Cranswick denies court approved diamond sale

Andrew Cranswick

Andrew Cranswick the CEO of African Consolidated Resources (ACR) has denied state media reports that the High Court approved the sale of diamonds at the centre of an ownership dispute between his company and the government. On Tuesday the Herald claimed the court had sanctioned the sale of 129 000 carats of diamonds mined from the Marange diamonds fields. His ACR company was kicked off their Marange claim at gunpoint in 2006 by the army.  

SW Radio Africa journalist Lance Guma spoke to Cranswick on Wednesday and asked him for his reaction to both the judgement and the subsequent media reports. 

Andrew Cranswick: ‘I have seen all of the media reports but some of the media reports I have seen are misleading because they are incorrect. There has been no green light given for the sale of the diamonds. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court ruled in February that the diamonds should be lodged with the Reserve Bank pending the outcome of the Ministers appeal to the Supreme Court. That has been disobeyed, actively disobeyed in contempt of court by the occupants of the mining fields. The application we made is an urgent application to the High Court to stop this particular proposed sale of diamonds, was an urgent application as you can imagine it should be. The judge heard the arguments only of the urgency of the matter and the urgency of the application. 

The main grounds of urgency for us, was the prejudice that would be suffered, which may be irrecoverable from the sale of the diamonds. The judge decided that the compensation could be sought in cash if the sale went ahead and in that regard it was not urgent. So he ruled and heard only on the arguments about urgency of the application. So what it means is he has effectively instructed us to do a normal court application as opposed to an urgent court application because he has decided the urgency of the application is not necessary. The media reports that state that there is some kind of approval or green light from the courts for a sale are very misleading and incorrect. In fact they are completely false. 

The fact is the Supreme Court has specifically stated these should not be sold and ordered them to be lodged at the Reserve Bank. So any other court cannot overrule the Supreme Court’s Chief Justice. So anyone who proceeds with the sale will be doing it against the law. 

Lance Guma: Now could you clarify this, the Herald newspaper is saying 129 000 carats of diamonds mined from the Marange fields are going to go on sale. This particular case, are you re-asserting your mining rights for the area? Are you also claiming ownership of these particular diamonds? Could you just clarify that confusion because there was some suggestion you were not contesting the ownership of the actual diamonds that are being kept (at the Reserve Bank). 

Cranswick: No, that’s absolute rubbish. No, of course the High Court has ruled that the ownership of the diamonds belongs to ACR. Not just the ones lodged with the Reserve Bank but all diamonds ever mined and that is clear from Justice (Charles) Hungwe’s ruling of 24^th September 2009, which has been appealed against and is still subject to an appeal in the Supreme Court. The fact is what ACR did propose or agree to because it wasn’t our proposal, it was someone in government who put it to us, and we put it in writing to ZMDC (Zimbabwe Mineral Development Corporation) and Canadile and Mbada. 

We proposed that the sale be allowed to go ahead on the basis that 100 percent of the revenue goes to the government of Zimbabwe, so it can be used to rebuild the economy and help the country and on the basis that once the Supreme Court decision is made on the final appeal whoever the Supreme Courts decides actually has ownership of those diamonds would receive a credit note for 50 percent of the value of the sale which could be deductable from future royalties. That way it would be win-win. We would be abiding by the law of the land but at the same time not preventing money from flowing into the fiscus. 

In fact more money would flow into the fiscus than planned. So that is a proposal we made. It was outright refused, in from of the judge, by Canadile and Mbada and they obviously want to keep all the proceeds themselves. But we made that suggestion in writing having been suggested to us and we accepted that suggestion whole-heartedly but the others have not. The……of the diamonds will finally be decided beyond any reasonable doubt by a Supreme Court appeal which will take place at some point. 

Guma: I don’t know if you had the chance to see reports quoting the Mines Minister saying he will institute a police investigation of African Consolidated Resources. He is alleging that your company bought diamonds on the black market. 

Cranswick: He (Obert Mpofu) has already written a detailed letter to the Attorney General asserting that charge. That charge was laid against the company, actually in 2006. It’s not a new charge. The prosecutor threw it out on the basis that a company cannot buy something that already belongs to it. We recover diamonds, how can we have been buying them if they belong to us. And the High Court agreed that they belong to us. So the Public Prosecutor said the charge was frivolous and only if the High Court ruled against our ownership, would we have a case to answer. So this case has been brought 4 years ago and dismissed by the Public Prosecutors. So I don’t have any worries about that. They may, anyone may ask for an investigation and it’s their right, we have nothing to hide. We have done everything transparently and openly. 

Guma: My Final question to you Mr. Cranswick it will probably get confusing for a lot of Zimbabweans following this because this matter is both in the High Court and in the Supreme Court. Can you separate this for us, why is this? 

Cranswick:  Let me just explain. The ownership matter is being settled in the High Court. Justice Hungwe ruled is September 2009 the ownership of the diamonds and the mining rights was 100 percent owned by African Consolidated Resources, that has been done. What the Supreme Court then on review of that judgment decided that no mining should continue until the appeal against that High Court ruling is heard. The appeal which is lodged by the Ministry. And that no diamonds should be removed at all from the country but lodged with the Reserve Bank pending the outcome of that final appeal. 

Now remember the appeal in the Supreme Court is just to review what a High Court does and either agree or disagree with the High Court. So it’s an appeal. Subsequent applications to the High Court, for example to interdict the current illegal miners from selling the diamonds they have mined illegally is a separate application because clearly no one is obeying the Supreme Court . Now if no one is obeying the Supreme Court you can’t go back to the Supreme Court and say please can you make people obey the Supreme Court. You have to apply for an interdict to force them to do so at the High Court first of all and then take that up and appeal if you fail. 

Now we have applied in the High Court on an urgent basis and the judge has ruled that he does not regard it as urgent enough immediately. So we have to do a normal application to the High Court still, have that set down, have that heard and try and have the diamond sale stopped in obedience with the Supreme Court. If the High Court disagrees with us then we could appeal to the Supreme Court in theory to rule on their own ruling, which would say, yes quite correct, the ruling is very clear, no sale of diamonds until the final main appeal is heard. So you have these little actions we have to do in the interim because no one is obeying the Supreme Court and High Court rulings. 

And just to clarify the company’s position, we have for several years been attempting with concerted effort to resolve this issue with all parties in government and do a more favourable and transparent deal with government to mine this for the benefit of the country and we are still of that opinion regardless of whatever High Court rulings we succeed with which we believe we will succeed with all the important ones, we still wish to do this as transparently and fairly as possible. SW Radio Africa 

[newsletter]

• Tweet This
• Share on Facebook
• Digg This
• Bookmark
• Stumble
• RSS Feed