Can we help you find something?

Content type
Categories
Country
Organization Type
You are very right Mr. Kilonzo, the Government of Tanzania has a lot to justify in connection with the MDAs she endorsed in secrecy and holding in secrecy in favour of foreign companies, at the expense of national interests.
It is a fact that most of the Mineral Development Agreements (MDAs) African Governments enter with foreign companies in secrecy and held in secrecy favoured the foreign companies at the expense of African national interests due the negotiation incompetence of the African Government officials also endorsing for bribes in return.
The only way African Governments could recover their deserved share of interests passed over to the foreign companies by the incompetent and/or corrupt Government officials who endorsed in secrecy is to review the MDAs in view of re-allocating themselves the shares they deserved, let’s say by doubling the shares earmarked in the MDAs as African interest.
If the foreign companies would refuse to abide to the review, fine African Government could deploy environment regimes which prescribe very high fine rates for any form of contamination and abuse of the environment, and wasteful extraction. Any kilogram of chemical or mineral contamination of the environment will be prescribed a fine of let’s 1, 000,000 $ multiply by a factor which is not less than 1 and increasing in accordance to the toxicity of the chemical or mineral contamination, plus a must liquidation of the contamination. Any physical abuse of the environment will be prescribed punishments similarly.
The companies which would comply with the Government review of MDAs would be prescribed small fine rates, let’s say 100,000 $ per kilo of the contamination multiplied by a factor which accounts for the toxicity of contamination according.
The companies would have to choose to abide to the toughest environmental control fines or to the Government review of MDAs prescribing deserved shares of interest to the African Governments.
I always suggested that MDAs should be published for African populations to scrutinize and approve through their Parliaments before the African Governments could endorse, as the best way avenues for the involvement of corrupt practice and exploitation of negotiation incompetence in the African Governments endorsement of the MDAs could be eliminated.
I’m surprised too hearing that the Tanzanian tax collector (TRA) was going to review all MDAs in view of affecting more taxes. It is Parliaments pass laws (including all fiscal regimes), and TRA should have been involved right at the beginning of negotiations between the Tanzanian Government and foreign companies which lead to the endorsements of the tax rates and/or production sharing contained in the MDAs.
Without the pressure of blackmail, there is no way foreign companies are going to abide to a Government review of MDAs in view of rewarding herself more at the expense of the companies, that is Government violation of what has already been endorsed by both sides in the MDAs which are already binding.

Mr. Massawe,

Indeed the government must give us justifications for deviation from the model PSA. On the TRA wanting to renegotiate PSAs and MDAs, I find this intriguing. When did they start being in charge of such agreements? 

It is the Government, not STATOIL should explain to the Public the compelling reasons (if any) for the deviation from model PSA. STATOIL is answerable to TPDC and the Government; TPDC is answerable to the Government; and the Government is answerable to the Public.

Moreover, PSAs which are already binding (after the endorsement of Government and companies) are not re-negotiated for denying Tanzania deserved share of benefit as the TRA of Tanzania wants here: Tanzania's taxman wants review of gas, mining deals TRA ...
mobile.theeastafrican.co.ke/...s...mining-deals/-/.../-/index.html
, if not proven beyond doubt that the companies engaged bribes or lying to effect the Government endorsement of the PSAs.