Zimbabwe's Mines Minister Obert Mpofu recently threatened to sue Kimberley Process (KP) Chairman Boaz Hirsch for “unilaterally barring” Harare from exporting Marange diamonds.
He told VOA’s Studio 7 that Zimbabwe will “continue to resist the politicisation of the [Kimberley Process] by participants and Non Governmental Organisations that are continuing with their unlawful machinations to irreparably prejudice the people of Zimbabwe”.
Boaz had earlier said a ban on the sale of Marange diamonds remained intact despite the recent unsanctioned certification of Zimbabwe’s diamonds by Abbey Chikane.
“No trade of Marange diamonds can currently take place under the joint work plan until an agreement can be found,” he said in a circular to members.
“Participants are therefore reminded of the need for vigilance and ask participant to notify the working group on monitoring (WGM) chair in the event of receipt of an irregular shipment of Marange diamonds, until new arrangements are agreed that will allow continued implementation of the joint work plan, including supervised export mechanism.”
African diamond producers unsurprisingly said that they would back Zimbabwe if it decides to pursue a legal suit against the KP Secretariat.
“Clearly, Zimbabwe should contemplate taking legal action against the KP. Zimbabwe's diamonds cannot be held to ransom over one or two countries,” Namibia's diamonds commissioner Kennedy Hamutenya said recently during a meeting of the Association of African Diamond Producing Countries (ADPA) held in Windhoek.
He said Zimbabwe had “firm” legal grounds if it wanted to drag the KP before international courts to challenge the certification Secretariat's “unfair” treatment.
“'The KP was formed to stop the flow of conflict diamonds - there is no civil war in Zimbabwe, there are no rebel groups, there might be illicit diamonds, but there is no conflict diamonds. KP was never formed to regulate illicit diamonds,” Hamutenya added.
However, a Zimbabwean lawyer Tinoziva Bere said Harare’s threats were an act of “desperation”.
“You don’t know what their lawyers have advised them for them to start threatening to sue the government of Israel and the (KP) chair,” he said.
“In order for them to do that they will have to go to Israel to sue the chairperson but (I wonder) if anyone (can) suggest how they will succeed to sue the government of Israel in its own country over a voluntary international process.”
So what “firm” legal grounds did Hamutenya referred to? Can Zimbabwe seriously sue the KP chair or Israel, which he represents?
This surely appears to be a legal gaffe, if Zimbabwe and its African allies are not in a kindergarten play.
It had been in the public arena that the United States, Canada, and Australia along with European representatives opposed Zimbabwe’s bid to export its diamonds freely during the November KP plenary held in Jerusalem.
Their argument was that Zimbabwe was yet to fully comply with the scheme’s minimum standards as cases of “human rights abuses” and “rampant smuggling” among other things were still taking place in the diamonds fields.
Zimbabwe, however, maintained the position that it had a right to resume rough diamond exports immediately and without any preconditions, and insists that it had complied fully with all KP demands.
In its quest to see finality to the Zimbabwean saga, Israel as the current KP chair pushed for a meeting of the Working Group on Monitoring (WGM) in Brussels few weeks after the Jerusalem meeting.
Zimbabwe was invited but refused to attend.
Mpofu said in a letter to Hirsch that he had requested three days to conclude consultations after the Jerusalem plenary failed to reach an agreement on Zimbabwe’s diamond exports.
“At the expiration of the three days, you did not revert to Zimbabwe…and we feel that you have not dealt with us honourably and with integrity,” Mpofu said.
“You have, instead, yielded to political schemes disingenuously devised by NGOs and the Participants opposed to our export of diamonds. The ban is, therefore, invalid for the aforementioned reasons.”
The WGM meeting was, however, convened without the representatives from Zimbabwe and came up with a tentative draft agreement that needed approval by some EU governments.
The contents of this tentative draft agreement was not made public but reports say once the EU governments approved the draft then the agreement would be submitted to the KP Chair who in turn would present it to Zimbabwe.
If Zimbabwe accepts the agreement, the country would “step closer” to full rough diamond exports, reports said.
One understands Zimbabwe’s frustration in the delay to show it a green light to resume exports of its diamonds from Marange, which is considered to be a magic wand to the country’s economic woes, if mined properly.
The southern African nation should, however, take cognizant of the fact that KP acts with a consensus and without one there won’t be any certification of its Marange diamonds.
Yes, Zimbabwe has “worked hard” to try and meet the minimum standards of KP and it should not throw out the baby with the bath water.
Suing the KP chair is not the best of advice it should follow, it is rather dangerous.
There is absolutely no basis for doing that. Did Zimbabwe sue its ally, Namibia when it chaired the scheme in 2009?
Was it not the same year Zimbabwe had its diamonds from Marange banned until it put its house in order? So what has changed now?
If it stands a chance in the court, Zimbabwe should rather sue the U.S, Canada and Australia for blocking its way to achieving full exports rights.
Israel is just simply chairing the scheme, period!
Mathew Nyaungwa, Rough&Polished, from Namibia
