-economic conditions. While the elite and their business associates in the diamond industry have lived in grandeur, the poor have invariably been left to rue the misappropriation of the collective wealth.
5. As a national resource, diamonds have been controlled and exploited largely by a non-Sierra Leonean community, the Lebanese, who have formed and maintained new centres of economic power in the country.
6. In the context of the Sierra Leone conflict, diamonds were highly coveted because they yielded tremendous revenues, which would enable the armed factions to procure additional weapons and ammunition. Possession of weapons conferred power upon the armed parties, as they could capture large areas of territory, which could in turn be exploited for economic purposes. The desire to expand "control areas" into parts of the country ripe for economic exploitation gradually became the main motivating factor for all the armed groups and many local commanders, thus triggering further conflict.
7. There is a widely held belief in the western world that the conflict in Sierra Leone was initiated and perpetuated because of diamonds, the country's most important mineral resource. According to this version, the RUF, backed by Charles Taylor and the NPFL, initiated an armed rebellion in Sierra Leone to gain control of its diamond resources. In the years following the initial attack, it is alleged, the proceeds from an illicit diamond trade enabled the RUF to finance its war effort through the purchase of weapons abroad.
8. On the basis of its research and investigations, the Commission views this version of the conflict as simplistic. It fails to capture numerous complexities, the reasons for the decay of the state in Sierra Leone and the role minerals played prior to and during the conflict. It also does not reflect what unfolded on the ground in Sierra Leone. There were multiple causes of the conflict and reasons for the involvement of Liberian and other foreign actors. Although it is true that the RUF partly financed its war effort through diamond trafficking, diamonds did not yield significant revenues for the movement before 1997.
9. Using primary data gleaned from interviews, statements and hearings, along with secondary materials from reports issued by NGOs and international bodies such as the United Nations, the Commission will address the following issues in this chapter:
- the political economy of mineral resources in Sierra Leone;
- the role minerals played in the conflict, including their appropriation and use by armed factions;
- the role of internal and external actors in the mining industry and its implications for the war;
- the systematic targeting of communities in mining areas and the effect of the conflict on those communities;
- government policies regarding the mining industry and their effect on the country; and
- the weaknesses of the international diamond industry and the effect of the Kimberley Certification Process.
10. The Commission has divided the Sierra Leone conflict into three phases.2 This chapter begins by examining the pre-conflict years with a view to setting the context for the conflict. Thereafter, the three phases are analysed as follows: first, the period of conventional "target" warfare from 1991 to late 1993; second, the guerrilla warfare phase from late 1993 up to March 1997; and finally the period from 1997 to 2002, encompassing the alliance between the AFRC and the RUF, the Lomé Peace Agreement, the resumption of hostilities and the eventual conclusion of the conflict.
The Political Economy of Mineral Resources
11. To understand the failure of the state in Sierra Leone and the role that minerals played in the conflict, we need to consider the nature of the state that emerged in 1961. At independence, there was euphoria that the new indigenous leadership would extend development and services to the people exponentially. In Sierra Leone, as in many other parts of Africa, the first few years following colonialism actually witnessed economic growth. Two key factors reversed this trend and set the country on a very different trajectory from the forward path desired by the people.
12. The first factor was the management of the economy. The popular expectation in the years before independence in many countries was captured by the Ghanaian Kwame Nkrumah in his refrain: "Seek ye first the political kingdom and all other things will be added unto you". The assumption was that political independence would free latent energies in the nation. The new state would churn out a host of policies to create and empower an indigenous entrepreneurial class, which was expected to be the engine of growth and development. In reality, however, the beneficiaries of these new policies turned out to be the political elite rather than the common people. Unfortunately for Sierra Leone, the indigenous elite preferred rent seeking rather than active economic participation and quickly ceded control of important economic activities to Lebanese and Syrian businessmen. Furthermore, the dominant economic management theories of the time favoured state intervention and centralised management of the economy. Leading members of the ruling elite sought to privatise state resources, thus depriving the nation of the benefits of its most valuable assets. Such "predatory domination" has been defined as the "conversion of political power and position into economic wealth for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many."3
13. Huge economic and development resources were placed in the hands of the new leaders. As the inheritors of power, the political elite acquired the tastes and behaviour of the departing colonialists. Such undisciplined control over resources opened the way for burgeoning corruption. Sierra Leoneans began to question the role and mission of the emergent political elite.
14. In 1978 a one-party state was imposed upon the people of Sierra Leone. This move by the ruling All Peoples' Congress (APC) followed the co-optation of civil society leaders into government and the crushing of dissent. Political power became a means to economic wealth, with personal rewards so high that politicians would resort to extreme measures to win and maintain power.4 The state became the primary avenue for private enrichment. Gradually, power became de-institutionalised and personalised, resulting in dysfunctional public institutions and random violence. It was in the interests of the political elite to promote disorder, as it provided further opportunities to misappropriate the economic resources of the state. As a direct result, public institutions could no longer provide vital services to the people.5
15. The political elite had preferential access to the machinery of the state. Politicians, senior civil servants and military officers exercised a great deal of power over access to foreign and domestic capital and markets, which they used to accumulate large fortunes and to consolidate their control of the economy. Exploitation occurred through a burgeoning de facto market in government contracts, licences and offices. The productive and regulatory capacities of the state became severely eroded and compromised. This led to the "informalisation" of the state.6 The state was misappropriated for the private benefit of the political elite, just as it had been in colonial times.
16. This brief background helps us to understand why diamond smuggling has been a perennial, seemingly uncontrollable problem in Sierra Leone. Key members of the elite and successive governments have promoted and continue to benefit from diamond smuggling. Efforts to contain smuggling during the APC rule were a façade. Smuggling was indeed promoted by the Office of the President. Today, so high are the personal and political stakes involved in the fight against diamond smuggling that every individual effort to achieve accountability will be fiercely contested and require sustained application.7
The Diamond Industry before the Conflict
The colonial period
17. A variety of minerals, including gold, iron and diamonds, were discovered in Sierra Leone in the 1930s; rutile, or titanium ore, was discovered in the 1960s.8 Diamonds were discovered in the Kenema and Kono Districts. The colonial government, through the Consolidated African Selection Trust (CAST), established the Sierra Leone Selection Trust (SLST) in 1934. CAST was a corporation controlled by the Selection Trust Group of London, with a portion of the shares held by De Beers.9 The SLST was granted exclusive mining and prospecting rights throughout the country for 99 years.10 In 1933, an iron-ore mine was opened at Marampa in Port Loko District and was generating almost 30% of the colony's export revenue by 1938.11
18. The mining sector became the major source of export for the country.12 In 1930, minerals accounted for a mere 0.5% of total exports and even in 1951, agriculture still accounted for 66.8%. However, by 1961, minerals had come to account for 87% of exports (79% of which were diamonds).13 These shifts rendered the economy vulnerable to fluctuations in the international market. Moreover, since minerals were only extracted in Sierra Leone but transformed abroad, the revenues from the value-added services that multiplied the price of the products were not being returned to the country. The profits of the industry went mostly to non-Sierra Leonean diamond industry interests involved at other levels of the transaction.
19. Beginning in the 1930s and 1940s, the colonial government adopted the strategy of relying on local chiefs to exercise control over the expanding diamond industry. However, the central government in Freetown had little control over the chiefs' actions and therefore could not curb nascent illicit mining:
"As the state's chosen administrative and, increasingly, political intermediaries, chiefs also voiced a popular dissatisfaction with state attacks on illicit mining. The harder Freetown pushed reform, the greater the risk of upsetting the accommodations that enabled Freetown to rule the hinterland in the first place."14
20. These "accommodations" with local chiefs widened the loss of state control over the diamond industry in the years leading up to the conflict. Government officials, as well as the chiefs, benefited from these unofficial deals:
"Informal accommodations between officials and chiefs and a tolerance of limited illicit mining maintained social order."15
21. The diamond rush in the 1950s created security problems. The number of new miners was so great that control became difficult. Thousands of people started illicit mining on the SLST lease16, many of them abandoning the rice fields for the diamond mines. This resulted in a significant drop in rice production.17 In the early 1950s, Sierra Leone was self-sufficient in rice production whereas in 1963, the country had to import 21,000 tons of rice to feed its population.18
22. In 1955, illegal miners attacked the SLST security forces and a police station in Kono. In 1955 and 1956, popular dissatisfaction with what was perceived as excessive control by Chiefs and the state led to several riots in Kono District. Indeed, "most Kono residents believed that SLST's monopoly on diamond mining bestowed benefits upon Europeans and chiefs" only.19
23. The SLST and De Beers began hiring private security companies to police the mining areas. They hired the Diamond Protection Force, a private British security company managed by Sir Percy Sillitoe,20 to guard the border areas against smuggling and the diamond areas against illicit mining. This was the first instance of the hiring of mercenaries in Sierra Leone, but many others would follow, especially during the conflict. SLST also had planes fly over mining areas to monitor illicit mining.
24. In 1955, the colonial government terminated the SLST - De Beers monopoly and introduced the Alluvial Diamond Mining Scheme (ADMS), under which Sierra Leonean miners could buy licences. Previously, Sierra Leonean nationals had not been allowed to own mining concessions.21 Parts of the SLST Yengema concession that were unsuitable for large-scale mining were leased to local, small-scale miners,22 who were required to sell all their diamonds to SLST. By allowing Sierra Leonean miners to operate mines, the colonial government sought to curtail smuggling and restore security to the SLST lease area.23 The colonial government also established the Mining Area Development Administration (MADA), a state development expenditure programme incorporating local authorities into the decision-making process.24
25. This new system gave more power to the local chiefs to grant leases to mine diamonds. The chiefs began assigning plots and collecting surface rents. One Kono businessman complained that the unofficial payments (or bribes) to chiefs to obtain a licence rose 500% under the new ADMS.25
26. The other effect of ADMS was to create a "supporter" artisanal system in which wealthy Lebanese businessmen would "look after" African miners, providing funding for licences and mining equipment and protecting miners against SLST security forces. In exchange, miners would sell their diamonds to the Lebanese. Most dealers engaged in both licit and illicit buying of diamonds, paying low prices to illegal miners and selling at higher prices to the SLST.
27. Despite the ADMS, smuggling did not stop. Rather, it increased dramatically. Due to its borderless nature, artisanal mining could not be effectively controlled and policed. Table 1, below, shows that in the three years following the introduction of ADMS, smuggling increased over the three years preceding its introduction.
Source for Table 1: Mitchell, P.K. and Swindell K.; "Recent Changes in Sierra Leone Mineral Industry", in The Bulletin: The Journal of the Sierra Leone Geographical Association, Volumes 9 and 10.26
28. As shown in Table 2, below, ADMS became a significant contributor to the total production of diamonds, accounting for a minimum of 50% of annual production. From 1980 on, while the value increased, the total number of carats recorded began to decline. Zack-Williams has argued that this fall was the result not of mine depletion but of the informalisation of mining by a decaying state.27 Most production was by illicit dealers who smuggled their products out of the country. The state was losing money, but the political elite was getting wealthier.
Table 2: Diamond Production Under SLST and ADMS for Selected Years
YEAR |
ADMS |
ADMS |
TOTALADMS and LST/NDMC
|
Total ValueSLST and ADMS |
|
(Carats ‘000)
|
(Le ’000) |
(Carats ’000) |
(Le ‘000) |
1961 |
1,406 |
22,655 |
2,045 |
31,938 |
1965 |
813 |
22,780 |
1,525 |
36,959 |
1970 |
1,048 |
26,182 |
1,955 |
52,803 |
1975 |
645 |
23,157 |
732 |
63,031 |
1980 |
- |
- |
592 |
127,944 |
1985 |
- |
- |
349 |
140,876 |
1986 |
- |
- |
315 |
88,430 |
1987 |
- |
- |
314 |
1,070,314 |
1988 |
- |
- |
175 |
106,646 |
1989 |
- |
- |
129 |
1,220,516 |
Source for Table 2: Mitchell, P.K. and Swindell K.; "Recent Changes in Sierra Leone Mineral Industry", in The Bulletin: The Journal of the Sierra Leone Geographical Association, Vol. 9 and 10.28
From SLST to the NMDC
29. When Siaka Stevens came into power in 1968, he used populist rhetoric to gain support, claiming that small miners should have the opportunity to benefit from the diamond industry.29 The government encouraged licensing of small-scale mining, proclaiming it as the small man's chance for success.30 However, the government's unofficial encouragement of smuggling resulted in the theft of several shipments of diamonds belonging to the SLST. For instance, on 3 November 1969, the SLST's monthly production, worth US$3.4 million, was stolen, allegedly on the orders of Stevens and Jamil Said Mohamed, a prosperous and influential Lebanese businessman with close links to Stevens.31
30. The transformation of the diamond industry into an informal economy was complete with the "nationalisation" of the SLST and its replacement by the National Diamond Mining Company (NDMC) in 1970. In 1973, the government created the Cooperative Contract Mining (CCM) scheme, which allowed private mining operations within the NDMC lease. This initiative was presented as a concession to local miners. The main reason for this opening was the decrease in foreign revenues resulting from the government's inability to curb illicit mining and smuggling, as well as the decrease in production arising from old equipment. CCM therefore did not really benefit the local miners. Rather, it strengthened Siaka Stevens' underground economy.32
31. Siaka Stevens had directed the state-controlled NDMC "to make land available for the people to mine". In reality, this was a division of the diamond fields among the APC elite and their allies, including the chiefs in the diamond-producing areas and government officials, many of whom owned plots in other people's names.33 The then Minister of Finance, Tommy Taylor-Morgan, was quoted as warning that the country was losing more than US$160 million of diamond income annually to smuggling.34
32. Through the years, Siaka Stevens had allied himself with a group of powerful Lebanese merchants who controlled some of the official and much of the unofficial diamond trade.35 The NDMC had a 51% share of the SLST lease, while Jamil Said Mohamed alone controlled some 12% through his company, the Precious Mineral Mining Company (PMMC).36 Jamil Said Mohamed was very influential and controlled a large part of the industry, including the mining of other minerals, with the approval of Siaka Stevens. Corruption and smuggling reached such a level that official diamond production dropped significantly.37
33. The CCM was designed to arrest the dramatic drop in NDMC production. In 1973, 94% of the legal non-alluvial diamond output was produced by NDMC. In 1980, the percentage had dropped to 29%.38 This was coupled with the general decline in overall official production. In 1974, the government created the Government Diamond Office (GDO) to value diamonds and ensure the repatriation of profits from diamond sales abroad into the Bank of Sierra Leone. Although GDO was supposed to be a neutral institution, it was headed by Stevens and Jamil Said Mohamed, who tended to allow favoured people to repatriate only a portion of their profits. They also used GDO to undervalue diamonds, keeping the difference for themselves or for members of the elite close to the government.39
34. The government cut its export tax on diamonds from 7.5% to 2.5% in 1977, ostensibly to reduce smuggling. However, in practice, the tax cut increased the share of diamond resources that went into the pockets of the political elite. By the end of the 1970s, NDMC was in decline. In 1983, SLST sold its remaining shares to Jamil Said Mohamed's PMMC.
35. Overall, Stevens established a system through which he controlled the diamond industry using a network of partners and without having to engage the government apparatus.40 The survival of this system was ensured internally by the use of elite-accommodation practices, such as offering favoured treatment to APC sympathisers and local chiefs.41 Stevens and his clients relied on paramilitary forces such as the Internal Security Unit (ISU) to maintain social order through physical repression of opponents and illicit miners. This transfer of ownership from formal state institutions to informal networks personally controlled by Stevens helped intensify smuggling, depriving the national treasury of potential tax revenues.
