Rio Tinto’s QMM Compensation Process Under Scrutiny
Despite Rio Tinto’s claims that the 2022 compensation process at QMM was carried out correctly, reports from the ground tell a different story. There have been allegations of human rights violations, gagging orders, and inadequate compensation amounts. These concerns were brought to light by the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre (BHRRC), which published Rio Tinto’s response to the events and feedback from civil society organizations.
In 2023, over 20,000 Antonosy people signed a petition through the Association LUSUD, demanding that QMM halt its operations until unresolved compensation, social, and environmental issues were addressed. Leaders of LUSUD repeatedly requested direct meetings with QMM and the government, but these requests were denied.
During this period, Eugene Chretien, the leader of LUSUD, faced multiple attempts to arrest him. There were reports of his house being searched by the police without a warrant, and his daughter being taken into custody without any charges.
Acknowledged Incidents
In June 2023, after failed attempts to engage in dialogue with QMM regarding grievances, LUSUD organized protests that blocked the road to the mine. Approximately 127 individuals were arrested during the protest, with 80 being incarcerated, including a pregnant woman and five QMM union members. Many of those arrested were held miles away from their homes in Ft Dauphin, exposing them to risks of food shortages and other violations.
Arrest warrants were issued for the two leaders of LUSUD, who are currently in hiding due to concerns for their safety. These warrants were directly linked to the protests against QMM.
Responsibility of Rio Tinto
Rio Tinto acknowledged the deaths that occurred in October in a statement provided to The Ecologist. However, during their 2024 AGM, the chair of Rio Tinto attributed the events to “something to do with the elections,” seemingly deflecting responsibility away from the company’s operations in Madagascar.
Rio Tinto’s actions seem to politicize the protests, shifting blame onto the government and labeling the deceased individuals as political agitators. This contradicts the company’s commitments to the UN Guiding Principles and Corporate Human Rights Benchmarks regarding human rights defenders.
Repression and Accountability
The repeated refusal by QMM to engage with LUSUD raises questions about the company’s compliance with human rights standards in Madagascar. The use of live ammunition during the October 2023 protests remains unexplained, highlighting the need for an inquiry into the events.
The right to assemble and protest is protected under Malagasy law, but the current regime’s crackdown on civil society presents challenges for human rights advocacy. Corporations like Rio Tinto operating in such environments must uphold their commitments to human rights defenders and hold themselves accountable.
In conclusion, the deaths of individuals like Msr Damy, Mme Francia, and Msr Jean Solomon must not be forgotten. Rio Tinto should conduct an inquiry into the October deaths, review its policies regarding human rights defenders, and address grievances related to compensation and environmental impacts at QMM. It is crucial for corporations to prioritize human rights and civic engagement in their operations, especially in regions with governance challenges and civic repression.
