|
|
||
|
|
||
|
Liberia |
||
|
||
|
To its credit, the United Nations (from mid-2003) in effect prohibited its member countries from importing logs from Liberia. China much the largest importer between 1999 and 2003 and also France, sought to prevent this prohibition. During 2002, China's imports alone matched the highest previously recorded level of Liberian exports. France continued to import substantial quantities of timber during the early 1990s, despite a ban on timber exports, partly in exchange for military support to the then ruling elite. No legal timber from commercial concessions has been exported since UN sanctions were lifted during 2006.[§54] Rather than accept the offer of financial income in exchange for continuing to exclude industrial scale logging, the government has been persuaded to restart such logging. The processes by which enterprises have been allocated concessions[-][§55 et seq] and changes being made in the law[-] make it unlikely that timber exports from those concessions will be deemed sufficiently legal to comply with the EU's proposed due diligence regulation,[-] let alone the US Lacey Act. Indeed the only importing country which might willingly accept timber from Liberia is China - and China would add as little value in Liberia as feasible, demanding logs now that Equatorial Guinea and Gabon prohibit the export of logs and redeploying foreign labour. Consequently, it is highly likely that enterprises linked to China have lobbied for a resumption of logging in Liberia. China is presumably the destination for the output which Samling hopes[-] to achieve through its associates in Liberia. Ironically, most of the accessible forest in the newly allocated concessions has been so badly managed that the profitability of even the sort of logging which was common in Equatorial Guinea and the south west of Congo (Brazzaville) during the last decade or so is unlikely to be great. One might argue that lack of capacity coupled with collusion between government and prospective participants in the resurgent timber industry has led to the information on which those seeking concessions have bid being misleading.[-] Clearly, concessionaires would have used that information at their own risk, and not be eligible for any redress. It is likely that medium-sized concessions (5,000ha-49,999ha), for which competitive bidding and sustaionable managgement do not seem to be required[p3], will be assigned to sleeping partners of major logging groups who consolidate their interests illicitly by logging as subcontractors - as they appear to have done elsewhere [slide 5 item 10] (particularly in Equatorial Guinea). |
||
|
Copyright
globaltimber.org.uk
|