Ivanhoe Mines Ltd (Burma) V Canadian Labour Congress (CLC)

Overview

NCP Decision Accepted
Current Status Closed
Date Submitted 01/11/2002
Date Closed 01/02/2006
Case Duration 169 weeks and 5 days
Host Country Burma  (Non-adhering country)
Issue(s) Forced labour in Burma, environmental damage
Provisions Cited IV.1-c   
Case Description In November 2002, the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) requested the Canadian NCP to investigate the activities of Ivanhoe Mines Ltd. in Burma. The company was involved in a joint venture in partnership with a state owned enterprise, which was operating the copper mine S&K. This joint venture was alleged by the CLC to have been involved in the use of forced labour to build a railway to supply the mine. The mine was also alleged to have resulted in significant ecological damage in the region.
Developments In January 2003, the NCP replied to the CLC requesting further information on the environmental problems, which the CLC agreed to provide whilst urging it to continue with the labour aspects of the case.
Outcome In June 2005, the Canadian NCP announced its decision to close the case, although it finally closed the case in February 2006. The NCP justified the closure on the grounds that it was not able to proceed with the dialogue given that there was "no agreement between the parties to participate in the process". The NCP issued a statement on its website .

Organisations

Lead NCP Canada NCP : Interdepartmental Committee 

Companies

Multinational Company Ivanhoe Mines Ltd (Home country: Canada)
Joint Venture S&K Mine Burma (Home country: Burma)

Complainants

Lead Complainant Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) : National Centre 

Related Documents

Ivanhoe Mines  [Publication date: 20/1/2009] 'Reference: Canadian Friends of Burma again misrepresenting about Ivanhoe Mines’ former interest in Myanmar.'
   http://www.ivanhoemines.com/i/pdf/2009-01-20_IVNOL.pdf [Date URL accessed: 12/8/2009]

Canada NCP  [Publication date: 1/2/2006] 'Ivanhoe Mines Ltd and the Canadian Labour Congress Canadian National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises Statement concerning Ivanhoe Mines Ltd in Burma'
   http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/ncp-pcn/spe
   cific-specifique.aspx?lang=eng
[Date URL accessed: 12/8/2009]

Canadian Friends of Burma  [Publication date: 5/4/2006] 'Damage Control at Ivanhoe'
   http://www.cfob.org/clickMore/1.shtml [Date URL accessed: 9/5/2010]

TUAC Analysis

Did the NCP publish its initial assessment? status-icon
Did the case involve parallel proceedings? status-icon
Was the existence of parallel proceedings an obstacle to the NCP accepting the case? status-icon
Was the businsess relationship other than that of a subsidiary? status-icon
Was the nature of the business relationship an obstacle to the NCP accepting the case? status-icon
Did the NCP inform other relevant government departments about its acceptance of this case? status-icon
Did the NCP offer mediation or conciliation? status-icon
Did the company accept the offer of mediation or conciliation? status-icon
Did the complainant(s) accept the offer of mediation or conciliation? status-icon
Was mediation or conciliation held? status-icon
Was mediation or conciliation conducted by a professional mediator? status-icon
Did the parties reach agreement? status-icon
If yes, did the NCP publish this agreement following the consent of the parties? status-icon
If mediation was refused or failed did the NCP make an assessment of whether the company had breached the Guidelines? status-icon
Did the NCP conduct in-host country fact finding? status-icon
Did the NCP make recommendations to the company on the future implementation of the Guidelines? status-icon
Did the NCP publish its final statement or report? status-icon
Did the NCP provide for follow-up of the agreement/recommendations? status-icon
Did the NCP inform other relevant government departments about its final statement or report? status-icon
Did the NCP inform public pension funds about its final statement or report? status-icon
Did the NCP apply any consequences in this case? status-icon
Did the NCP follow the indicative timescales set out in the procedural guidance? status-icon
Was there a positive outcome for the workers involved in this case? status-icon
Did the filing of the case under the Guidelines have a positive impact for the workers involved? status-icon
Did the lead NCP play a positive role? status-icon
If different, did the home NCP play a positive role? status-icon

TUAC Assessment

Not only did the NCP spend more than three years on trying to convince the company to participate in a dialogue with the CLC, it also failed to make recommendations on the implementation as called for by the Guidelines.

Implications

Lack of cooperation of the company to engage in the NCP process