36. The popular perception that the state was favouring elites and giving away the diamond resources led to riots in Kono in 1984 and 1985, in which miners attacked the property of the state and of politicians.
The establishment of the GGDO
37. President Momoh came to power in 1985 and created the Government Gold and Diamond Office (GGDO) to remedy the shortage of foreign exchange. This attempt was part of a series of reforms aimed at re-establishing Sierra Leone's borrowing capacity with the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
38. GGDO was originally supposed to buy and sell gold, and to stockpile diamonds to be used as collateral to raise external loans, but these functions were never carried out.42 Although GGDO never bought diamonds, it advertised diamonds internationally and facilitated export deals.
39. Sierra Leone's diamonds were fuelling the Middle East conflict. Prominent Lebanese dealers were some of the main financiers of the Islamic movements in the Middle East. To undermine this control, the Israeli government got involved in the diamond industry at a time when President Momoh was in desperate need of foreign exchange and support to prop up his failing economy. Momoh invited an Israeli firm called LIAT Construction and Finance Company to manage the diamond industry, thereby undermining Jamil Said Mohamed's control. The Israeli company was accused of trafficking in drugs and arms, using the Sierra Leonean diamond industry as cover, and its director, Shaptai Kalmanovitch, was arrested for fraud in London in 1987.43 Under the control of the Israelis, however, diamond exports rose 280% between 1985 and 1986.44 Another Israeli company, N.R. SCIPA Group, replaced LIAT after Kalmanovitch's arrest. The company was allegedly dealing in both legal and illegal diamonds.45 The ever-growing demands of Momoh's cronies resulted in further drastic reductions in government revenues and popular dissatisfaction led to riots again in 1988 and 1989 in Kono District.
Diamond smuggling
40. The rise in diamond smuggling during the Stevens and Momoh eras is explained by the rent seeking instincts of the political elite, which were furthered by the peculiar organisation of the international diamond industry. Inadequate monitoring of the origin of diamonds is one of the major problems in the industry. The Belgian Diamond High Council (HRD), on whose trading floors a large proportion of the international diamond trade takes place, records the origin of diamonds as the country from which they were last exported. Such recording tells nothing about where the diamonds were actually mined. For instance, a diamond can be smuggled from Sierra Leone into Liberia, then shipped to London, and be recorded as being of British origin, even if Britain does not produce diamonds.
41. Tables 3 and 4 and Figure 1, below and overleaf, show the discrepancy between the diamond production in some West African countries and diamond imports into Belgium. Throughout the conflict period, the HRD imported two or three times as many diamonds from Sierra Leone as the government of Sierra Leone officially exported. These numbers suggest significant smuggling. In 1999, official exports were worth US$1.2 million, compared with a conservative industry estimate of US$70 million in real commercial value.46
Table 3: Diamond Production in Selected West African Countries for Selected Years ('000 carats)
Year
|
1990 |
1991 |
1992 |
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
Sierra Leone
|
78 |
243 |
347 |
158 |
255 |
213 |
270 |
104 |
8.5 |
Liberia
|
100 |
100 |
150 |
150 |
100 |
150 |
150 |
150 |
150 |
Guinea
|
127 |
97 |
153 |
167 |
381 |
365 |
205 |
205 |
205 |
Ghana
|
650 |
700 |
656 |
591 |
740 |
632 |
715 |
830 |
800 |
Côte d’Ivoire |
12 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
84 |
75 |
302 |
307 |
307 |
Sources for Table 3: Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, Partnership Africa Canada Ottawa, January 2000: Data for Liberia, Guinea, Ghana, Côte d'Ivoire for the years 1994 to 1998 from: Ronald F. Balazik, 'Gemstones', 1998 Annual Review (United States Geological Survey, August 1999) at page EE 17. Remaining data for the same countries is from various mineral industry reports from 1990 to 1994 published by the United States Geological Survey. Sierra Leone data is drawn from the Government of Sierra Leone, Government Gold and Diamond Office (GGDO), Freetown, Sierra Leone, 1999.
Table 4: Belgian Imports of West African Diamonds ('000 carats)
Year
|
1990 |
1991 |
1992 |
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
Sierra Leone
|
331 |
534 |
831 |
344 |
526 |
455 |
566 |
803 |
770 |
Liberia
|
5,523 |
658 |
1,909 |
5,006 |
3,268 |
10,677 |
12,320 |
5,803 |
2,558 |
Guinea
|
287 |
374 |
526 |
1021 |
875 |
780 |
439 |
533 |
596 |
Ghana
|
597 |
675 |
689 |
526 |
498 |
643 |
608 |
531 |
N / A |
Côte d’Ivoire
|
825 |
946 |
868 |
683 |
605 |
1614 |
2214 |
885 |
N / A |
Sources for Table 4: Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, Partnership Africa Canada Ottawa, January 2000: Diamond High Council, 1998 Annual Report, Antwerp 1999, at page 1, and additional information supplied directly by HRD.
Figure 1: Graph demonstrating disparities in Belgian diamond imports from Liberia and Sierra Leone
Source for Figure 1: Progress Report, Diamond High Council, 2003
42. The figures for Liberia, represented graphically in Figure 1, are even more interesting. While Liberia has never produced more than 150,000 carats per year, HRD records show that 12.3 million carats were imported from Liberia in 1996. In fact, the import figures for Liberian diamonds are in the million-carat range for every year from 1990 to 1998, except 1991. Between 1995 and 1999, Belgium imported 33.6 million carats from Liberia.47 The HRD therefore concluded that "imports recorded from Liberia bear no relationship to local production capacity".48
43. The diamonds found in Sierra Leone are mainly gemstones, while those mined in Liberia are mostly industrial diamonds. Gemstones are clear and colourless stones used in jewellery, while industrial diamonds are imperfect stones used in drills and other tools.49 It is therefore fairly easy for experts to differentiate between diamonds of Sierra Leonean origin and those of Liberian origin.
44. Diamond smuggling from Sierra Leone into Liberia and neighbouring countries was not invented by the RUF or Charles Taylor. It started as least as early as the 1950s. After the tightening of control over the industry by the Sierra Leonean state in the 1960s and 1970s, Liberian diamond exports decreased considerably.50 Such controls enabled key officials of the Sierra Leonean government to become real players in the industry and channel trade in diamonds to Lebanese and other friends within the country, who then exported them to Belgium and parts of the Middle East.
45. It is also important to note the figures for Belgian imports from Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea and Ghana. Although it has not been demonstrated that the RUF and Charles Taylor were responsible for smuggling diamonds through these countries, the figures show that in all probability their government officials colluded in the smuggling of diamonds out of Sierra Leone. Consequently it is likely that officials of the Sierra Leonean state have been doing business in diamonds with people in Liberia, including Charles Taylor, while he supported the pillage and plunder of Sierra Leone.
46. Côte d'Ivoire has virtually no diamond-production capacities, yet between 600,000 and 2.2 million carats were exported to Belgium each year between 1990 and 1998. The 2.2 million carats officially exported from Côte d'Ivoire in 1996 is equal to the entire volume produced in Côte d'Ivoire during the 30 years between 1948 and 1978.51 This comparison suggests the massive smuggling of diamonds into Côte d'Ivoire during the 1990s.
47. The import and export figures for Guinea also raise suspicion of smuggling. The UN Panel of Experts has indicated that diamond smuggling from Sierra Leone into Guinea and the use of Guinea as the country of origin for exported diamonds are the two factors that explain these figures.52
48. A further discrepancy exists in the figures for The Gambia. Imports of Gambian rough diamonds into Belgium averaged US$100 million per year between 1996 and 1999.53
49. The Commission's research demonstrates that the RUF could not have earned all the money attributed to it in official reports from conflict diamonds alone. Except for a brief period in 1992 when the RUF occupied Koidu, the headquarters of the diamond-rich Kono District, it did not have access to the major diamond-producing areas of the country until 1995, when it occupied Koidu again for four months before being driven out by Executive Outcomes. RUF's diamond pickings in those areas could not have constituted the colossal amounts reflected in the literature. Figure 1 shows that, except in 1986, Belgian imports of diamonds from Liberia have always outstripped those from Sierra Leone. Yet Liberia is not reputed to have substantial diamond deposits and does not have gemstone-quality diamonds. The conclusion to be drawn from the above tables and Figure 1 is that diamond smuggling within the axis of Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia and Côte d'Ivoire has been going on for more than 30 years, with Liberia being the principal conduit. This would suggest that those involved in diamond smuggling had developed networks and contacts in Liberia, which facilitated their smuggling and export of diamonds from within the region. Even in 1990, before the war in Sierra Leone started, Liberia exported more than 5 million carats of diamonds.
50. During the conflict, particularly between 1992 and 1997, control over Kono District seesawed between the RUF and government forces. Diamond exploitation and smuggling carried on unabated. Testimony to the Commission indicated that dealers continued to do business with whoever had control of the territory. Even the manager of Branch Energy in Kono tried to arrange a secure corridor to facilitate the continuation of his business.54 It served the interests of both the RUF and members of the political elite to continue to use the same sources for laundering their diamond loot. Individuals laundering the proceeds from diamonds had direct connections to Charles Taylor, the alleged mastermind of diamond smuggling from Sierra Leone.55 Control of the routes provided opportunities for rent seeking for both the RUF and the NPFL; it probably also yielded substantial revenues in "passage tax". An alarmed international community quickly outlawed business in what has come to be known as "blood diamonds".
51. The corruption in the Liberian diamond industry made "diamond laundering" extremely easy. Transactions and payments were made in U.S. dollars. This made Liberia a haven for diamond dealers. The UN Panel of Experts found the existence of several shelf companies whose given addresses in Monrovia turned out to be non-existent. These companies were used to legalise the diamonds exported. President Taylor controlled the trade through his Inspector General of Mines, who reported directly to him.56
52. Charles Taylor benefited enormously from the diamonds that passed through Liberia. His control was institutionalised when he became President of Liberia in 1997. The RUF also profited substantially from fines and charges it levied against diamond miners in the territories it controlled. The revenues from these activities were used to procure arms, ammunition and supplies for continuing the war against the Sierra Leonean state.
53. On 5 July 2000, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1306, imposing an embargo on the trade of diamonds from Sierra Leone. The UN Panel of Experts was created at the same time to monitor violations of the embargo and investigate diamond smuggling from Sierra Leone and its effect on the conflict. The Panel conducted several interviews with senior officials in different countries, including the then Liberian President Charles Taylor and senior officials in Liberia and Sierra Leone. Its report was published in December 2000 and provided great insights into the relationship between diamond smuggling and arms trafficking.
Other minerals
54. Other mineral resources are present in Sierra Leone, especially gold, bauxite and rutile. Although these minerals represent potentially important financial resources for the state, government focus so far has been on diamonds.
55. Mining of such minerals requires deep digging and therefore heavy machinery and substantial capital investment. The same is true of kimberlitic diamonds, found deep below the surface of the earth. Illegal mining of these minerals is difficult and therefore easily monitored by the government. On the other hand, the mining of alluvial gold and diamonds is easy and requires no investment in major equipment. It is therefore very difficult to control and regulate.
The role of non-Sierra Leonean communities
"The problem with us Sierra Leoneans is that we discriminate against ourselves. Any time an outsider comes in, we immediately give him everything."57
56. This quote essentially reflects the behaviour of the Sierra Leone political elite who exploited every opportunity for personal benefit, through networks and partnerships with non-Sierra Leonean businesses.
57. The Lebanese did not come to Sierra Leone for the diamonds; they were in the country long before diamonds were discovered. Beginning in the 1940s, however, members of the Lebanese community got involved in all aspects of the Sierra Leonean diamond industry, from funding licence holders to exporting diamonds. By paying higher informal taxes to the miners, they have assumed dominance over the industry.
58. Bank loans have been far more accessible to non-Sierra Leonean communities than to Sierra Leonean nationals. Because of their wealth, members of these communities are widely perceived as being more capable of repaying loans. The result of such lending practices has been that non-Sierra Leoneans have taken advantage of opportunities for investment and business development, amassing tremendous resources from the diamond business and other industries. These captains of industry have allied themselves with the political elite as a means of protection. They have benefited enormously from doing business in Sierra Leone but they have returned little to the country in the form of investments. Most profits are sent to other countries.
59. Since the Lebanese possessed capital, they rapidly took control of the diamond industry, as well as much of the business sector in general. By 1966, 73% of all shops in the country belonged to Lebanese nationals.58
60. In 1959, the government required joint ventures between the SLST and Sierra Leonean nationals to exploit aspects of the SLST lease. In 1961, a constitutional decree denied citizenship to anyone of non-African parentage, which meant that the Lebanese and members of other resident communities who had been in Sierra Leone for generations could not automatically obtain citizenship.
61. The combination of the new policy of indigenous participation in mining and the citizenship decree had two consequences. First, it consolidated the dependence of Sierra Leoneans - who did not possess the necessary capital - upon wealthier individuals, mainly the Lebanese, thus deepening the "supporter" system that had begun in the 1950s. Second, since the right to acquire a mining licence was now restricted to citizens of African descent, many Lebanese invested through the local chiefs, using the chiefs' names to get licences and sharing the profits.59
62. This situation persisted for many years, creating a system in which Lebanese dealers associated with government officials and local chiefs dominated the diamond industry. These dealers supported the mine operators (also referred to as "diggers") who in turn hired labourers to dig the diamond plots. According to the 1963 census, there were 2,500 licensed and unlicensed diggers, most of them linked financially to Lebanese dealers. The diggers employed 25,000 to 30,000 labourers.60 These links increased over the years, and in 1982, 80% of all Sierra Leonean nationals applying for a dealer licence listed the same address in Sefadu, which was connected to Jamil Said Mohamed.61
63. Directly or indirectly, the Lebanese are still dominant at every level of the process. At the extraction level, they create a "supporter system" and provide the mining tools and the money for the licence.62 The arrangement usually includes the sharing of profits on every diamond found. The Lebanese are also extensively involved at the dealer and exporter levels.63
64. The Marakas (Gambian and Senegalese nationals) have also been involved at the dealing level since the 1950s. Unlike the Lebanese, they do not own shops; instead they conduct their transactions on the streets of Kono towns, especially Koidu. The Marakas are generally held in higher esteem than the Lebanese by Sierra Leoneans involved in the diamond industry. The Marakas have invested some of their profits in community development.64
65. Leading Lebanese dealers were close associates of government leaders. Jamil Said Mohamed, for example, was a business associate of Siaka Stevens. His company was granted a licence to take over the NDMC. When he ran it aground, he sold it back to the government. When the government could no longer pay civil servants' wages, Jamil Said Mohamed "lent" money to the government to do so. The perception deepened that the Lebanese were and still remain the greatest beneficiaries of the diamond business.
