18 December 2017
Home Page About Us Services Publications Links
VIEWS
TACY'S MEMO
Opinion
Analysis
NEWS
Mining & Exploration
Rough Trade
Polished Wholesale & Manufacturing
Retail
Governmental
Labs & Trade and Industry Bodies
Branding & Marketing
Legal
Financial
Diamond Pipeline
Statistics
ARCHIVE NEWS - PRE 2008
People
Regional Issues
Created Diamonds
Civil Society
Ethics
Development Issues
Conflict Diamonds
Auctions
Kimberley Process
DIAMOND INTELLIGENCE BRIEFS
Diamond Intelligence Briefing 2017
Diamond Intelligence Briefing 2016
Diamond Intelligence Briefing 2015
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2015
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2014
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2013
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2012
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2011
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2010
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2009
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2008
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2007
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2006
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2005
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2004
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2003
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2002
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2001
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 2000
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 1999
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 1998
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 1997
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 1996
Diamond lntelligence Briefs 1995
Diamond lntelligence Briefs 1994
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 1993
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 1992
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 1991
Diamond lntelligence Briefs 1990
Diamond lntelligence Briefs 1989
Diamond lntelligence Briefs 1988
Diamond lntelligence Briefs 1987
Diamond lntelligence Briefs 1986
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 1985
Diamond Intelligence Briefs 1984
TACY RESEARCH
Tacy's Reports
Tacy's Research
Tacy's Presentations
RESOURCE LIBRARY
Company Reports
Kimberley Process
NGO Reports
Government Reports
Conflict Diamonds
Producer Marketing Documentation
Trade Organization Guidance
Supplier of Choice
Legal Issues
LEGAL
Laws and Regulations
Court Documents
Anti-Money Laundering
Best Practice Principles
Compliance
Competition
Banking
FINANCE
Basel II
Compliance
Decisions
PICTURES
Botswana
De Beers Archive Pictures
Conference Photos
India
Zimbabwe
SITE MAP
MY ARTICLES
created by CyberServe
 Email this      Printer-Friendly Format    
WAR BETWEEN NGO’S AND UAE KP CHAIR THREATENS KP, BLOG WARNS
03 November 2016
In a blog entitled "NGOs put Kimberley Process at Risk", The Financial Intelligencer's (FI) Nick Kochan warns that the ongoing "war" between the Kimberley Process's Civil Society Coalition (KP CSC) and the United Arab Emirates KP Chair threatens the entire initiative.

Towards the end of 2015, the KP CSC voted unanimously to boycott the UAE's 2016 Chairmanship of the KP. However, in response to KP Chair Ahmed Bin Sulayem's appeal to the CSC to attend the upcoming Plenary in Dubai, positive responses were received from Albert Kabuya Muyeba of the Centre National d'Appui au Développement et à la Participation Populaire (CENADEP), and from Dr. Ola Bello, Executive Director of Good Governance Africa (GGA).

A few days later, though, CENADEP Director General Danny Singoma, reportedly sent out another letter to the KP Chair reaffirming its continuing support for the boycott and stating that Muyeba's positive response was done "on personal terms", and "does not commit our organization in any way."

FI's Kochan refers to internal correspondence he has seen which indicates that Muyeba and CENADEP were put under pressure by the NGO Partnership Africa Canada (PAC) to retract their announcement, while JCK quotes PAC spokesperson Zuzia Danielski saying, "The boycott is still in effect, and that is not going to change."

Referring to the UAE's proposal for the establishment of a Fund to support the KP-related activities of individual KP Civil Society Coalition members, Kochan surmises that this would, "... bring an end to the hold that Partnership Africa Canada (PAC), a prominent Ottawa-based NGO, has over its African partners. PAC, despite effectively being the only non-African member of the CSC, serves as the coalition's coordinator and controls the funding of the other members. Using this dominant position within the group, it speaks on behalf of its African partners. It can be argued this is often to the detriment of their interests. This would be particularly the case if the KP were to unravel."

Kochan further states that, "The failure of the KP would have a devastating impact on the African diamond producing countries for whom the industry contributes a large part of their revenues, and for whom the KP prevents a return to the violence that gripped central and western Africa during the 1990s."
   Back»