BSG Resources: Human Rights Legal Action Filed in London against Global Witness

LONDON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--

BSG Resources

(“BSGR or “the Group”)

Human rights legal action filed in London against Global Witness

Dag Cramer, David Clark, Sandra Merloni-Holmes and Beny Steinmetz confirm that they are claiming damages for breaches of their human and data protection rights by Global Witness, a London-based non-governmental organisation closely associated with George Soros, the billionaire hedge fund manager.

The claim, filed at the High Court in London and served on Global Witness today, has been brought under the UK’s Data Protection Act (DPA), which derives from EU legislation that protects individuals' rights to privacy, including the European Convention on Human Rights.

The claimants have taken this action reluctantly, because they sympathise with Global Witness’s declared aims. They have been forced to take action by Global Witness’s refusal to comply with the DPA and a decision of the UK Information Commissioner. There is nothing in the action, however, that will impede Global Witness’s ability lawfully to carry out its investigations.

The four individual claimants are either employed by or associated with BSG Resources (BSGR), a diversified international mining and natural resources group with more than 6,000 employees and operations in 14 countries. BSGR has been the subject of a sustained, negative publicity campaign by Global Witness, Mr Soros and other organisations and individuals associated with Mr Soros.

For almost a year, Global Witness has consistently refused to produce personal data which it holds about the individuals, in breach of its obligations under the DPA, which is designed to protect individuals' rights and has been the law of the United Kingdom since 1998.

Global Witness first denied it held information on Mr Steinmetz, citing reasons subsequently dismissed as “contradictory” by the UK Information Commissioner. It then conceded it did hold such information but refused to disclose it. It has also not produced the data which it holds on the other three claimants.

The action has also been prompted by concern on the claimants’ part that Global Witness, in breach of its declared commitment to fairness and justice, may be engaged in a politically-motivated campaign to strip BSGR of its legally-acquired mining rights in Guinea. The group has made a number of bogus claims about BSGR, at the same time as its chief donor George Soros is an advisor to the Guinean government on mining issues.

For seven months this year, two of BSGR’s employees in Guinea were incarcerated without charge, in appalling conditions and in breach of international law. BSGR sought Global Witness’s help on their behalf, but none was forthcoming. BSGR has also attempted to draw Global Witness’s attention to many proven instances of graft and corruption in Guinea, which have drawn criticism from EU observers and which genuinely require scrutiny from a respected NGO. Again, Global Witness has shown no interest. Global Witness only appears to be interested in the things that Mr Soros would like it to focus on.

Dag Cramer, CEO of Onyx Financial Advisors, an adviser to BSGR, said:

“We tried for more than a year to avoid this outcome, because we consider Global Witness’s declared aims to be laudable. Unfortunately, the organisation has entirely failed to live up to its own principles. It is hopelessly compromised, and out of control.

“Global Witness’s refusal to tell us what personal data it has on us is a breach of the law and is deeply discomfiting to me and my fellow claimants. It feels like a personal violation.

“It is ironic that this NGO, which claims to value transparency above all else, refuses to make itself accountable by complying with transparency laws. We don’t know who calls the tune at Global Witness, but we do know who pays the piper. That person is George Soros, an eccentric plutocrat using his fortune to fund a private foreign policy.”

James Libson, partner at Mishcon de Reya solicitors, which is piloting the litigation, added:

"“NGOs are not above the law. The law is for all, and this is an important case about individual rights. Global Witness claimed ‘journalistic privilege’ to avoid providing our clients with their personal data. But we argue that Global Witness isn’t a journalistic enterprise – not least because of its undeclared interest in Mr Soros’s agenda. We respect Global Witness’s right to free expression. But equally our clients have rights as individuals to have their personal information properly protected in accordance with UK and European law.”

ENDS

Notes for Editors

1. A copy of the claimants’ statement of claim can be found on the link below:

http://bsgresources.com/bsgr-guinea/bsgr-guinea-analysis-reports/claim-filed-against-global-witness/

2. The action follows successful litigation brought by BSGR against FTI Consulting, formerly its advisor, and Lord Malloch-Brown, Chairman of FTI for Europe, Middle East and Africa, earlier this year.

FTI and Malloch-Brown agreed to pay compensation of €90,000 plus legal costs to BSGR of £190,000 in June 2013, to settle claims that Malloch-Brown had pressured FTI to resign its account with BSGR following pressure from George Soros, on whose Foundation Malloch-Brown sits. BSGR also claimed that Malloch-Brown had breached its fiduciary duties to BSGR and had been involved in a conspiracy against BSGR.

FTI and Malloch-Brown each had their own legal teams, and the likely cost of these, added to the figures above, means that FTI and Malloch-Brown faced a probable final bill of more than £500,000 as a result of their dereliction of duty to BSGR. This, it should be noted, was more than they earned from their advisory work for BSGR over three years.

Documents obtained through a DPA request of FTI showed that Malloch-Brown had been corresponding with people connected to Soros about BSGR and its interests.

3. The four claimants submitted DPA requests to Global Witness, in accordance with their legal rights, in requests made in December 2012 and July 2013. Following Global Witness’s initial refusal to disclose personal information requested, Mr Steinmetz filed a complaint with the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).

The ICO concluded that Global Witness’s arguments were “contradictory”, that it was “unlikely that Global Witness had complied with the requirements of the Data Protection Act”, and that “it appears that Global Witness has not appropriately responded to Mr Steinmetz’s request”. The ICO also expressed concern as to the level of Global Witness’s understanding of its obligations under data protection laws.

The ICO recommended that Global Witness review Mr Steinmetz’s request again, and provide him with a copy of all the personal information he is entitled to. However, Global Witness refuses to comply with this recommendation, despite admitting that it “probably” holds personal data on Mr Steinmetz, and certainly does so on the other claimants.

Global Witness claims that it is entitled not to disclose information that might identify its sources, and that handing over the data in sufficiently redacted form would “not be practicable”. Today’s litigation will give the claimants the chance to challenge these bogus assertions in court.

The claimants will also argue that the information in question is being used by Global Witness to support the reiteration of false allegations of bribery and corruption against BSGR, in further breach of the DPA’s stipulations against misuse of personal information.

4. For further information on BSGR’s operations in Guinea, please visit: http://www.bsgresources.com/bsgr-guinea

Theo Crutcher

Powerscourt

1 Tudor Street

London EC4Y 0AH

Switch [phone]

Direct [phone]

Mobile [phone]

[e-mail]