66. Diamond smuggling is facilitated by the possession of a "dealer licence". A holder of a dealer licence is required to declare a certain minimum amount of transactions every year to the GGDO. Once this benchmark is attained, the dealer may legally deal in diamonds in his possession as he pleases. Although dealers cannot export diamonds officially without an export licence, they can deal in diamonds inside the country without declaring such sales to the GGDO. A popular hotel on Aberdeen Road in Freetown has been identified to the Commission as the rendezvous point for foreign speculators and merchants eager to buy diamonds.65
67. Ordinarily dealers are supposed to buy diamonds from licensed miners only, but there is minimal oversight of the dealership level of the industry. Since the dealers are the prime promoters of the supporter system, they have hundreds of miners, not all of whom are licensed, on their support lists. Once a diamond is received at a dealer's office, it can be certified as having been produced by any of the supported miners and can be "officially" sold to the dealer. One of the foremost diamond dealers in the country told the Commission during a closed hearing in Freetown that he wouldn't insist on licences from miners before buying diamonds from them, because "I can legalise any diamond and then sell it".66
68. There is a perception among Sierra Leoneans that the Lebanese keep all the profits from the diamond trade within the Lebanese community and invest only in their own businesses or export the profits to Lebanon. Many Lebanese, despite their long years in the country, have not integrated into Sierra Leonean society and are resented by Sierra Leoneans for their failure to do so.67
69. Non-Sierra Leonean communities perceived by the RUF/AFRC as being wealthy were specifically targeted for attacks during the conflict. In the diamond industry, the Lebanese, Maraka and Fullah communities are involved in dealing and exporting. Their houses were often searched and their diamonds and money seized in surprise attacks.68 One victim, a wealthy diamond exporter of Lebanese origin with business interests in Kono and Freetown was attacked several times. During one of the attacks on his house in Koidu, his family was only rescued by the intervention of Executive Outcomes.69
70. The Ukrainian and Russian communities were involved in the conflict mainly as mercenaries, training men and flying supplies to whoever paid them, including the RUF and the government forces.70 According to statements and interviews obtained by the Commission, they were also involved in diamond smuggling and arms trafficking, using helicopters to transport weapons and gems.71
71. Links have been alleged between Sierra Leonean diamonds and international terrorist organisations. The Washington Post published an article claiming that Charles Taylor had facilitated a diamond deal for Al Qaeda. Taylor was allegedly paid US$1 million, and the diamonds originated in Sierra Leone.72 The Commission found no evidence to substantiate such allegations.
Mineral Resources and the Conflict Period
72. The lack of total state control over the diamond industry and other mineral resources had major repercussions for the conduct of the war in Sierra Leone.
73. Mining companies often contract with private security firms to provide protection in conflict areas where collapsing states are unable to provide security. In Sierra Leone, diamond-, rutile- and gold-mining companies entered into arrangements with private security firms, such as Executive Outcomes, Sandline International, Lifeguard Security and ArmSec International (SL). Some of these firms, notably Executive Outcomes and Sandline, have also provided security services to the government.73
Phase I of the Conflict: March 1991-1993
74. Phase I encompasses the start of the war in March 1991, the NPRC coup in 1992 and the RUF's efforts to regroup from the brink of defeat in 1993. Although this is a pivotal period in the history of the conflict, few significant events occurred in the diamond industry. The RUF started its military operations in 1991, but did not gain any significant control over any diamond area before 1992, when it first captured Kono. This period was characterised by the decline of NDMC and the retreat of GGDO from the diamond trade.
75. The NDMC shut its operations in Yengema in October 1992, its operations in Tongo Field in March 1993 and went into liquidation in October 1993. The demise of the NDMC left the government weakened by the loss of legal diamond revenues.
76. Throughout the conflict, the fighting factions used the tactic of diamond seizure to gain revenues quickly. Diamonds were looted or seized from individual miners and dealers and sold.
77. From 1991 to 1993, Kailahun District and parts of Pujehun District were under RUF control. In Kailahun, only two towns, Jojoima and Kotoma, were mining areas. Diamond mining was organised by the RUF in those towns on a very small scale and produced a modest quantity of diamonds.74 These were handed over to a mining commander, who would record them and hand them either to Foday Sankoh or to NPFL fighters, who would take them to Liberia.75
78. The RUF captured Kono for a brief period in 1992 and was in control of Koidu and the surrounding communities for four months between October 1992 and February 1993. However, some Chiefdoms in Kono District - Nimikoro, Nimiyama and Sewafe - were under RUF control during almost all of the conflict.76 The RUF mined diamonds on a small scale, seized mining equipment and abducted miners to operate it.77 One former RUF commander witnessed the presence of Foday Sankoh, Issa Sesay, Sam Bockarie and Patrick Lamin in the Koidu area in late 1992 to oversee RUF mining activities.78
79. The RUF attacked a diamond mine in February 1993 in Baakaar, Dama Chiefdom, in Kenema District,79 but was forced from the area by the NPRC regime. Throughout the war, insufficient control on the ground prevented the RUF from organising large-scale mining in Pujehun District, where the Zimmi diamond mines were located.80
80. The situation worsened for the RUF from 1993 onwards. Military authorities told the BBC on 15 November 1993, that the Sierra Leone Army had recaptured Koindu after 13 months under RUF control. They also proclaimed the recapture of nine other towns in Kailahun and seven towns in Pujehun.81 By the end of 1993, the RUF had been largely pushed out of Sierra Leone into Liberia.
81. Army soldiers also engaged in diamond smuggling in Bo and Pujehun Districts from the beginning of the conflict. A miner was attacked by SLA soldiers in Sumbuya, Bo District, in 1991 and tortured because he refused to hand over the diamonds he had mined. A soldier assaulted him and raped his wife:
"I was beaten by them severely until I was at the point of death. The reason was because I was a miner and they said I have never given diamonds. One of them raped my wife."82
82. This victim also witnessed the soldiers seizing diamonds from other miners. In the same year, in Gisiwulo village, Pujehun District, SLA soldiers forced villagers to guide them through the swamps where diamonds were found. Those who refused were tied up and left in the sun until they became co-operative:
"The SLA soldiers used to gather the towns' people and ask that we show them the swamps where big diamonds could be found. If we failed to cooperate, they would tie us up and bake us in the sun. One morning, Lieutenant Mallah ordered his men to tie me up because I was the town chief and I had refused to show them the swamps. I was held hostage for one whole day and night."83
83. In the town of Bo, in 1993, during a riot, a diamond digger was attacked and killed by an SLA soldier who had requested money from him. His employer witnessed the killing:
"Hassan was stabbed and shot all over his body. I stood there for some time watching him, then his brothers came and joined me."84
84. The perceived wealth of diamond workers made them targets of armed factions throughout the conflict.
Vigilantes and civil militias
85. From the first efforts at assembling civil militia forces in the south and east of the country, the collective resources of the host chiefdoms were typically gathered together to feed, fund or otherwise assist whatever force was present there. In chiefdoms with diamond and other mineral deposits, the young men were required to donate their finds to the community effort. In Pujehun District, where the RUF had allied itself with an amorphous body of militiamen known as the "Action Group",85 villagers in the Soro Gbema and Kpanga Krim chiefdoms provided fighters with shelter and the proceeds of their agriculture and industries.86 This practice was reflective of the warm reception initially given to the RUF in the south. However, after the middle of 1991, there is evidence that locals ceased to contribute voluntarily and that the RUF then resorted to looting the resources they required, including diamonds and other minerals that people had in their possession.
Phase II of the Conflict: 1994-1997
86. Phase II of the conflict was characterised by a shift in the fighting strategy of the RUF to guerrilla warfare tactics. This change was effective: the RUF was able to gain significant territory and secure control over Kono for several months in 1995 and strike a decisive advance towards Freetown.87 In the same year, the attacks on the SIEROMCO and Sierra Rutile Limited mines by the RUF had tremendous implications for the national economy and led to the destruction of the surrounding communities and the internationalisation of the conflict. The insecurity created by the attacks, coupled with the effectiveness of the RUF on the ground, led the government to hire the private security firm, Ghurkhas Security Guards.
87. The NPRC regime, in search of more revenue, opened the mining industry to "junior" diamond-mining companies. The term "junior" refers to "small prospecting and mining companies which work on the edge of the industry, discovering diamond fields, generating funds on international stock markets, sometimes selling diamonds directly but more often than not eventually selling out to larger companies".88 Such companies take risks to discover new resources and establish themselves in the world market.
88. These junior companies were associated with private security firms not just in Sierra Leone but throughout Africa. In conflict zones, such companies could not rely on the war-torn country to protect their mining operations. Therefore, to safeguard their profits, they turned to other means of security. The junior companies that entered Sierra Leone during the conflict period included those in the list overleaf.
Rex Mining Company
89. Rex Mining Company NV acquired concessions in Tongo Field and Zimmi in March 1994. The leases were renewed by the government in August 1999 but were revoked in mid-October 2003 when the company failed to pay outstanding licence fees amounting to US$282,000. The company claimed in 1999 to have close contacts with both government officials and the RUF. That claim was denied by Foday Sankoh. When the government's helicopter gunship was shot down in 1998, Rex's managing director and president provided the government with spare parts from Russia worth US$3.8 million.89
AmCan
90. AmCan came to Sierra Leone in 1993, and procured concessions for exploration in Kono District. Sierra Gold Limited, a subsidiary of AmCan, holds a 30-square-mile gold mine in Tonkolili District.90 In 1996, AmCan purchased ArmSec International (SL), a private security company.91 It is not clear what role ArmSec played in the conflict, but it was used by AmCan to provide security for its mining concessions. As of 1999, David Quee was AmCan's lawyer and representative in Freetown as well as Chairman of the GGDO. Despite this apparent conflict of interests, the Ministry of Mineral Resources did not intervene.
Branch Energy, Diamond Works and Executive Outcomes
91. Branch Energy first entered Sierra Leone in 1995 and obtained a concession from the NPRC regime for mining kimberlitic diamonds in the Kono District. The lease was originally for 25 years and could be renewed. The contract was ratified by the Parliament in 1996. However, Branch Energy, which in 1996 became a subsidiary of Diamond Works, a mining company registered in Canada, decided to end its activities and evacuate its personnel after the May 1997 coup that led to the establishment of the AFRC.
92. The Commission travelled to Kono to visit the Branch Energy concession and conducted interviews with its employees. The company lost US$15 million of its initial 1995 investment, because its equipment was looted or burnt. Jan Joubert, the company's country manager since 1995, arranged the evacuation of personnel after the May 1997 coup. After negotiations with the AFRC in Kono, the employees and other foreigners were finally evacuated by helicopter in August. However, Joubert stayed behind and managed to set up meetings between the military, the AFRC/RUF and the Kamajors. The ultimate aim was to achieve a secure climate in Koidu and in Kono District in general that would be safe enough to permit the resumption of the company's operations. Joubert succeeded initially in creating a forum for discussion with the AFRC but finally had to leave the country in September 1997 following the breakdown of negotiations.92
93. Executive Outcomes (EO) was part of a bigger group, called Plaza 107, which included Sandline International, Lifeguard Security and other security firms, as well as some mining companies such as Branch Energy. From its inception, EO had been providing security for diamond companies in conflict zones. It had performed such services for Anglo American, De Beers and Branch Energy in its diamond operations in Angola.93
94. The ostensible links between Branch Energy, EO and Sandline International in Sierra Leone are denied by Branch Energy and Diamond Works. After the end of Executive Outcomes' operations in Sierra Leone, Eeben Barlow, the former director of Executive Outcomes, became a shareholder in Diamond Works.94
95. Executive Outcomes was allegedly introduced to the government by Branch Energy through Tony Buckingham.95 Its mandate was to repel the RUF and retake the diamond-mining areas in Kono District.96 EO was paid by the NPRC partly in cash and partly in mining concessions granted to Branch Energy. According to Captain Valentine Strasser, former Head of State and Chairman of the NPRC, Ghurkhas Security Services was also paid in diamond concessions.97 One month after Executive Outcomes pushed the RUF out of the diamond areas, Branch Energy98 secured its 25-year lease in Kono District. Reginald Glover, then Minister of Mineral Resources, claimed that he was ordered by the Head of State to give diamond concessions to Branch Energy.99
96. Branch Energy, Diamond Works and Executive Outcomes became important players in the diamond industry in Sierra Leone. Using contacts in government and acquiring protection from the RUF, they continued to engage in diamond exploitation.
The RUF, diamond smuggling and arms trafficking
"We have signed the Peace Accord on 29 November 1996, just so as to relieve our movement of the enormous pressure from the international community while I will use this opportunity to transact my business in getting our fighting materials freely and easily."
Foday Sankoh, Leader of the RUF, 4 December 1996100
97. Before 1995, the RUF conducted diamond mining on a sporadic and unorganised basis. However, the Commission received multiple reports of civilians being forced to mine for the RUF dating back to 1994.101 In a letter allegedly sent to Mohamed Talibi of the Libyan Arab Bureau in Ghana, Sankoh stated in June 1996 that he had been able "to organise serious mining operations in precious minerals which [he] believes will help [them] generate the needed foreign exchange for [their] mission".102
98. In 1995, the RUF took control of the Koidu area and held it for about four months until being driven out by Executive Outcomes.103 Witnesses recall several instances in which RUF fighters seized diamonds from civilians in Kono District, often beating or torturing them if they refused to hand the diamonds over. In Kelfala Chiefdom, Pujehun, in 1995, a miner was seriously beaten by RUF fighters when he refused to hand over his diamonds:
"One rebel came with a mask and asked me to produce the diamonds. I told him I had nothing like diamonds in my possession. Failing to produce the said diamonds, I was severely beaten with a stick. He further threatened to kill me. I begged him not to kill me as I am a poor boy working for people. But he seemed not to care and continued beating me until the first stick was broken. He used a second stick until it was finished."104
99. A former RUF commander reported on RUF diamond-seizure tactics during the period when the RUF was in control of the Koidu area. Seizures were conducted during raids on towns and mining sites and also on individual miners and dealers.105 Diamond seizures were also conducted in Pujehun District, often resulting in the death of civilians:
"At Kpetewoma Lugbu in August 1995, we were in a hiding place mining when the rebels got to us. They surrounded us and got everybody to the mining site. We were asked to give them the diamonds we had. Because there was delay in giving them the diamonds, four miners were killed and others lined up to follow them. They took all we had in the huts plus our food."106
100. The tactic of diamond seizure was also used in Tongo Field throughout the war, but large-scale mining was not organised in that area during the period between 1994 and 1997.107
101. The RUF used diamonds to buy weapons and supplies.108 As illustrated by the Foday Sankoh quote above, it appears that the RUF signed the Abidjan Peace Accord only to gain time and re-establish its control on the ground. Indeed, by the time of the Abidjan signing in 1996, the RUF had suffered a major military setback and lost control of the diamond-mining areas.
102. The RUF diamonds were smuggled mainly to Liberia and Guinea, over footpaths through the borders.109 The diamonds were carried by RUF commanders across the border to Foya-Kama and Voinjama, and then on to Monrovia. The profits from diamond sales were used to purchase weapons, ammunition, food and equipment.110 Several reports and testimonies indicate that the weapons came mainly from Eastern Europe by air, were trans-shipped in Burkina Faso and Libya, then imported into Liberia, usually by air as well, in violation of the UN arms embargo on Liberia. The weapons were then transported into Sierra Leonean territory mainly by road in load trucks.111 The material included ammunition, RPGs, grenades and AK-47s.112
103. The estimates of RUF revenues from diamond smuggling vary from US$25 million to US$125 million per year. De Beers' estimate for 1999 is US$70 million.113 The estimates refer to the optimal value of the production capacity of the land under the RUF's control and not to the actual RUF revenues, which are extremely difficult to estimate. Nevertheless, these estimates seem very high and, if accurate, suggest a very important role for diamonds in fuelling the conflict. The fact that there is no evidence that supplies matching these levels of profits reached the RUF fighters on the ground, suggest that the estimates were overstated.
