|
Biafra
Dec 18, 2012 1:36:51 GMT 4
Post by resistk on Dec 18, 2012 1:36:51 GMT 4
CALGARY, ALBERTA, Dec 16 (MARKET WIRE) -- Kilimanjaro Capital Ltd., a private Canadian company focusing on emerging nations in West Africa is pleased to announce that on 17 December 2012 it signed an Oil & Mineral AssignmentAgreement with the Biafran Government. www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/17/idUS33056+17-Dec-2012+MW20121217Note: Kilimanjaro Capital has been compared to Jarch Capital but really these are two different strategies. Zul Rashid at Kilimanjaro is an Ismaili Muslim originally from Uganda not a former Wall Street investment banker. farmlandgrab.org/post/view/16521
|
|
|
Biafra
Dec 20, 2012 5:24:32 GMT 4
Post by fireopal on Dec 20, 2012 5:24:32 GMT 4
The general public knows that Biafra cn not sign such contracts.
Even Wikipedia says: quote Biafra, officially the Republic of Biafra, was a secessionist state in south-eastern Nigeria that existed from 30 May 1967 to 15 January 1970, taking its name from the Bight of Biafra (the Atlantic bay to its south). The inhabitants were mostly the Igbo people who led the secession due to economic, ethnic, cultural and religious tensions among the various peoples of Nigeria. The creation of the new country was among the causes of the Nigerian Civil War, also known as the Nigerian-Biafran War.
Land of the Rising Sun was chosen for Biafra's national anthem, and the state was formally recognised by Gabon, Haiti, Côte d'Ivoire, Tanzania and Zambia. Other nations which did not give official recognition but which did provide support and assistance to Biafra included Israel, France, Portugal, Rhodesia, South Africa and the Vatican City. Biafra also received aid from non-state actors, including Joint Church Aid, Holy Ghost Fathers of Ireland, Caritas International, MarkPress and U.S. Catholic Relief Services.
After two-and-a-half years of war, during which a million civilians had died in fighting and from famine, Biafran forces agreed to a ceasefire with the Nigerian Federal Military Government (FMG), and Biafra was reintegrated into Nigeria. unquote
They are still fighting there, just a month ago they had mass arrests after a demonstration (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-20209365). There is no freedom just bloody supression and the world looks on ........
I do not see what you want with these contracts
|
|
|
Biafra
Dec 21, 2012 0:09:00 GMT 4
Post by resistk on Dec 21, 2012 0:09:00 GMT 4
As you note the Biafrans are a People:
African [Banjul] Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, adopted June 27, 1981, OAU Doc. CAB/LEG/67/3 rev. 5, 21 I.L.M. 58 (1982),
Article 21
1. All peoples shall freely dispose of their wealth and natural resources. This right shall be exercised in the exclusive interest of the people. In no case shall a people be deprived of it. 2. In case of spoliation the dispossessed people shall have the right to the lawful recovery of its property as well as to an adequate compensation. 3. The free disposal of wealth and natural resources shall be exercised without prejudice to the obligation of promoting international economic cooperation based on mutual respect, equitable exchange and the principles of international law. 4. States parties to the present Charter shall individually and collectively exercise the right to free disposal of their wealth and natural resources with a view to strengthening African unity and solidarity. 5. States parties to the present Charter shall undertake to eliminate all forms of foreign economic exploitation particularly that practiced by international monopolies so as to enable their peoples to fully benefit from the advantages derived from their national resources.
|
|
|
Biafra
Dec 21, 2012 0:17:01 GMT 4
Post by resistk on Dec 21, 2012 0:17:01 GMT 4
Unrecognized governments can of course enter into contracts under International Law - there are numerous public companies doing business in Puntland, Somaliland, and with POLISARIO. Oil rights in at least one case are disputed by three governments - Puntland, Somaliland and the Somalia TFG along with original concession holders from the defunct Somalia Democratic Republic which declared force majeure.
|
|
|
Biafra
Dec 21, 2012 3:56:39 GMT 4
Post by Sapphire Capital on Dec 21, 2012 3:56:39 GMT 4
Unrecognized governments have no representation rights when they do not result from a direct election, as a lawyer like you I am troubled by the idea of contracting with such entities. Contracts are created by agreement but not by agreeement with a ghost, only by agreement with legally established entities and persons and as such they are under the law and have a jurisdiction. Here you have a government which is not elected, in a country which does not exist as a country but a federal unit of another government. The Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) is a secessionist movement with the aim of securing the resurgence of the defunct state of Biafra from Nigeria. It is led by an Indian-trained lawyer Ralph Uwazuruike, with headquarters in Okwe, in the Okigwe district of Imo State. But it is not a legal entity to sign agreements and they can not be enforced, they are just pending MOU's till the State of Biafra is established and will need reconfirmation when such is done. I had an office in Nigeria for 10 years and yes it made money and yes it was difficult, but the area of Biafra is even more dangerous and as such I wonder where you are going with this.
|
|
|
Biafra
Dec 22, 2012 1:11:46 GMT 4
Post by resistk on Dec 22, 2012 1:11:46 GMT 4
This was more or less settled by Gur v. Africa Trust (Ciskei) in Commonwealth jurisdictions. Unrecognized and even illegal states like the Bantustans could litigate strictly commerical claims in the High Court. The contracts involved with Kilimanjaro are for future contingent property which in Canada and most other common law jurisdictions are a form of property. Thus the entities contracting with Kilimanjaro can only sell a potential future interest based on their present credibility. However, with potential funding they become more credible. As you note, MASSOB and MEND are not governments, the contract signer for Biafra. however is an unrecognized government that was established several years ago. The lack of pushback on a well publicized contract like this also indicates fait accompli. The signers are well known in the Biafra exile community but do have security concerns similar to Southern cameroons: www.abakwatimes.com/politics/blogs/untitledpost-13
|
|
|
Biafra
Dec 22, 2012 1:33:13 GMT 4
Post by Sapphire Capital on Dec 22, 2012 1:33:13 GMT 4
The statements in Gur v. Africa Trust were all obiter and even if some have discussed the matter and made a valid argument there is no jurisdiction here, because neither de jure nor de facto has the entity signing any power to push this through, while between commercial entities silence is considered a yes or ok, that is not true when private parties or public entities like governments are involved and the silence of the BIAFRA exiles does not make it a contract, The Nigerians do not have to say anything because they will not let BOAFRA sececed so I fail to see the fait a compli, beside you may get the result you want by bribing the applicable government entity which is a time honored practise in Nigeria and all around and in Biafra. Its a gamble.
|
|
|
Biafra
Dec 22, 2012 6:01:48 GMT 4
Post by resistk on Dec 22, 2012 6:01:48 GMT 4
Quite true but an unrecognized government can also be a juridical entity and thus capable of entering into contracts as an unincorporated association. Obviously, the outcome of such contracts are a gamble but so is prospecting for oil where none has been found before. At least in this case the oil there. Further no representation can made about the value of a future contingent interest as it is not an oil lease per se. Companies that carry such assets on the books from the POLISARIO oil licenses in Western Sahara carry them on the books at no value. See AIM companies Ophir, Wessex Exploration, Premier Oil.
|
|