Subsequent to a recent statement made by the Angolan Endiama on the outcome of one of the three arbitration process initiated by De Beers, this morning the miner publishes it response.

In the press release De Beers says the Sao Paulo, Brazil, Tribunal did not order it's claim "to be set aside" or rule that "accepting Debap's claim could represent a serious disregard of Angolan sovereign rights".

Following is De Beers’ statement:

DE BEERS RESPONDS TO RECENT CLAIMS MADE BY ENDIAMA

On 21 June 2001, De Beers Angola Prospecting Limited ("Debap") initiated an international arbitration against Endiama and the Angolan State to defend its rights contained within three agreements for diamond exploration in Angola entered into in 1996.

In the face of unresolved procedural complications, the Tribunal as expected ordered the arbitration proceedings to be terminated on 25 September.  The Tribunal made no ruling whatsoever on the merits of Debap's claim. This decision was of a procedural nature only and has no bearing on the claim itself.

The arbitration, based in Sao Paulo, Brazil, was beset by a number of complications from the outset.  In particular, the Tribunal was confronted with the onerous logistical task of trying to resolve a complex international dispute within a four month deadline.  This timetable was interrupted and further complicated by a moratorium agreed between both Endiama and Debap which temporarily suspended all legal proceedings between the parties for a considerable period.  It should also be noted that Endiama and the Angolan State had not filed their defences against Debap's claim when the termination order was made.  In effect, the arbitration failed to get off the ground as a result of procedural complications and the insurmountable and unrealistic four month time constraint.

Contrary to statements made by Endiama in the Angolan press, the Tribunal did not order Debap's claim "to be set aside" and nor did it rule that "accepting Debap's claim could represent a serious disregard of Angolan sovereign rights".  On the contrary, while terminating the proceedings on procedural grounds, the Tribunal assiduously avoided making any ruling on the claim itself.

Debap considers its underlying rights to be unaffected by this decision and reserves its rights in this matter.