104. Two possible explanations can be offered for the discrepancy between alleged RUF receipts in diamond sales and the supplies to the fighters. The first is that corruption within the ranks of the RUF was high and individual commanders were keeping some of the profits. Another possible explanation is that Liberian officials and other business partners in Liberia, who received the diamonds from RUF commanders, retained a high level of the profits for themselves.
105. On several occasions, senior commanders in various factions attempted to keep diamonds for themselves. Former Head of State Johnny Paul Koroma, after the removal of the AFRC from power, tried to keep some diamonds to pay for his escape from the country. He was placed under house arrest by senior RUF officers (including Issa Sesay and Mike Lamin) until he returned the diamonds. He handed over diamonds reportedly worth US$15,000.114
106. On another occasion, Issa Sesay was given 14 diamonds by Sam Bockarie to take to Monrovia to a business associate of President Taylor's. The objective was to exchange the diamonds for military equipment. Issa Sesay went to Monrovia with the diamonds, but claimed to have "lost" them in a tea shop.115 He later explained to the RUF command structure what had happened, and a fight with Sam Bockarie and Mike Lamin ensued.116 Issa Sesay has been accused of dealing diamonds for his own benefit and covering up the deals:
"Issa was in charge as the overall commander; if he had a diamond of about 10 to fifteen carats, he would take it to somebody who he knows has money, and he would say: 'Go and sell that diamond; go to such and such person.' That person would buy the diamond and later on Issa would come around with his vehicle and his boys and say: 'What about that diamond you bought? Bring it, I want it.' The person would then be forced to produce that diamond and pay for it again."117
107. The People's Army of Sierra Leone, a combination of the RUF and AFRC forces, had a mining unit complete with Mining Commanders. The unit suffered from internal power struggles with commanders stealing diamonds from one another. One investigation obtained by the TRC, conducted by the People's Army Joint Security Board, followed the "loss" of 82 pieces of diamonds. The investigation concluded that "the administrative set-up within the Mining Unit was very poor" and recommended the daily weighing of diamonds in the presence of all the mining commanders, the issuance of receipts signed by witnesses and an increase in security within the Mining Unit.118
108. The TRC received testimony about the involvement in diamond dealing of high-ranking government and military officers in Liberia, including former President Charles Taylor. One former RUF combatant claimed to have witnessed an exchange of diamonds and weapons between Foday Sankoh and Charles Taylor in 1994 at the Kangari Hills base.119 Although his account was uncorroborated, this combatant's testimony does accord with widely-held suspicions in the international community.
109. In the aftermath of the overthrow of the AFRC/RUF regime by ECOMOG in February 1998 and the subsequent withdrawal of the RUF to its stronghold of Kailahun District, diamond transactions were allegedly conducted with the "leader of Liberia" and "the brother in Burkina" in exchange for arms and ammunitions. According to a conversational excerpt attributed to Mike Lamin:
"Although he [Sam Bockarie] had already made some contacts with them, he needed some of the gem stones to give to the leader in Monrovia to facilitate these contacts. Before this, of course, we were aware that some transactions were going on as on several occasions he made visits to Monrovia through the help of one Benjamin Legon, a Liberian security personnel; in collaboration with the Adjutant General. The Adjutant General knows about some diamonds given to Benjamin Legon for onward handing over to the Leader in Liberia."120
110. There is some evidence of diamonds for weapons and supplies deals between the RUF and some Guinean individuals and military officers121. There is however no proof of the involvement of the government or any high-ranking military personnel. It is alleged, in one instance, that the RUF bought a BM-21 multiple rocket launcher from the Guinean Armed Forces just after the invasion of Freetown in January 1999.122
111. Allegations of corruption were made against Foday Sankoh when he became Chairman of the Commission for the Management of Strategic Mineral Resources, following the signing of the Lomé Peace Agreement in 1999. These allegations concern deals apparently made with the Integrated Group of Companies and BECA Company, the latter having signed a contract for exploitation of diamond and gold resources directly with the RUFP and not with the Government of Sierra Leone.123
The place of diamonds in the overall strategy of the RUF
112. Some of the RUF's weaponry was acquired through purchases made abroad, paid with diamonds and other sources of revenue. However, this does not suggest that diamonds-for-arms exchanges was the only way, or even the primary way, in which the RUF acquired weapons; nor does it mean that diamonds were the only commodities used in such exchanges.
113. The Commission has received several testimonies from civilians forced to produce marketable agricultural produce for the RUF. All these events were reported from Kailahun District, which borders Liberia. In July 1998, the RUF came to an understanding with the authorities of Lofa County in Liberia for cross-border trade allowing the RUF to transport produce for sale in Liberia.124
114. Villagers were forced to harvest cocoa and coffee and hand those products over to RUF commanders. Abu Yaku Gaima was the Paramount Chief for Dia chiefdom, Kailahun District, in 1993, when the RUF invaded the chiefdom:
"Peter Vandy and Mohamed Ukulay (alias Mannawa), who was the RUF Brigade Commander, came to Baiwala and requested for 100 bags of cocoa to be produced in 5 days, as they urgently needed it to buy arms. He ordered me to register all civilians all over the chiefdom and that everybody should join efforts."125
115. Villagers were then forced to carry these items across the border to be exchanged for weapons, suffering many violations in the process, such as beatings and killings. The abductees would then be brought back to carry more items: "I was subjected to forced labour to carry double bags with either cocoa or coffee to Liberia and back to Sierra Leone. This was done many times"126; or left behind upon reaching the destination:
"When they entered into our hiding place and captured us, we had to carry one double bag loaded with either cocoa or coffee. But if they did not get the required amount, they would lock us in our houses until they get the quantity they wanted, after which they would open the door and ask us to carry these loads to Foyia in Liberia. When you reached your destination, they would abandon you and go for their business".127
116. From these testimonies, the focus appears to have been on the acquisition of coffee and cocoa, because they had a reasonably high market value.128
117. Several witnesses speculated that the RUF acquired weapons mainly through the seizure of SLA equipment after taking over SLA bases. These testimonies are supported by evidence of the types of weapons and logistics that were used by the RUF: mainly SLA standard issue firearms rather than sophisticated weaponry imported from abroad. RUF weapons included small arms rather than mounted heavy artillery pieces. RUF vehicles were typically stolen vehicles rather than newly purchased trucks.
Other minerals and natural resources
118. On 19 January 1995 the RUF attacked two important mines in Moyamba and Bonthe Districts. One was a bauxite mine owned by SIEROMCO, a subsidiary of Swiss Aluminium Company of Zurich. The second mine was owned by Sierra Rutile Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of Nord Resources of the United States. Sierra Rutile was then the largest producer of rutile, or titanium ore, in the world with a 25% share of the global market.129 SRL employed 2,000 people and produced 150,000 tons of rutile per year.130 The company was the largest private employer in Sierra Leone before the attack. The two mines accounted for 63% of export earnings in 1994 (with 48.7% for SRL and 14.5% for SIEROMCO), which represented US$13 million of revenues for the government.131 The impact on the economy of these attacks was therefore disastrous.
119. Most of the employees of SIEROMCO and Sierra Rutile were evacuated, but the RUF took several foreigners hostage. The attack at Rutile was led by Mohammed Tarawallie, who was the RUF Battle Group Commander at the time. He was acting under the instructions of Foday Sankoh and is said to have communicated with him by telephone from the Sierra Rutile office.132
120. One civilian witness told the Commission that many soldiers under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Tom Nyuma, Provincial Secretary of State under the NPRC, were brought in as reinforcements the day before the attack at Mokanji and Rutile in two helicopters. According to this account, the directors of Sierra Rutile Limited wanted to evacuate the employees, but were assured by Tom Nyuma that the area was secure and the advance of the RUF had been countered:
"Tom Nyuma assured them of security since the soldiers were fully deployed; this same confidence he gave to the civilians. [The next day] we heard the information that the RUF had reached Kaibama. The township was full of panic as everyone wanted to leave but the soldiers deployed gave us confidence that nothing would happen."133
121. When Mokanji was attacked, the mother of this witness, Ibrahim Jusu, was shot dead by the RUF, along with other civilians. The employees of SIEROMCO were kidnapped. Witnesses before the Commission, including Ibrahim Jusu, accused Tom Nyuma in strong terms of collusion with the RUF.134
122. A number of reasons have been advanced to the Commission for the attacks at Sierra Rutile and SIEROMCO. One reason was that the attacks were aimed procuring equipment and stealing cash from the Sierra Rutile office, allegedly amounting to "thousands of dollars".135 Another objective was to cut off the government's revenue by disrupting production activities at the companies. A further reason was that the attacks were part of the RUF's terror tactics in order to create a general climate of insecurity among the population.
123. Two victims of the attacks claimed that the attacks were carried out by a combination of RUF and SLA fighters, acting together in the looting of civilian properties and the burning of houses:
"The RUF rebels who were controlling the Sierra Rutile Company used the route from Sierra Rutile through our village, Moselolo. They opened fire on us and all of us abandoned the village. They set fire to 27 houses and some people were captured, all of our belongings were looted and some burnt down. The RUF rebels and SLA combined themselves to attack us."136
124. The attacks and the subsequent hostage taking were certainly part of a strategy to gain international notice. The RUF simultaneously demanded the cessation of British military help to the NPRC regime.137 The hostage taking was widely reported in the Western press, as European nationals were among the abductees. The negotiations for the release of the hostages also resulted in the Sierra Leonean conflict receiving international attention some four years after it had started. The hostage taking sent a message to international aid workers that the country was not safe and that they should pull out.
125. The attacks on the two companies resulted in the disruption of community life in the areas close to the mines. The Commission has received testimony from villagers of Moyamba and Bonthe Districts describing the violations committed against them by the RUF as including looting of property, abduction, including of young children138, summary executions139 and the burning of houses140. These violations resulted in extensive displacement of civilians, as they fled to neighbouring villages and to the bush, trying to escape the attacks.141 Young girls were abducted and turned into "bush wives":
"We were captured on Wednesday 25 May 1995 and taken to Kpetema where we stayed for about a month. An RUF rebel who apprehended me forcefully took me for his wife. I was 15 years of age by then."142
126. A female witness was captured by the RUF with her two sisters on January 19th 1995 at Rutile:
"One night, Edward Kaitibi (my RUF abductor) asked me to have sex with him but at that time I had no knowledge of sex. He forced me that night in the bush after which I saw blood all over me. It went on for about 30 minutes [...] I ended up with pregnancy."143
127. The towns of Rutile and Mokanji were specifically targeted, being closer to the mines. The Commission collected testimony regarding the looting and burning of the villages of Mata Gelema144, Moselolo145, Victoria146, Nyandehun147 and Mokeleh148 during the months following the attacks at the mines. Civilians were displaced from these villages, sometimes for several months149. The RUF conducted sporadic attacks, making it difficult for the population to return to the villages.
128. The attack at the Sierra Rutile plant itself was described by an employee as "tense, fearful and bloody"150. The same employee witnessed the killing of many people, including his supervisor. After the attacks, several Rutile abductees were forced to become members of the RUF. The first contacts to secure their release were made with the help of the ICRC and the head office of SIEROMCO in Freetown. Fred Marrafono, a British citizen, was hired as a consultant by SIEROMCO to negotiate with the RUF.151 The contacts were made by telephone with RUF officers and the hostages were finally released.
129. As a result of the worsening security situation and the fear of losing control over the Moyamba area, the NPRC regime called in the Ghurkha Security Services. The arrival of the Ghurkhas opened the way for the involvement of private security firms in the conflict as mercenary forces for the government. Executive Outcomes and Sandline International soon followed the Ghurkhas. From that point on, various governments were to rely on the services of private security companies to provide security in mining areas, fight the RUF and provide logistical support to the Army and the Civil Defence Forces.152
130. SIEROMCO resumed its activities after the crisis, but output declined drastically and production was finally ceased altogether. More recently Sierra Rutile Limited has begun initial steps towards resuming production. The plan for the renewal of operations was presented to the public at Mokanji in August 2003 and activities were about to resume at the time of writing in 2004. The project is expected to create 900 jobs at its inception, 90% of which will be for Sierra Leonean nationals.153
131. One witness testified to the Commission about combat training he received in 1997 from a security company called Cape International. Cape International is owned by Fred Marrafono, the British citizen who conducted the negotiations for the release of the hostages taken by the RUF at Rutile in 1995. The witness was trained, along with 33 others, in providing security for a gold mining company named Golden Prospect Mining Company.154 The original aim of the training was to provide security for the company's assets and personnel from attacks. The witness and his fellow trainees subsequently fought with the Tamaboros, the Northern Region-based group that was part of the Civil Defence Forces.
Mineral resources and civil militias
132. By the end of 1995, a growing consensus existed among chiefs particularly in the South and East that the army could no longer be trusted to provide effective defence for the civilian population. In their place, most chiefdoms were seeking to install a form of civil or community defence force, consisting of "sons of the soil", bolstered by the chiefdom police. As part of their undertaking to support and supply such a force, the chiefs in areas endowed with natural resources would put forward "offerings" of those resources. The Commission has heard evidence of diamonds being given directly to the CDF mined from the diamondiferous banks of the Sewa River, Bo District; from the lucrative alluvial diamond mines around Tongo Field, Kenema District; and from the smaller mining fields North of Zimmi, Pujehun District.155 In addition, chiefdoms that possessed mineral resources other than diamonds contributed towards the war effort. Gold, for example, was donated by chiefs in the Mongheri township in Valunia Chiefdom, Bo District.
133. In order to institute an efficient system of supply of items such as diamonds and gold, chiefs had to assemble a labour force from among their own people. In this regard, while the majority of those engaged in mining or auxiliary tasks appear to have worked on a voluntary basis, the Commission received testimony from aggrieved persons who claimed that they were forced into labour or otherwise disadvantaged by their participation. One such claim suggested that in the chiefdom they were "regimented" into performing different types of labour and heavily punished if they refused the "orders" of their chiefs.
134. It is not clear what happened to the valuable minerals in question once the local chiefs collected them. The intended purpose was to convert them into their equivalent value in food, logistics such as vehicles or fuel, or arms and ammunition for the local civil militia (mostly Kamajors). However, while the testimonies from those who mined seem to indicate a relatively high value of minerals extracted, testimony from the "foot soldiers" of the CDF seem to suggest a paucity of provisions in every respect.
135. This disparity suggests that there was a high degree of embezzlement among those in control of such resources in the CDF.156 A Commission of Inquiry into allegations of corruption in the CDF in Bo District resulted in the resignation of the CDF Regional Co-ordinator for the South, Alhaji Daramy-Rogers in 1999. When questioned on this issue, Alhaji Daramy-Rogers testified that claims of embezzlement against him were fabricated.157 In his submission to the Commission, a coordinator of a CDF support group based in the United States recalled a telephone conversation in which Chief Hinga Norman requested the President to permit the take over of the diamond mines at Zimmi for exploitation by the CDF in order to boost the war effort. The President turned down the request because this would amount to the "mortgaging the nation's resources", to which Chief Norman replied "that they were already mortgaged."158
136. Despite the President's demurrer, the CDF engaged in substantial mining of diamonds and other minerals in areas under its control. The Commission was unable to establish definitively how the mined resources were taken out of the country, or who the buyers were. The Commission has however heard testimony that Chief Norman made trips to Monrovia to procure arms and ammunition for the CDF. Monrovia had become the regional hub for international diamond dealing. The dealers there are known to have purchased diamonds from all available sources, which can safely be said to have included the RUF, AFRC, CDF, NPFL and a variety of private operators.
