OREA, Montagne d'Or - The art of delay.Interesting article below which indicates that despite the FNE’s recent rejection by the French court in their effort to join France’s lawsuit in opposition to the renewal of the Montagne d’Or concessions, their battle is still nowhere near over.
Now we see that the NGO is trying to have the court repeal several articles of the actual mining code that fail to require public discussion of any concession extensions and the recognition of potential environmental damages.
Is there any wonder NG went to court for damages starting in June 2020 and via the French Russian 1989 Investment Treaty route? Going via the French legal system or Court of Arbitration would have tied them up for how long?
Legal systems are ‘wonderful’ mechanisms for finding one after another ways to appeal mining company progress (e.g., an entity has checkered history, lacks necessary funding, negative water impact, debilitating energy grid impact, chemical handling, permanant waste storage, deforestation, workers’ conditions, racial inequity, etc, etc). If you have the financial backing and some well-versed lawyers you can go on from all sorts of angles with delaying.
We await the next element of the Montagne d'Or saga.
GLTA -
https://twitter.com/EarthsRare JUSTICE Mountain of gold at the Constitutional Council https://www.franceguyane.fr/actualite/justice/montagne-d-or-au-conseil-constitutionnel-494762.php FXG, in ParisMonday, January 17, 2022 - 11:28 a.m.
The legal battle between France Nature Environnement and Montagne d'Or is not over. Following our article on the
rejection of the France nature environnement (FNE) appeal by the Council of State relating to the extension of the Montagne d'Or concession, Pierre Gallet de Saint-Aurin, administrator of FNE returned to us to draw our attention and that of our readers to the fact that "
the fight which opposes the economic interest of mining concessions on the one hand and the environmental interest of the protection of nature and the participation of the public in the decisions of 'other hand, is not over '.
Indeed, this opposition is now the subject of a priority question of constitutionality (QPC) aimed at repealing articles L 142-7 to 142-9 of the mining code (which allow the extension of a mining concession without prior procedure participation of the public and without taking into account any damage to the environment) and article L 144-4 of the same code (which provides that the extension of a previously perpetual mining concession is granted automatically by the authority administrative, without prior procedure for public participation or taking into account any damage to the environment,in defiance of the principle of prohibition of perpetual commitments and without the difference it establishes with the extension of other mining concessions being justified by a reason of general interest).
In its decision of December 30, 2021, the Council of State rejected FNE's appeal, but decided to refer the QPC raised by FNE to the Constitutional Council. “
The challenge, explains the administrator of FNE,
is nothing less than the implementation, finally, of the Charter of the environment and of article 34 of the Constitution. He adds that if the QPC is opened on the occasion of other concessions, it is indeed the same debate: " Should
the management of environmental interests be done from the concession stage, even its renewal, or should it only be debated during the discussion on work permits? The FNE concludes: “
We believe that these interests must be taken into account at the earliest stage of the project! »