The Director
The Centre for Democracy & Development
12 The Leathermarket
Weston Street
London SE1 3ER
cdd@cdd.org.uk
Sir
My attention has recently been drawn to the undated article published on your website entitled 'The Impasse in Sierra Leone' (at http://www.cdd.org.uk/pubs/sierraleone.htm). The article makes a number of assertions and statements concerning Sandline International which are completely unfounded and it would be appropriate for CDD, as an ethical organisation, to publish a correction so that the reader is not misled. Below I have listed the inaccuracies as far as they are directly relevant to Sandline. They appear in the sub-section in the article entitled 'Mercenaries and Weapons Continue to Dominate Sierra Leone'.
'The hub of frenetic mercenary activity in Africa is shifting from Luanda to Freetown, where private military companies are failing (sic) over themselves to market their deadly expertise to the State, sub-state groups and international entities alike. The Sandline-Executive Outcomes (EO) alliance is at the head of the pack.'
First, as you are well aware, there is no 'Sandline-EO alliance' In fact, EO ceased to trade almost one year ago. Secondly, Sandline is not marketing itself in Sierra Leone at all. The company provided much publicised support to the legitimate government early last year and its involvement came to an end shortly thereafter.
'It (Sandline) continues to support Nigerian operations with its helicopters and supplies pilots for the Nigerian AlphaJets and MI-24 HIND gunships. In conjunction with Nigerian forces, the alliance ('Sandline-EO') has stepped up its training programme for the Kamajors. It also provides escort facilities for NGOs, such as World Vision, United Nations agencies and foreign businesses, including Lebanese diamond dealers.'
As Sandline is not active in the country - and I challenge you to provide one shred of evidence to prove otherwise - the statements the author has made above are complete nonsense. Furthermore, it is one of Sandline's stated operating principles that it will not operate for commercial concerns. A number of commercial security contractors, including Lifeguard, will provide essential security services to legitimate concerns.
'Through the entrenchment of Guard (Lifeguard?) in Sierra Leone, the Sandline-Executive Outcomes (EO) transnational mercenary conglomerate with its mining wing, the Branch-Heritage group has made itself indispensable to the efficacy of Nigerian troop presence and the very survival of the Kabbah administration.'
Once again, I wish to repeat that there is no Sandline-EO alliance. It is pretty valueless having an alliance with a non-existent business! Furthermore, Sandline does not have a 'mining wing'. Branch Energy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Toronto listed company DiamondWorks Ltd. Heritage - presumably Heritage Oil and Gas Corporation, also a listed Toronto stock, does not even have a presence in Sierra Leone. The statements you make and conclusions you draw are simply not founded on any facts.
'With this influence, the network (your term for Sandline-EO-Branch-Heritage) dominates and dictates terms in the economy.'
Even if Sandline was present in Sierra Leone - which I stress it is not - such a degree of control would be impossible, even if it was attempted. How your author can dream up these wild allegations and CDD allow them to appear in an article sponsored by you is extraordinary.
'It (Sandline, Branch Energy?) has first refusal on lucrative mining and deals such as the Sierra Rutile and Koidu concessions.'
Anyone who understands the present situation in Sierra Leone will be fuly aware that Branch Energy, as a subsidiary of DiamondWorks, already has a 60% interest in the Koidu kimberlite pipes. The Sierra Rutile titanium oxide concessiion is owned by two other completely unrelated international companies, including one listed on the Australian Stock Exchange.
'Through its links with Jupiter Mining that owns rich goldmines in neighbouring Guinea, the Sandline-EO group is expanding its presence in the sub-region by setting up rear bases in Conakry.'
If these types of statements were not so inaccurate and poorly researched they would be laughable. Sandline has no relationship now or ever in the past with Jupiter Mining, nor is the company setting up 'rear bases' in Conakry.'
I look forward to the publication of an appropriate apology and correction.
Yours
Michael Grunberg