Phase III of the Conflict: 1997 - 2002
137. The coup of 25 May 1997 marked a veritable turning point in the conflict. The AFRC junta invited the RUF to join it in a governing coalition. At this time the RUF and AFRC retained combined control over most of the diamond mining areas. From 1997 the RUF engaged in extensive mining and smuggling. This expansion of activity resulted in a significant increase in both the quantity and the quality of weapons and ammunition distributed to RUF fighters on the ground.159
138. Between 1998 and 2002, RUF revenues from diamonds came in three main ways: organised mining, continued seizure from civilians in diamondiferous areas and "washing" of already mined gravel by abducted civilians.160 Mining ceased when the RUF and AFRC retreated into the bush in the face of the ECOMOG intervention of February 1998. However, the RUF regrouped and was able to launch its largest ever assault on Kono District in December 1998. Prior to December 1998, the RUF had not had sufficient control over the most lucrative areas of Kono to organise large-scale mining operations. Upon capturing Koidu Town and its environs, though, the RUF and some elements of the AFRC were able to carry out large-scale mining across Kono District, as well as in parts of Kenema District, such as Tongo Field. Mining activity continued from late 1998 to 2002 and was especially concentrated from 2000 up to the 2002 elections. The best areas for mining were pointed out to the combatants by abducted civilians.161 The RUF relied on abducted miners for its mining operations, as most RUF commanders had no mining expertise.162
139. Combatants even resorted to mysticism in their search for diamonds. The Commission received a report of a human sacrifice organised by AFRC soldiers in Tongo Field in July 1997. The sacrifice was aimed at providing mystical support to the search for diamonds:
"The soldiers arranged to perform a ceremony so that they can get more diamonds, but this ceremony must be performed on a human being. My husband was seriously tortured with a stick by the AFRC soldiers until he became hopeless. They finally beat him until he died."163
140. Towards the end of the war, some citizens of the diamond-producing areas resisted the mining of diamonds in their communities. There was a rebellion by the Kono people in the Koidu area in December 1998. The rebellion, led by the Movement of Concerned Kono Youth (MOCKY), was aimed at stopping the mining activities that were benefiting the RUF. A battle ensued between the civilians and the RUF forces with substantial casualties on both sides.164
141. When Foday Sankoh was released from detention in Nigeria in 1999, he visited Kono and ordered the commanders on the ground to expand mining operations. Mining Units were created with one Mining Commander for each area. Mining Commanders registered all miners and ordered security forces to monitor all mining and ensure that the diamonds were not stolen.165 According to one former RUF commander, any diamond found was handed over to the Mining Commander, then on to the Brigade Commander, the Battlefield Inspector and finally the Battle Group Commander, who in turn would pass it on directly to the "Leader" (Foday Sankoh).166 The Battle Group Commander at the time was Sam Bockarie. RUF personnel had to deliver the diamonds to him in Buedu on foot, using the footpath between Koidu and Buedu.167 There was one Overall Mining Commander for Kono and one for Tongo Field.168
142. The people engaged in acquiring valuable resources for the RUF, including its miners and Mining Commanders, were strictly monitored. According to the same former RUF commander:
"There was one idea in the RUF: diamonds and foreign currencies were highly, highly needed. So whenever you captured these things, you should report them - no matter what quantities there were."169
143. There were several attempts by local RUF commanders and civilian miners to retain some of the diamonds and keep the profits for their own benefit. The Commission has received evidence of several investigations carried out by the RUF and by the People's Army into private appropriations of diamonds.170 The diamonds were labelled "state property". Sometimes, there were not even formal investigations. The accused were tortured on the spot. According to another RUF commander:
"When you are caught, then if you are lucky, they will say that they should investigate you. If you are unlucky, they will conduct their own jungle investigation, which means that they will torture you until you are dead."171
144. During one investigation in January 2001, three civilians were arrested for allegedly stealing diamonds. The third accused, Fatmata Conteh, was tortured and beaten to death.172
145. There are accounts of the RUF/AFRC forces attacking civilians for the purpose of diamond extortion. A miner was attacked in Kono in 1997 by the AFRC troops who stole his mining equipment.173 Another witness claimed that he was arrested and tortured by the RUF in Tongo Field in July 2000 when he refused to hand over the diamond he found:
"During my arrest, I was seriously tortured, almost to death, for that diamond. The rebels burst my head and they made a deep cut in my fore head."174
146. The RUF destroyed many houses and buildings in Kono District to use the lands for mining.175 In addition to the physical harm inflicted on civilians, was the displacement of the civilian population. The most striking example is Kono District. It was targeted throughout the war, by the RUF and by other armed factions, and many civilians have yet to return to the district after having escaped the attacks.
147. According to one account, Kamajors were carrying out illicit mining in Dodo Chiefdom, Kenema District, in 2000.176 There are also reports of Kamajors seizing diamonds from civilians, in Normiyama, Kono District, in 1999. The latter incident resulted in the witness being beaten, shot and detained, while six diamonds were taken from him.177
ECOMOG
148. Allegations of diamond smuggling were made against the Nigerian troops of ECOMOG. According to some accounts,178 high-ranking ECOMOG officials were involved in trading diamonds. Other accounts state that individual commanders were involved but the leadership was aware and did nothing to stop them.179 The Commission has been unable to obtain sufficiently authoritative information to make decisive findings in this regard.
The Current Status of the Diamond Industry in Sierra Leone
149. The Ministry of Mineral Resources regained access to Kono District and control of the Tongo Field area in March 2002.180 Mining began immediately and this has resulted in an increase in the level of legal diamond exports since 1999, as demonstrated by the figures in Table 5, below.
Table 5: Value of diamond exports from Sierra Leone since 1999
Year
|
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
Value of diamond exports (US $)
|
1.5 million |
11 miliion |
26 million |
42 million |
Source for Table 5: Gberie, L. West Africa: Rocks in a Hard Place - The Political Economy of Diamonds and Regional Destabilisation, Partnership Africa Canada, Ottawa, May 2003.
150. The Government of Sierra Leone's target for 2003 was US$ 60 million of diamond export value. As of 19 May 2003, the GGDO reported to the Commission that it had recorded an export value of US$ 27.6 million.181
151. Although the level of smuggling seems difficult to assess, the expected level of exports from Sierra Leone has been estimated at between US$ 70 million to US$ 300 million per year.182 This estimate indicates that high levels of exports are still unaccounted for and suggests that smuggling continues on a large scale. Valuable profits remain unavailable to help rebuild the economy or to provide resources for the communities.
Kimberlite diamond mining
152. Branch Energy / Diamond Works came back to Sierra Leone in 2003 and resumed its activities. It started rebuilding its installations at the beginning of the year and began operations in November 2003. The Kono concession (Koidu Property, four square kilometres) has estimated reserves of 6.3 million carats, with a potential to generate US$ 2.5 million in monthly revenues.183 The company hopes to repay its investment during the first two years of operation and generate substantive profits over the following two years.184
153. Acquisition of diamond licences is by agreement with the chiefdom authorities and the central government. All land in the provinces is community owned. Companies and individuals cannot buy land. They can only rent it for a given period of time. The local authorities have the prerogative to decide who is issued a lease.
154. The chiefdom authorities may, for example, require that the company reinvest a part of its profits in community development, hire a percentage of its employees from the local people and conduct environmental assessments before starting operations.185 Branch Energy agreed to hire most of its labour force from the local community, and reinvest part of its profits into community projects.186 In June 2003, hundreds of youths demonstrated in Koidu to request the company to keep to this commitment. The situation was resolved by a series of meetings between community leaders and the management of the company.187
155. The government will issue a licence after negotiations have been concluded with the community. At the time of writing, Branch Energy is currently paying an annual rent of US$200,000 for its Koidu Property, an annual lease rent of US$25 per acre, an annual surface rent of US$10 per acre and a 5% royalty on diamond sales and 4% royalty on precious metal sales.188 According to the Sierra Leone Mining Code, the government has the prerogative to negotiate special mining agreements with private companies to provide incentives for foreign investment. These special agreements can include tax cuts and royalty payments.189
Alluvial diamond mining
156. The government has never succeeded in establishing complete control over the alluvial mining of diamonds. Corruption of the state apparatus and the close relationships between diamond magnates and politicians has always undermined government control. Current regulations on alluvial mining are imposed by the national government and the chiefdom authorities. Since all land in the diamond producing areas is community owned, the plots are leased. The licence fee to government is set at Le 200,000, which is around US$60. Le 120,000 is payable to the local Chief as surface rent.190 Only Sierra Leonean nationals are permitted to buy mining licences.191
157. All alluvial diamond-mining licences are renewable every year and a miner is allowed to hold up to five licences. All applicants approved by the chiefdom authorities are granted licences by the government. Concerns relate to the manner in which selections are made and whether ruling families are favoured. The unregulated nature of the mining allows for corruption and abuse. Interviewees192 have alleged that the best parcels of land are allocated to privileged people in government and their associates. The procedure for the granting of licences by the chiefdom authorities needs to be revisited.
158. According to the district office of the Ministry of Mineral Resources in Kono, one thousand licences were issued in 2003.193 Many Sierra Leoneans who do not possess the necessary capital to pay for the licence were "sponsored" by either wealthy Sierra Leoneans, Lebanese or Guinean dealers who control the mining operations through the intermediary of Sierra Leonean nationals. These supporters provide tools and food to miners, the cost of which is subsequently deducted from any diamonds that the miners sell to the supporters.194 Alternatively the supporter receives all the diamonds mined and sells them with the miner receiving a portion of the sales.195 Since all diamonds found are sold to the supporter, the supporter is able to fix prices and control market conditions unilaterally.
159. The monitoring system established by the government is composed of local offices in the diamond mining areas with Mines Monitoring Officers travelling to the chiefdoms to control illicit mining (plot owners who operate without licence) and illicit buying (dealers who do not possess licences and/or who buy from unlicensed miners). There are few Mines Monitoring Officers and their pay is low (less than US$ 100 a month). Low remuneration encourages corruption, as Mines Monitoring Officers are tempted to supplement their low incomes with bribes.196
160. The Mines Monitoring Officers lack the necessary resources, such as vehicles, to patrol the mining areas. In November 2003, alluvial diamond resources were identified in at least six of the 14 chiefdoms in the Kono District: Nimiyama, Nimikoro, Gbense, Tonkoro, Kamara and Fiama Chiefdoms. There were less than 30 Mines Monitoring Officers to cover the whole area. This area represents half of Kono District. One government official interviewed by the Commission assessed the need for about 60 officers in the district.197
161. UNAMSIL and the Ministry of Mineral Resources started a joint project in Kono District in July 2003 with the aim of improving monitoring on the ground. Military Observers conducted an aerial survey together with representatives of the Ministry to identify the areas where diamonds are mined. 485 mining sites were identified198. This data was subsequently compared with the licence registry to identify illegal sites. UNAMSIL MILOBS personnel then accompanied Mines Monitoring Officers in land patrols to visit the illegal sites and impose reprisals.199 The Ministry hopes to extend this monitoring project to other alluvial mining areas outside of Kono District.
162. A dealer licence costs US$ 3,000.200 Illicit buyers offer slightly higher prices to miners because they don't pay licence fees and taxes. The higher prices are an incentive to miners to sell to illicit buyers.201 The border areas have many bush paths that are not policed at all. UNAMSIL has recruited a border control specialist to advise the government on border policing issues. One solution proposed by the Government Mining Engineer in Kono District is to encourage the licensed dealers to buy diamonds from illegal miners. The diamonds enter the system at the dealer level and will be exported legally, under government control.202 This proposal cannot be a solution because the dealers are also reselling the diamonds locally. The government therefore does not earn any revenues at any stage of the dealing process unless the diamond is exported.
163. Mines Monitoring Officers have no authority to arrest illegal miners. They must report the cases to the police, who often lack the necessary means to act on the spot.203 The police are not always able or willing to proceed with arrests and illegal miners. The diamonds that are actually confiscated from unlicensed miners are sold at an auction. Forty percent of the selling price goes to the person who confiscated the diamond (Mines Monitoring Officer) and 60% to the government treasury.204 This clause has been given legal status by the Mines and Minerals (Amendment) Act, 2003.
164. In the Mines and Minerals Decree of 1994, the punishment for offenders of the licence system is not more than one year's imprisonment or a fine not exceeding Le 200,000.205 The Amendment Bill approved by Parliament in 2003 removes the fine provision and provides only for sentences of a minimum imprisonment of three years.206 This measure was taken by the government to further dissuade illegal exporting.
165. The Mines Monitoring Officers can also confiscate illegal miners' implements and retain them until the miners obtain licences.207 Exporters need to have licences. The prices vary according to the nationality of the applicant, as the following comparison of annual prices demonstrates:208
i. Sierra Leonean nationals: US$ 1400 + 300,000 Leones
ii. ECOWAS citizens: US$ 1900 + 500,000 Leones
iii. Other nationals: US$ 3400 + 500,000 Leones
166. Even if Sierra Leonean nationals pay a lot less than others, the export licence is still unaffordable to most of them. Accordingly, during the first half of 2003, 78.4% of the total diamonds exported were by foreigners and only 21.6% by Sierra Leoneans.209
167. It is forbidden for Ministers and Parliamentarians to hold licences. However when questioned on the issue at a Commission hearing, the Minister of Mineral Resources explained that many actually held licences through their relatives. It is not against the law for a Minister's wife or son to hold a diamond licence but it can engender a conflict of interest for the public official involved. The solution resides in the adoption of a code of conduct under which all civil and public servants will be restrained from getting involved in practices that are perceived as corrupt or that demonstrate a conflict of interest.
168. The export tax is determined by the value of the diamonds. The GGDO valuator establishes the export value of each parcel; then, an independent valuator gives his own estimate. If there is a discrepancy, the GGDO uses the higher estimate210 and a tax of 3% is levied on the parcel. The distribution of the tax revenues is as follows:211
i. 0.75% to cover GGDO costs of valuation and export processing
ii. 0.35% to the Ministry of Mineral Resources for monitoring
iii. 0.40% to the independent valuator
iv. 0.75% to the Community Development Fund
v. 0.75% to the government treasury
169. The 0.75% of the 3% tax that goes to the communities in the diamondiferous areas is released every six months, proportionally to the number of licences issued in each chiefdom.212 In Kono District, plot owners also pay Le 50,000 to the chiefdom authorities for infrastructural development projects.213 The Community Development Fund was set up in January 2001 and a total of US$ 786,481 has been returned to the communities as of June 2003.214
170. The return of a portion of the tax to the local communities is an incentive to counter smuggling. Since the communities benefit from the legal export of diamonds, they may feel motivated to stop illegal mining practices. The fact that the revenues returned are proportional to the number of licences issued offers an incentive to issue more licences, which will in turn increase production.215
171. There have been allegations from the communities that the revenues are being mismanaged.216 The government should ensure that communities feel represented in the management of the revenues and that the process is transparent. Reports should be issued on a regular basis to assess the progress of the community projects being implemented, perhaps as part of the government's decentralisation strategy, thus empowering communities.
