Diamond-mining giant De Beers last week expressed concern over what it called the “distorted and inaccurate” depiction of the diamond industry in Botswana, by nonprofit organisation the Bench Marks Foundation (BMF).

BMF executive director John Capel noted in the report, entitled ‘Corporate Social Responsibility in the Diamond-Mining Industry in Botswana: De Beers, Botswana and the Control of a Country’, that while the diamond-miner had added a significant amount of cash to Botswana’s coffers through its operations in that country, the relationship with the country was also riddled with complexities, where the Botswana government benefited revenuewise but lacked the political will to ensure mining did not harm indigenous communities.

“This is a corporate challenge and De Beers needs to state what [its] position is regarding indigenous communities, in particular concerning mining in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve,” Capel added.

He further said that while the BMF report showed that De Beers had a good record in corporate reporting, the company had a long way to go to becoming a good corporate citizen.

“De Beers needs to be able to show that [its] operations are fair, just and that profits [it makes] are done ethically.”

However, De Beers hit back last week, stating that the BMF report reflected neither the company’s experience in Botswana, nor the findings of numerous reputable independent studies by academics and bodies ranging from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) to the World Bank.

“In contrast to the BMF report, these highlight Botswana’s unique success in using its diamond wealth to drive sustainable development at both community and national level, as well as the role played by Botswana’s exceptional governance record in this process,” the diamond-miner said in a statement.

De Beers noted that among the most pervasive of the many distortions in the BMF report was the key criticism that the operations of Debswana – a joint venture between the company and the Botswana government – had not generated benefits at community level.

“This is not the case. Debswana is widely recognised as one of the most successful public–private partnerships in the world in terms of its contribution to national and community development with in the region of 80% of all gross profits realised by Debswana going into government revenues. 
“Thus, Debswana’s direct contribution to community development in Botswana vastly exceeds even the most stringent benchmarks for social investment,” De Beers stated.

The BMF also based key elements of its critique of Debswana on the strength of the assumption that in the “last two months of 2008” Debswana “retrenched half its head office staff in Gaborone” and that Debswana planned to “retrench workers at all its operations”.

“The assumption of mass retrenchments having taken place is then frequently invoked in the report as a point of reference for a range of criticisms. 
“Debswana did not retrench any staff at head office in Gaborone in response to the recession and, moreover, retrenched no staff at its operations,” De Beers added.

The BMF also criticised conditions within Debswana’s mining towns. 
It stated that the operations fenced out the surrounding community and fenced in the ‘closed’ community living in the towns operated by the company, “reinforcing the closed/secretive nature” of the mining sector in Botswana.

“The employees at Orapa practically live at work, but they are not at home at work, nor are they at work at home – they live on company property, in houses owned by the corporation in a situation where all aspects of their lives are managed by the corporation – this implies that the employees suffer a degree of alienation. 
“They may get visitors only when they apply to management and when management approves of their visitors. 
“This is a situation not dissimilar to a prison, except that, in this case, the employee may go out of the institution on corporate-approved leave,” the BMF report claimed.

But De Beers responded by saying that its Jwaneng township was “open and freely accessible”, while Orapa was “accessible with appropriate permission”. 
The mining group said that Orapa was home to many non-Debswana employees.

De Beers said that the BMF had made a number of factual errors in its report, such as criticising Botswana for not having a Ministry of Environment and claiming that most of the country’s land was State owned.

The mining company also said that the BMF did not interview De Beers or Debswana management, or government officials.

De Beers noted that it had prepared a detailed response to the BMF report.

To subscribe to Mining Weekly's print magazine email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za or buy now.