The dispute between Mauritanian company SCTP and Tasiast dates back several years. According to Ismaël Mohamed Babacar, director-general of SCTP, the conflict began when Tasiast terminated their contract without notice or justification. SCTP had been working with Tasiast since it acquired the mine from Red Back Mining. Babacar claims SCTP was one of the best local subcontractors, adhering to strict safety, hygiene, and environmental standards.
SCTP's contract with Tasiast was abruptly terminated while Babacar was in France for medical treatment following a stroke. He was informed that a new company, lacking experience and technical capabilities, had been awarded the contract. Letters of termination were sent, but no reasons were provided. Babacar asserts that verbal justifications provided by Tasiast were false and unsubstantiated. SCTP retains evidence and testimonies related to the matter, which will be presented in court if necessary.
The terminated contracts between SCTP and Tasiast Mauritanie Ltd were allegedly rescinded in violation of Mauritanian law. No justification or fault was mentioned in the termination letters. Babacar states that Tasiast's decision was discretionary and aimed to reassign the contracts to other companies that did not meet the initial tender requirements. These companies were awarded contracts in opaque circumstances.
Tasiast cited contract clauses allowing termination with seven days' notice or without notice for alleged contract breaches. However, Babacar argues that these clauses contravene Mauritanian laws, specifically the Code des Obligations et Contrats and the Code du travail. The clauses create an imbalance in favor of Tasiast and were not effectively communicated to SCTP. Babacar claims that Tasiast failed to respect its own contract clauses.
Despite attempts to find an amicable solution, the issue remains unresolved after seven years. Babacar states that SCTP's attempts at dialogue were met with false pretexts and changing justifications. Tasiast allegedly raised unsubstantiated accusations of corruption and, more recently, claimed that SCTP financed an opposition party. Babacar finds these accusations defamatory and unfounded.
Babacar believes that Tasiast's refusal to engage in a serious investigation or confrontation indicates bad faith. He personally offered to cover expenses for a meeting to clarify the situation but received no response. Babacar suggests that internal lobbies with tribal or regional interests may be behind Tasiast's actions, aiming to monopolize contracts and benefits.
SCTP is prepared to take the dispute to court in Mauritania and Canada if necessary. Babacar emphasizes that his company was the best-rated on the site, with zero accidents, timely employee payments, and respect for environmental and safety standards. The company's exclusion appears to be unfounded, and Babacar is confident that the truth will prevail in court.
Key points
- Tasiast terminated SCTP's contract without notice or justification, allegedly in violation of Mauritanian law.
- SCTP and Tasiast have been in dispute for seven years, with no amicable solution found.
- Babacar suggests internal lobbies may be behind Tasiast's actions, aiming to monopolize contracts and benefits.