172. Between October 2000 and the end of the war, the independent valuator was responsible for determining the origin of the diamond parcels. Those that originated from areas under RUF control, i.e. "conflict diamonds", were confiscated.217 The result was that exporters wanting to deal in conflict diamonds did not register them with the GGDO, but smuggled them out of the country outside of governmental channels. There is still confusion among miners and plot owners as to the role of the GGDO.218 In the past, the GGDO used to facilitate the sale of diamonds. The current role of GGDO is to monitor the export process and the payment of taxes. GGDO does not organise the sales of diamonds anymore. More sensitisation needs to be done with miners so that they understand the process better.
173. The Lomé Peace Agreement provides for government revenues from gold and diamonds to be allocated to social projects and post-conflict reconstruction activities. As stated in Article VII, 6:
"The proceeds from the transactions of gold and diamonds shall be public monies which shall enter a special Treasury account to be spent exclusively on the development of the people of Sierra Leone, with appropriations for public education, public health, infrastructural development, and compensation for incapacitated war victims as well as post-war rehabilitation and reconstruction. Priority spending shall go to rural areas."219
174. While provision for public education, health and infrastructural development can be made through the Community Development Fund, such provisions are presently disbursed only to diamond-mining areas. The benefits of the Fund should be extended to cover all rural areas.
The international diamond industry, "conflict diamonds" and the Kimberley Process
"Natural resources can be a source of great good or dreadful ill. The key element is not the resource itself, but how it is exploited. An orderly mining regime, operating within a transparent and predictable legislative and fiscal framework, can be a major source of prosperity for governments and people. Without it, mineral wealth will be a magnet for the greedy and corrupt to line their own pockets at the expense of the people."
Nicky Oppenheimer, former CEO of De Beers220
175. Diamonds are sold almost exclusively in two places in the world: the Central Selling Organisation (CSO) in London and the Diamond High Council (HRD) in Antwerp. About 80% of all rough diamonds mined in the world and 50% of all polished diamonds transit through Antwerp.221
176. Anglo American, the company that bought De Beers in 2001, controls roughly 65% of the worldwide diamond trade. De Beers has submitted to the Commission that it has not purchased diamonds from Sierra Leone since 1985.222 Nonetheless De Beers maintained buying offices in Monrovia, Liberia and Conakry, Guinea.
177. The term conflict diamonds refers to "diamonds that originate in areas controlled by forces fighting the legitimate and internationally recognised governments of the relevant country".223 In order to accurately describe the Sierra Leonean context, this definition must be refined to include areas where the RUF and AFRC were present on the ground, but not necessarily in full control of. For the Commission's purposes conflict diamonds include diamonds that were seized, stolen or otherwise acquired by the fighting forces and not only diamonds that were mined under RUF/AFRC control.
178. It is generally estimated that between 5% and 20%224 of the international diamond trade is from illicit diamonds (that is diamonds that are exported outside of state control). The secrecy of the international diamond industry, established for security reasons, is partly responsible for making the smuggling of diamonds easy, by rendering the control and monitoring of transactions very difficult.
179. In response to the problem of conflict diamonds and the smuggling of diamonds in general, South Africa initiated the Kimberley Process Diamond Certification Scheme in 2000. Coming into effect in early 2003, this process includes 70 countries, the High Diamond Council and international NGOs. It aims at developing a system of diamond export monitoring. Each member state is responsible for establishing its own export certification scheme. All diamonds exported must be accompanied by a certificate of origin, stating the country where the diamonds were mined. Diamonds exported without a certificate of origin are rejected by the international diamond industry. The purpose is to avoid the sale of diamonds that have escaped the control of the state where they were mined, and to tackle smuggling and the trade in conflict diamonds.
180. On July 5, 2000, the UN Security Council by Resolution 1306 imposed a ban on the import of Sierra Leonean diamonds. In response, the government of Sierra Leone created a certification regime, which in turn led to the granting of a Security Council exemption in October 2000. The exemption requires all diamond exports to be accompanied by a certificate of origin.225 Technical assistance was provided by the governments of the United States, United Kingdom and Belgium, and by the Diamond High Council, to assist in the design of the certification system. In March 2003, all sanctions against Sierra Leone were finally lifted.
181. Sierra Leonean diamonds are exported mainly to Belgium, the US, Israel and the UK, with the vast majority going to Belgium (over 95% for the years 2000 to 2003)226. This renders the co-operation between the governments of Sierra Leone and Belgium paramount in establishing transparent trade practices. The two governments established a customs procedure to monitor the trade that includes an electronic data transmission system based in Freetown to secure the transmission of the information to the Department of Economic Affairs in Belgium prior to the shipment of the parcels.227 This information includes digital photos of the diamonds.228
182. The Diamond High Council considers falsification of the Sierra Leonean certification form impossible. Therefore, the Sierra Leone export figures and the Belgian import figures for Sierra Leonean diamonds must balance.229 The problem with this system is that as long as the Diamond High Council does not implement similar arrangements with other exporting countries in West Africa, diamonds smuggled out of Sierra Leone are still likely to be imported into Antwerp.
183. There are currently three major problems with the Kimberley Process. Countries that have no diamond resources have been accepted into the process. This means that smuggled diamonds finding their way to these countries can be "legalised" through certification. For example, the Republic of Congo-Brazzaville has been accepted even though it does not have any diamond resources. The same is true for Burkina Faso, which has been accused of diamond smuggling and arms trafficking in the past.
184. There is no system independently to monitor the implementation of the certification process by the respective countries. Therefore if governments are not rigorous in delivering their certificates, smuggling is liable to continue. The certification applies only to the import / export sector. There is no regulation at the mining and dealing levels, leaving room for corruption and smuggling.230
185. It was decided at a meeting of the Kimberley Process held in South Africa during October 2003 to establish a voluntary monitoring process. According to this agreement, diamond-producing countries can request independent monitoring visits. This provision is aimed at improving the credibility of the monitoring systems by allowing independent experts to evaluate them. So far, the Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Lebanon and Mauritius have requested such visits. While increased monitoring is a step in the right direction, these independent monitoring visits should become compulsory for countries that are part of the process. There is also a provision for review missions for countries that demonstrate "significant indications of non-compliance".231
186. It has been suggested that the industry should get rid of the "middle-men", a term referring to the diamond dealers. As was discussed earlier in the chapter, the "middle-men" can buy diamonds from anyone and resell them within the country. Their sale is not regulated. In order to reduce room for corruption, the miners should be encouraged to sell directly to the exporters, thereby removing a layer over which state authorities have little or no control.232
187. The process of issuing certificates of origin is managed in Sierra Leone by the GGDO. Four signatures are required for a certificate to be legal, including the GGDO expert, to certify the origin of the parcel; the Minister of Mineral Resources, to ensure that the exporter is licensed; the Governor of the Central Bank, to attest to the correct registration of foreign exchange; and the customs official to certify that export taxes have been levied.233 The actual form is in two parts: one stays in Sierra Leone; the other is sent back to GGDO by the authorities of the importing country.234 This is done in order to keep track of the parcels once they leave the country and to ensure that importers do not buy illicit diamonds. The procedure is completed by a security slip that is sealed and fixed on the box containing the diamonds and may only be broken by the importing authority.235 It seems that the process of issuing certificates of origin is well managed. However there is a long way to go before smuggling is brought to a halt at the mining and dealing levels.
Labour conditions, diamond-related abuses and impact of mining
188. The defining feature of labour relations in the mining of diamonds is the "tributor" system. Wealthy businessmen and sponsors provide equipment and cash to the "san san" boys, illicit diggers who spread out over the fields engaging in alluvial mining using only shovels and sieves to separate the gravel. Conditions started deteriorating from the diamond rush of the 1950s. Workers were fed by their sponsors and worked without payment. Most of the profits went to the supporters.
189. The RUF used forced labour throughout the war for all kinds of work, including mining in the diamond pits. The workers were forcibly recruited in villages. The RUF fed them, but they did not receive any salary.236 They suffered mistreatment and torture, and were forced to mine "under gun point", with armed men monitoring the washing of the gravel237. The following account describes abuses carried out near Tombudu, Kono District in 1997:
"The RUF organised their diamond mining operations and the manpower was provided by us [civilian abductees]. When they obtained 100 pieces of diamonds, then there was no trouble for us. But when they obtained only 10 or 20, we were accused of being witches and we were tied, beaten and stripped naked and put in prison for several days."238
190. The same witness complained about mistreatment to Brigadier Issa Sesay, but the abuses increased after the complaint. Another witness described similar violations near Tombudu and in Sandoh, Kono District, in 1998. The witness was forced to spend 4 days cleaning the pump in the water, without rest. The group of abductees was forced to mine day and night, without rest and with very little feeding, for 2 weeks. They were released and replaced by a new group of abductees.239 This was a system of slavery used by the RUF. Instead of letting the workers rest, they used them to the point of exhaustion and replaced them, to improve productivity.
191. The Commission received testimonies on the use of forced labour in the mines by the RUF up to 2001. There are also accounts of the Kamajors using forced labour to mine diamonds from 1997 onwards. A villager from Limba, in Bo District, testified that a group of Kamajors forcibly organised villagers to mine in 1997. A percentage of the diamonds found was seized by the Kamajors. The witness was punished because he was doing agricultural work instead of mining:
"I was tied up, despite several pleas, for several hours. This made me partially paralysed. For me to be freed I had to surrender the few bushels of the rice I had harvested."240
192. According to another statement, one mine supporter was stopped by a group of Kamajors in Kono District in 1999 and asked to hand over the diamonds he had in his possession. When he refused, he was arrested and shot. The Kamajors stole his diamonds and money.241
193. In order to assess present labour conditions in the mining areas, the Commission made a trip to Kono District and interviewed several miners, plot owners and government officials. The conditions observed were very poor. The government regulations stipulate that the miners should work eight hours a day, six days a week. Any extra hour worked should be paid overtime.242 In reality, the miners usually work seven days a week, 12 hours a day.243 They do not earn a salary. Plot owners use the "two pile system" that was established by the NPRC regime: all the gravel shovelled in a day is divided into two piles, one for the plot owner, and the other for the miners.244 The diamonds found in the plot owner's pile are for the plot owner, while the diamonds found in the miners' pile become the property of the miners. Another variant of this system is the "one man, one bucket". If a miner finds a diamond in his "one bucket", he can sell it and therefore receive payment for his work. If he finds no diamonds, the miner would have worked for free.
194. Among the problems identified by miners and plot owners are the miners' lack of knowledge of diamond valuation and the price variations. They recommended training for miners to assist them able to assess the value of the diamonds.245 USAID, the US development agency, is currently implementing a training programme for miners and local communities. The training pertains to the valuation of diamonds. USAID is also implementing a credit programme to enable local miners afford the cost of the licence and the mining equipment.246 This measure is aimed at reducing the dependence of small-scale miners on supporters.
195. The Ministry of Mineral Resources is supposed to monitor the safety of the miners in the pits.247 The Mines Monitoring Officers have the power to withdraw a licence because of poor safety conditions in a pit. In practice, the Commission has found no evidence of such monitoring. Miners work under difficult and even dangerous conditions, as landslides are common, especially during the rainy season. Safety is left to the plot owners.248
196. There is a system in place at the Ministry for complaints on labour conditions. In practice though, very few miners complain. More sensitisation needs to be carried out to inform miners about the system and about their rights as workers.
197. Alluvial diamond mining has several social and environmental consequences. The use and destruction of the land renders it unsuitable for agriculture. Even if the pits were refilled, the top soil is removed in the process of digging and therefore lost.249 This has a huge economic impact as it contributes to food shortages by disrupting agricultural production. The archaic nature of production also creates problems of deforestation, stagnant water (providing breeding ground for mosquitoes and other health hazards). These create tensions between mining and farming communities250. Diamond mining has created new communities that rely solely on the mines for their subsistence. It has also led to the loss of manpower in agricultural communities disrupting community life and leading to food shortages in the communities.
Women
198. Women are usually not miners. Their role is limited to providing food to the miners at the pits. But they are also plot owners and therefore are supporting miners.251 One fifth of the total licences issued by the Ministry of Mineral Resources in Kono in 2003 went to women.252 There appears to be no discrimination at the level of the Ministry. On the other hand, since the approval for the granting of licences comes first from the chiefdom authorities, discrimination is present at that level. If a family requests a licence, it would generally be granted to a male member of the family.
Child miners
199. Child abductees were forced to mine by the RUF throughout the conflict, as well as latterly by the AFRC and CDF. Most of the children were over 14 years old, since younger children were physically weaker and so less productive.253
200. Many children still work in the alluvial diamond mines. They are employed as miners, but also as food providers and cleaners.254 The international NGO, World Vision, conducted a survey in Kono District in August 2002 with 497 child miners, 454 parents or care givers and 495 mine supporters.255 The survey explored the reasons and the nature of the involvement of children in mining activities. The survey was limited to the Kono District. The children interviewed were mainly boys (90%) and the vast majority of them (97%) expressed their desire for alternative employment to mining.256
201. The reasons indicated by the children for their involvement in mining activities were to receive money payment (75%) and the absence of an alternative employment (15%).257 Similarly, 66% of the children interviewed declared that they would continue mining until they find something else to do. These children are subjected to hard labour conditions and long working hours. They are usually not attending school or any other form of alternative training.
202. Many children are sent to the mines by their parents or care givers in order to bring incomes to the household. When asked how they felt about their children's involvement in mining activities, 50% of the parents and care givers replied that they "liked it" and 17% declared that they "did not care"258. 80% of the mine supporters interviewed were relatives or parents of the children they employed.259 There is a clear need for a sensitisation campaign to inform families, mine supporters and communities about the consequences of child mining, such as the loss of educational opportunities and the physical damage done to young children's bodies. While organisations such as the Child Protection Agencies' Network have undertaken some sensitisation projects, there is a need for a consolidated approach by all stakeholders.
203. Many child miners in Kono are former child combatants and 18% of the mine supporters interviewed were former commanders employing their former child combatants.260 This continuity means that the patterns of abuse against children during the conflict are still in place. Many child ex-combatants are still displaced from their families and thus have to rely on their former commanders to provide their subsistence.
204. As part of the general strategy to monitor diamond-mining activities, the government introduced a new form (Form 19) that mining licence holders have to fill to declare the age of the miners they employ. The licence holder has to declare that he or she is not employing miners under the age of 18. While this is a valuable step forward in addressing the issue of child mining, the Commission believes that offenders should have their licences revoked.
205. The issue of remuneration of child miners presents the same problems as with adult miners. The mine supporters usually feed the children they employ and buy diamonds from them, but many children do not receive a salary.
206. Any strategy to combat child mining that does not address the root causes of why children go to the mines in the first place will not tackle the problem. Alternative opportunities have to be created for children, their families and their communities, such as education, skills training programmes and alternative employment.
Conclusion
207. The exploitation of minerals and in particular diamonds did not cause the conflict but rather fuelled it. Diamonds were used by most of the armed factions to finance their war efforts. The sale of diamonds has contributed in large measure to the procurement and proliferation of small arms within the sub-region.
208. Successive post-colonial governments in Sierra Leone have mismanaged the diamond industry and placed its effective control in the hands of non-Sierra Leoneans in a way that has not benefited the majority of the people. The state never had effective control of the diamond industry prior to or during the conflict period.
209. The APC government abdicated its responsibility in ensuring effective control of the diamond industry. Other actors emerged who siphoned off the resources from the diamond industry to other countries and in the process denied the people of Sierra Leone the benefits of the country's mineral wealth. The political elite of Sierra Leone and of the neighbouring countries were complicit this process.
210. Traditions of expropriation for personal gain have not been stamped out. While commendable efforts have been made to strengthen the regulatory regime, substantial weaknesses still exist. The Government of Sierra Leone is yet to win the war on diamond smuggling.
Endnotes
1 Sierra Leone has ranked in last place out of more than 170 countries on the UNDP Human Development Index for the last three successive years from 2002 to 2004.
2 More detail on the Commission's three phases, including a justification for the chosen parameters, can be found in the chapter on the Military and Political History of the Conflict in Volume Three A of this report.
3 See Callaghy, Thomas; The State-Society Struggle: Zaire in Comparative Perspective, New York, Columbia University Press, at page 191.
4 See Ake, Claude; "Address to the Inaugural Meeting of the Nigerian Political Science Association", in West Africa magazine, 25 May 1981, at pages 162-163. The article is cited in Kandeh, J.; Political Economy of Democratisation, unpublished manuscript (hereinafter "Kandeh, Political Economy of Democratisation"); at page 2.
5 See Kandeh, Political Economy of Democratisation, at page 3.
6 See Kandeh, Political Economy of Democratisation, at page 3.
7 A former Minister and Member of Parliament who was imprisoned in 2003 for dealing in diamonds was recently released by the Appeal Court on technical grounds. For further details on such cases, see the public testimony of the Minister of Mineral Resources before the Commission in July 2003.
8 See Gwynne-Jones D.R.G., Mitchell, P.K., Harvey, M. E. and Swindell, K.; A New Geography of Sierra Leone, Essex, Longman, 1978 (hereinafter "Gwynne-Jones, et al., A New Geography of Sierra Leone"); at pages 109.
9 See Zack-Williams, A. B.; Tributors, Supporters and Merchant Capital: Mining and Underdevelopment in Sierra Leone, Avebury, 1995 (hereinafter "Zack-Williams, Tributors, Supporters and Merchant Capital"); at page 50.
10 See Smilie, I., Gberie, L. and Hazleton, R.; The Heart of the Matter, Partnership Africa Canada report, Ottawa, January 2000 (hereinafter "Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter"); at page 4.
11 See Pratt, D. (MP for Nepean-Carleton, Canada), Special Envoy to Sierra Leone; Sierra Leone: the forgotten crisis, Report to the Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Honourable Lloyd Axworthy MP, 23 April 1999 (hereinafter "Pratt, Sierra Leone: the forgotten crisis").
12 The Sierra Leone economy had been based prior to that time on agro-based export crops. See Zack-Williams, Tributors, Supporters and Merchant Capital, at page 56.
13 See Zack-Williams, Tributors, Supporters and Merchant Capital, at page 56.
14 See Reno, W.; Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, Cambridge University Press, 1995 (hereinafter "Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone"); at page 57.
15 See Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, at page 58.
16 See Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, at page 59.
17 See Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, at page 41.
18 See Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, at page 74.
19 See Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, at pages 61-62.
20 See Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, at page 42.
21 See Martinez, I.; Sierra Leone's Conflict Diamonds, in "Africa at the Crossroads: Current Themes in African Law", International and Comparative Law Review, 2001 - 2002 (hereinafter "Martinez, Sierra Leone's Conflict Diamonds").
22 See Zack-Williams, Tributors, Supporters and Merchant Capital, at page 120.
23 See Martinez, Sierra Leone's Conflict Diamonds.
24 See Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, at page 61.
25 See Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, at page 63, based upon an interview with a diamond merchant conducted in Kono District in 1990.
26 This source is cited in Zack-Williams, A. B.; Mining Resources and Post-War Reconstruction in Sierra Leone, unpublished manuscript (hereinafter "Zack-Williams, Mining Resources and Post-War Reconstruction").
27 See Zack-Williams, Mining Resources and Post-War Reconstruction, at page 8.
28 This source is cited in Zack-Williams, A. B.; Mining Resources and Post-War Reconstruction in Sierra Leone, unpublished manuscript (hereinafter "Zack-Williams, Mining Resources and Post-War Reconstruction").
29 See Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, at page 44.
30 See Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, at page 44.
31 See Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, at page 44.
32 See Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, at page 6.
33 See Zack-Williams, A. B.; "Sierra Leone: Crisis and Despair", in Review of African Political Economy, No. 49, 1990 (hereinafter "Zack-Williams, Sierra Leone: Crisis and Despair"), cited in Zack-Williams, Mining Resources and Post-War Reconstruction, at page 9.
34 See Zack-Williams, Sierra Leone: Crisis and Despair.
35 See Pratt, Sierra Leone: the forgotten crisis.
36 See Martinez, Sierra Leone's Conflict Diamonds.
37 Smilie, I.; Motherhood, Apple Pie and False Teeth: Corporate Social Responsibility in the Diamond Industry, Partnership Africa Canada, Ottawa, June 2003 (hereinafter "Smilie, Motherhood, Apple Pie and False Teeth"); at page 10. See also Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, at page 106.
38 See Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, at page 106.
39 See Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, at page 110.
40 See Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, at page 110.
41 For example, President Stevens waived the diamond license fee for Chiefs in 1981.
42 See Government Gold and Diamond Office (GGDO), Submission to TRC Thematic and Special Hearings on Mineral Resources, July 2003, at page 1.
43 See Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, at page 46.
44 See Martinez, Sierra Leone's Conflict Diamonds.
45 See Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, at page 47.
46 See USAID; Sierra Leone Conflict Diamonds - Progress Report on Diamond Policy and Development Program, New York, 30 March 2001 (hereinafter "USAID, Sierra Leone Progress Report, 2001"); at page 1.
47 See Report of the United Nations Panel of Experts on Sierra Leone, New York, December 2000 (hereinafter "UN Panel of Experts report, 2000), at page 21.
48 Diamond High Council (HRD), Witness statement of the HRD at the hearing on Sierra Leone convened by the UN Sanctions Committee, New York, 31 July and 1 August 2000 (hereinafter "Diamond High Council, Witness statement to UN Sanctions Committee"); at page 3.
49 See Gwynne-Jones, et al., A New Geography of Sierra Leone, at page 113.
50 See Gberie, L.; West Africa: Rocks in a Hard Place - The Political Economy of Diamonds and Regional Destabilisation, Partnership Africa Canada, Ottawa, May 2003 (hereinafter "Gberie, Rocks in a Hard Place").
51 Gberie, Rocks in a Hard Place.
52 See UN Panel of Experts report, 2000, at page 26.
53 See UN Panel of Experts report, 2000, at page 14.
54 See Jan Joubert, Sierra Leone Country Manager, Branch Energy Ltd.; TRC Interviews conducted in Kono and Freetown, June 2003.
55 See UN Panel of Experts report, 2000, at page 14.
56 See UN Panel of Experts report, 2000, at page 14.
57 This quote is drawn from an interview with a merchant in Kono, conducted on 8 March 1990 and cited in Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, at page 116. The merchant was referring to various areas in which Sierra Leonean nationals are disadvantaged, including the fact that they have a hard time securing credits from local banks.
58 See Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, at page 72.
59 See Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, at page 64.
60 See Report of the Census of 1963, published by the Government of Sierra Leone.
61 See Reno, Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone, at page 113.
62 See Emmanuel Kargbo, committee member of the Tankoro Youth Organisation; TRC interview conducted in Kono District; 10 June 2003.
63 See Patrick Tche, UNAMSIL Civil Affairs Officer; TRC interview conducted in Kono, 8 June 2003.
64 See Emmanuel Kargbo,; TRC interview conducted in Kono District; 10 June 2003. The TRC conducted additional interviews with several other miners on the same day.
65 TRC Confidential Interview with a state intelligence officer; Freetown; 23 December 2003.
66 TRC Closed Hearing involving a diamond dealer; TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 20 May 2003.
67 See Emmanuel Kargbo, committee member of the Tankoro Youth Organisation; TRC interview conducted in Kono District; 10 June 2003.
68 See TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
69 TRC Closed Hearing involving a diamond dealer; TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 20 May 2003.
70 See International Crisis Group (ICG); Sierra Leone: Report on the state of Security and Governance, Brussels, September 2003, available at the website: www.crisisweb.org (hereinafter "ICG, 2003 Report on Security and Governance"); at page 28. See also Honourable Alhaji M.S. Deen, Minister of Mineral Resources; TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 9 October 2003.
71 See, inter alia, Neall Ellis, former Executive Outcomes helicopter pilot, TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 27 May 2003.
72 The reference to this article in the Washington Post newspaper is contained in the following report: Global Witness, For a Few Dollars More, Washington, April 2003.
73 More detail on the role of private security firms in the conflict can be found in the chapter on External Actors, which follows directly in Volume Three B of this report.
74 Moigboi Moigande Kosia, former RUF 'G-1' officer recruited in 1991; TRC interview conducted at TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 24 May 2003.
75 Moigboi Moigande Kosia, former RUF 'G-1' officer recruited in 1991; TRC interview conducted at TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 24 May 2003.
76 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
77 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003. See also Moigboi Moigande Kosia, former RUF 'G-1' officer recruited in 1991; TRC interview conducted at TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 24 May 2003.
78 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
79 Kamoh Nyakoi, TRC statement number 5098, Baakaar (Kenema), 6 March 2003.
80 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
81 British Broadcasting Corporations (BBC), Government troops reportedly recapture rebel-occupied town, included in the BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, 15 November 1993.
82 Aruna Vandy, TRC statement number 2400, Sumbuya (Bo), 22 January 2003.
83 Brima Kemokai, TRC statement number 1850, Gisiwulo (Pujehun), 21 January 2003.
84 Mohamed Bangura, TRC statement number 4462, Konta Line (Port Loko), 31 January 2003.
85 More detail on the "Action Group" and other local dynamics in the Pujehun District can be found in the chapter on the Military and Political History of the Conflict in Volume Three A of this report.
86 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant and erstwhile mining supervisor; interview conducted in Pujehun District; September 2003.
87 For a detailed discussion and analysis of RUF military gains during this period, see the chapter on the Military and Political History of the Conflict in Volume Three A of this report.
88 See Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, at page 51.
89 See Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, at page 54.
90 See Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, in Annex 2.
91 See Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, at page 55.
92 Jan Joubert, Sierra Leone Country Manager, Branch Energy Ltd.; TRC Interviews conducted in Kono and Freetown, 2003.
93 See Harding, J.; "The Mercenary Business: Executive Outcomes", in Review of African Political Economy, 1997 (hereinafter "Harding, The Mercenary Business").
94 See Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, at page 59.
95 See UN Panel of Experts report, 2000, at page 43. See also Harding, The Mercenary Business.
96 Jan Joubert, Sierra Leone Country Manager, Branch Energy Ltd.; TRC Interview conducted in Freetown, 11 June 2003.
97 Captain (Retired) Valentine E. M. Strasser, Former Head of State and Chairman of the National Provisional Ruling Council (NPRC) from 1992 to 1996; testimony before TRC Thematic Hearings held in Freetown, 30 July 2003.
98 The company formerly known as "Branch Energy Limited" has undergone a name change since the conflict. At the time of writing it is called "Koidu Holdings Limited".
99 See Smilie, et al., The Heart of the Matter, at page 60.
100 Letter from Foday Sankoh to Mohamed Talibi of the Libyan Peoples' Revolutionary Council, Accra, dated 4 December 1996; Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Sierra Leone Police; letter included in the dossier pertaining to the 'Foday Sankoh / 8 May 2000' case; dossier provided to the TRC in July 2003.
101 TRC interviews and statements from Kailahun, Kono and Pujehun Districts; March to May 2003.
102 Letter from Foday Sankoh to Mohamed Talibi of the Libyan Peoples' Revolutionary Council, Accra, dated 26 June 1996; Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Sierra Leone Police; letter included in the dossier pertaining to the 'Foday Sankoh / 8 May 2000' case; dossier provided to the TRC in July 2003.
103 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
104 Abdul Karim Koroma, TRC statement 3709, Makali Junction (Tonkolili), 18 February 2003.
105 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
106 Brima Bobor, TRC statement number 6668, Pujehun Town (Pujehun), 31 March 2003.
107 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
108 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003. See also Alhaji Conteh (alias Black Jesus), former RUF combatant; TRC interview conducted in Pademba Road Prison, Freetown, 20 May 2003.
109 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
110 See, inter alia, Alhaji Conteh (alias Black Jesus), former RUF combatant; TRC interview conducted in Pademba Road Prison, Freetown, 20 May 2003. See also Musa Bunduka, former SLA soldier and later RUF fighter; TRC interview conducted in Palima, Tongo Field, 15 June 2003. See also Report to Foday Sankoh by RUF Commander Issa Sesay, dated 27 September 1999; Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Sierra Leone Police; report included in the dossier pertaining to the 'Foday Sankoh / 8 May 2000' case; dossier provided to the TRC in July 2003 (hereinafter "Report by Issa Sesay, 27 September 1999").
111 See UN Panel of Experts report, 2000, at page 38.
112 See Alhaji Conteh (alias Black Jesus), former RUF combatant; TRC interview conducted in Pademba Road Prison, Freetown, 20 May 2003.
113 See UN Panel of Experts report, 2000, at page 14. See also Fred Marrafono, former Executive Outcomes officer, TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 4 June 2003.
114 See UN Panel of Experts report, 2000, at page 13. See also Report by Issa Sesay, 27 September 1999.
115 See also Report by Issa Sesay, 27 September 1999.
116 "Unofficial transcript of a recorded discussion between Foday Sankoh and his RUF Cohorts upon his return from detention in Nigeria in 1999"; Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Sierra Leone Police; transcript included in the dossier pertaining to the 'Foday Sankoh / 8 May 2000' case; dossier provided to the TRC in July 2003.
117 Moigboi Moigande Kosia, former RUF 'G-1' officer recruited in 1991; TRC interview conducted at TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 24 May 2003.
118 Letter to Brigadier Peter Vandi, RUF Overall Brigade Commander, from the People's Army Joint Security Board of Investigations, entitled "Summary of findings and recommendations on the missing of 82 pieces of diamond stones on 5 April 1999 in Kono"; document provided to the TRC by a former RUF administrator, April 2003.
119 See Alhaji Conteh (alias Black Jesus), former RUF combatant; TRC interview conducted in Pademba Road Prison, Freetown, 20 May 2003.
120 Former RUF commander Mike Lamin was among the speakers attributed in the document entitled: "Unofficial transcript of a recorded discussion between Foday Sankoh and his RUF Cohorts upon his return from detention in Nigeria in 1999"; Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Sierra Leone Police; transcript included in the dossier pertaining to the 'Foday Sankoh / 8 May 2000' case; dossier provided to the TRC in July 2003.
121 See the document entitled Report on a visit to some refugee camps in Gueckedou, Forest Region, Republic of Guinea, March 1995; contained in confidential files compiled by the National Security Agency (NSA) of the NPRC Government, 1992 - 1996; presented to the Commission by the former NPRC National Security Adviser, Brigadier (Retired) Sam H. King; September 2003.
122 Neall Ellis, former Executive Outcomes helicopter pilot, TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 27 May 2003.
123 See UN Panel of Experts report, 2000, at pages 16-17.
124 See report of a meeting held on 16 July 1998 to iron out differences between the Joint Security of Lofa County (Liberia) and the RUF Movement; Criminal Investigations Department (CID) of the Sierra Leone Police; report included in the dossier pertaining to the 'Foday Sankoh / 8 May 2000' case; dossier provided to the TRC in July 2003.
125 Abu Yaku Gaima, TRC statement number 47, Baiwala (Kailahun), 16 December 2002.
126 Brima Amara Davowa, TRC statement 4311, Sandeyaru Town (Kailahun), 23 February 2003.
127 Eddy Thomas, TRC statement 35, Kailahun Town (Kailahun), 20 February 2003.
128 Further corroboration of the priority afforded to these goods came from Musa Bunduka, former SLA soldier and later RUF fighter; TRC interview conducted in Palima, Tongo Field, 15 June 2003.
129 See Sierra Leone, in The Mining Journal - African Mining, 26 January 1996, at page 19.
130 See Bleak outlook in Sierra Leone, in The Mining Journal - Mining Week, 15 September 1995, at page 190.
131 See Sierra Leone, in The Mining Journal - Mining Annual Review, July 1995, at page 152.
132 See the document entitled: "Rebels at Mokanji and Sierra Rutile", dated January 1995; contained in confidential files compiled by the National Security Agency (NSA) of the NPRC Government, 1992 - 1996; presented to the Commission by the former NPRC National Security Adviser, Brigadier (Retired) Sam H. King; September 2003.
133 Ibrahim Jusu, TRC statement number 2740, Taininihun Jakinah (Moyamba), 27 January 2003.
134 Various perspectives regarding collusion between SLA officers and the RUF can be found in the chapter on the Military and Political History of the Conflict in Volume Three A of this report.
135 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
136 Idrissa Conteh, TRC statement number 6846, Moselolo (Moyamba), 22 March 2003; and Gbessay Santigue, TRC statement number 3873, Mokeleh (Moyamba), 10 February 2003.
137 Associated Press; Rebels attack US-owned mine, threaten to kill foreigners; 20 January 1995.
138 TRC Confidential statement number 565, Magburaka (Tonkolili), 7 December 2002; TRC confidential statement number 4749, Mile 91 (Tonkolili), 26 February 2003; and TRC confidential statement number 2825, Moriba (Bonthe), 28 January 2003.
139 Lansana Momoh, TRC statement number 2990, Jangalor (Bonthe), 5 February 2003.
140 Massa Squire, TRC statement number 5383, Grafton (Western Area), 22 February 2003.
141 Lansana Momoh, TRC statement number 2990, Jangalor (Bonthe), 5 February 2003.
142 Female victim, TRC confidential statement 3047, Serabu Town (Bo), 3 February 2003.
143 Female victim, TRC confidential statement 4312, Sandeyam (Kailahun), 23 February 2003.
144 Fatmata Sandi, TRC statement number 1302, Bonthe (Bonthe), 13 December 2002.
145 Idrissa Conteh, TRC statement number 6846, Moselolo (Moyamba), 22 March 2003.
146 TRC Confidential statement number 3946, Victoria (Bonthe), 15 February 2003.
147 Sharka Kamara, TRC statement number 3938, Nyandehun (Bonthe), 14 February 2003.
148 Gbessay Santigue, TRC statement number 3873, Mokeleh (Moyamba), 10 February 2003.
149 Kadie Sheriff, TRC statement number 3007, Gbangbama (Bonthe), 30 January 2003.
150 TRC Confidential statement number 708, Bo II (Bo), 4 December 2002.
151 See Fred Marrafono, former Executive Outcomes officer, TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 4 June 2003.
152 More detail on the role of private security firms in the conflict can be found in the chapter on External Actors, which follows directly in Volume Three B of this report.
153 See ICG, 2003 Report on Security and Governance, at page 28. See also Honourable Alhaji M.S. Deen, Minister of Mineral Resources; TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 9 October 2003.
154 Abu S. Marrah, former local commander of the Tamaboros; TRC interview conducted in Kondembaia, Koinadugu District, 15 August 2003.
155 TRC Interviews with Members of the CDF War Council; interviews conducted at TRC Headquarters, Freetown, October 2003.
156 A tendency among those in positions of power to 'take a cut' of profits intended for the common good is commonplace in Sierra Leone. It is symptomatic of the culture of 'bad governance' discussed at length in the chapter on Governance in Volume Three A of this report. A similar brand of leadership seems to have prevailed in all the combatant factions, hence the prominent tales of embezzlement relating to the leaders of the RUF, AFRC and CDF at different points in the conflict.
157 Alhaji Daramy-Rogers, former Member of the CDF War Council at Base Zero and later Regional Co-ordinator (South) of the CDF; TRC Interview conducted at TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 24 - 29 October 2003.
158 Reverend Alfred M. SamForay, former Secretary-General of the Sierra Leone Action Movement for the Civil Defence Forces (SLAM-CDF); written statement and supporting documentation submitted to the Commission by e-mail; 2-10 December 2003.
159 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
160 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
161 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
162 Moigboi Moigande Kosia, former RUF 'G-1' officer recruited in 1991; TRC interview conducted at TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 24 May 2003.
163 Massah Brima, TRC statement number 4014, Foindu Mamaima (Kenema), 18 February 2003.
164 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
165 Moigboi Moigande Kosia, former RUF 'G-1' officer recruited in 1991; TRC interview conducted at TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 24 May 2003.
166 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
167 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
168 Moigboi Moigande Kosia, former RUF 'G-1' officer recruited in 1991; TRC interview conducted at TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 24 May 2003.
169 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
170 Moigboi Moigande Kosia, former RUF 'G-1' officer recruited in 1991; testimony before TRC Public Hearings held in Freetown; 17 April 2003.
171 Moigboi Moigande Kosia, former RUF 'G-1' officer recruited in 1991; TRC interview conducted at TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 24 May 2003.
172 "Report from the Mining Security Operations to the Office of the Overall Mining Headquarters, Koquima", Revolutionary United Front (RUF), dated 15 January 2001; document provided to the TRC by a former RUF administrator, April 2003.
173 Mohamed Foday, TRC statement number 5617, Calaba (Western Area), 29 March 2003.
174 Alimamy Kamara, TRC statement number 1715, Kissy (Western Area), 22 January 2003.
175 See TRC interviews with miners in Kono District, 10 June 2003. See also TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
176 Senesie Conteh, TRC statement 4099, Kpendebu (Tongo Field, Kenema), 25 February 2003.
177 Khalilu John-Bull, TRC statement number 256, Sahrquee Town (Kono), 13 December 2003.
178 See Neall Ellis, former Executive Outcomes helicopter pilot, TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 27 May 2003. See also Fred Marrafono, former Executive Outcomes officer, TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 4 June 2003.
179 Gberie, L.; Sierra Leone researcher for Partnership Africa Canada, TRC interview conducted at TRC Headquarters, Freetown, 1 July 2003.
180 See Honourable Alhaji M.S. Deen, Minister of Mineral Resources; TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 9 October 2003.
181 See Government Gold and Diamond Office (GGDO), Submission to TRC Thematic and Special Hearings on Mineral Resources, July 2003, at page 5.
182 See ICG, 2003 Report on Security and Governance, at page 26.
183 Jan Joubert, Sierra Leone Country Manager, Branch Energy Ltd.; TRC Interviews conducted in Kono and Freetown, 2003.
184 Jan Joubert, Sierra Leone Country Manager, Branch Energy Ltd.; TRC Interviews conducted in Kono and Freetown, 2003.
185 See TRC interviews with Jan Joubert. See also Diamond Works, Annual Report 2003.
186 Jan Joubert, Sierra Leone Country Manager, Branch Energy Ltd.; TRC Interviews conducted in Kono and Freetown, 2003.
187 See ICG, 2003 Report on Security and Governance, at page 28. See also Jan Joubert, Sierra Leone Country Manager, Branch Energy Ltd.; TRC Interview conducted in Kono, June 2003.
188 See Diamond Works, Annual Report 2003.
189 See Honourable Alhaji M.S. Deen, Minister of Mineral Resources; TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 9 October 2003.
190 TRC Closed Hearing involving a diamond dealer; TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 20 May 2003.
191 See Honourable Alhaji M.S. Deen, Minister of Mineral Resources; TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 9 October 2003.
192 See, inter alia, TRC Closed Hearing involving a diamond dealer; hearing conducted at TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 20 May 2003.
193 Jonathan Sharkah, Government Mining Engineer, TRC interview in Kono District, 9 June 2003.
194 TRC Interviews with miners in Kono District, 10 June 2003. See also USAID, Sierra Leone Progress Report, 2001, at page 6.
195 Patrick Tche, UNAMSIL Civil Affairs Officer; TRC interview conducted in Kono, 8 June 2003.
196 Steven Koroma, Senior Mines Monitoring Officer, TRC interview in Kono, 9 June 2003.
197 Jonathan Sharkah, Government Mining Engineer, TRC interview in Kono District, 9 June 2003.
198 Berhanemeskel Nega, UNAMSIL Governance and Stabilisation Policy Adviser, TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 9 October 2003.
199 See Honourable Alhaji M.S. Deen, Minister of Mineral Resources; TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 9 October 2003.
200 TRC Closed Hearing involving a diamond dealer; TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 20 May 2003.
201 Jonathan Sharkah, Government Mining Engineer, TRC interview in Kono District, 9 June 2003.
202 Jonathan Sharkah, Government Mining Engineer, TRC interview in Kono District, 9 June 2003.
203 TRC Interviews with officials at the Ministry of Mines, Koidu, June 9th 2003. See also ICG, 2003 Report on Security and Governance, at page 27.
204 TRC Interview with Steven Koroma, Senior Mines Monitoring Officer, Ministry of Mineral Resources, Koidu, June 9th 2003
205 See the Mines and Minerals Decree, Decree No. 5, 1994, section 118(2).
206 See the Mines and Minerals (Amendment) Act, 2003
207 TRC Interview with Steven Koroma, Senior Mines Monitoring Officer, Ministry of Mineral Resources, Koidu, June 9th 2003
208 Jonathan Sharkah, Government Mining Engineer, TRC interview in Kono District, 9 June 2003.
209 See Government Gold and Diamond Office (GGDO), Half-Year Report, 2003.
210 See USAID, Sierra Leone Progress Report, 2001, at page 13.
211 See Government Gold and Diamond Office (GGDO), Submission to TRC Thematic and Special Hearings on Mineral Resources, July 2003, at page 3.
212 See ICG, 2003 Report on Security and Governance, at page 28.
213 See Honourable Alhaji M.S. Deen, Minister of Mineral Resources; TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 9 October 2003.
214 The returns are itemised year-by-year in the GGDO Half-Year Report. For 2001, the return was US$ 195,165. For 2002, it was US$ 312,988; and in 2003, it was US$ 278,328.
215 See Honourable Alhaji M.S. Deen, Minister of Mineral Resources; TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 9 October 2003.
216 See Honourable Alhaji M.S. Deen, Minister of Mineral Resources; TRC interview conducted in Freetown, 9 October 2003.
217 See USAID, Sierra Leone Progress Report, 2001, at page 20.
218 Jonathan Sharkah, Government Mining Engineer, TRC interview in Kono District, 9 June 2003.
219 The Lomé Peace Agreement, signed by the Government of Sierra Leone and the Revolutionary United Front, Lomé, 7 July 1999, at Article VII, 6.
220 Oppenheimer is quoted in Smilie, Motherhood, Apple Pie and False Teeth, at page 10.
221 See Diamond High Council, Witness statement to UN Sanctions Committee, at page 1.
222 De Beers, Submission to TRC Thematic and Special Hearings on Mineral Resources, July 2003.
223 See UN Panel of Experts report, 2000, at page 27.
224 Conservative estimates put the percentage of "conflict diamonds" at 5% (De Beers). Other accounts speak of 15% (Partnership Africa Canada) and even of 20% (diamond expert consultant quoted by the UN Panel of Experts in 2000). Considering the value of the international diamond trade, even 5% would represent a very important amount of money.
225 See ICG, 2003 Report on Security and Governance, at page 26.
226 See Government Gold and Diamond Office (GGDO), Submission to TRC Thematic and Special Hearings on Mineral Resources, July 2003, at page 9.
227 Diamond High Council (HRD), Progress Report; available at the website: www.hrd.be.
228 See Government Gold and Diamond Office (GGDO), Submission to TRC Thematic and Special Hearings on Mineral Resources, July 2003, at page 4.
229 Diamond High Council (HRD), New Belgian control systems on diamond trade implemented in Sierra Leone, Press Release, Antwerp, Belgium, 27 October 2000.
230 Jonathan Sharkah, Government Mining Engineer, TRC interview in Kono District, 9 June 2003.
231 TRC e-mail correspondence with Ian Smilie of Partnership Africa Canada, an NGO involved in the negotiations that established the Kimberley Process; October 2003.
232 See Smilie, Motherhood, Apple Pie and False Teeth, at page 10. See also TRC Closed Hearing involving a diamond dealer; TRC Headquarters, Freetown; 20 May 2003.
233 See USAID, Sierra Leone Progress Report, 2001, at page 9.
234 Jonathan Sharkah, Government Mining Engineer, TRC interview in Kono District, 9 June 2003.
235 Diamond High Council (HRD), Progress Report; available at the website: www.hrd.be.
236 See Alhaji Conteh (alias Black Jesus), former RUF combatant; TRC interview conducted in Pademba Road Prison, Freetown, 20 May 2003.
237 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
238 Tamba Ngekia, TRC statement number 1782, Tombudu (Kono), 11 January 2003.
239 Sahr Komba II, TRC statement number 230, Komandor (Kono), 10 December 2002.
240 Patrick Foday Koroma, TRC statement number 4529, Limba (Bo), 13 February 2003.
241 Khalilu John-Bull, TRC statement number 256, Sahrquee Town (Kono), 13 December 2003.
242 Jonathan Sharkah, Government Mining Engineer, TRC interview in Kono District, 9 June 2003.
243 Mr. Kandeh, Chief Security Officer, Koidu mine, TRC interview in Koidu, 10 June 2003.
244 Mr. Kandeh, Chief Security Officer, Koidu mine, TRC interview in Koidu, 10 June 2003.
245 TRC Interviews with miners and plot owners in Kono District, 9 - 10 June 2003.
246 See USAID, Sierra Leone Progress Report, 2001, at page 4.
247 See USAID, Sierra Leone Progress Report, 2001, at page 4.
248 Mr. Kandeh, Chief Security Officer, Koidu mine, TRC interview in Koidu, 10 June 2003.
249 See USAID, Sierra Leone Progress Report, 2001, at page 21.
250 See Zack-Williams, Mining Resources and Post-War Reconstruction, at page 7.
251 Andrew Kandeh, Tankoro Youth Organisation, TRC interview in Koidu Town, 10 June 2003.
252 Jonathan Sharkah, Government Mining Engineer, TRC interview in Kono District, 9 June 2003.
253 TRC Confidential Interview with an RUF combatant, 'G-5' commander and former intelligence officer; interview conducted in Koidu Town, Kono District; 12 August 2003.
254 TRC Interview with Mr. Kandeh, CSO, Koidu mine, June 10th 2003
255 See World Vision Sierra Leone and African International Mission Services SL, Report on children in mining activities assessment survey, Kono District, published in Freetown, August 2002 (hereinafter "World Vision et al, Mining Assessment Survey") at page 9.
256 See World Vision et al, Mining Assessment Survey, at page 36.
257 See World Vision et al, Mining Assessment Survey, at page 17.
258 See World Vision et al, Mining Assessment Survey, at page 33.
259 See World Vision et al, Mining Assessment Survey, at page 13.
260 See World Vision et al, Mining Assessment Survey, at page 27.