View Comments

By Carlos Zorrilla, February 21, 2009

News from Intag 21 Februrary

99 days since Copper Mesa lost their concessions in Intag, AND,—-

Community Leaders in Canada to Sue the Toronto Stock Exchange and a Canadian Mining Company

Marcia Ramirez and Carlos Zorrilla, community activists from the Intag area of Ecuador, will be visiting Canada from the 25th of February until the 7th of March as part of a tour to announce lawsuits against a Canadian mining company and the Toronto Stock Exchange.
Continue reading 'Intag Activists to Sue Canadian Stock Exchange and Canadian company'»

View Comments

By Carlos Zorrilla, January 2, 2009

TEN QUESTIONS YOU SHOULD ASK ABOUT COPPER MESA MINING CORPORATION

1. Q. Does the company have legal title to its much-touted JUNIN mining concessions in Ecuador?
A. NO. On November 12th, the government annulled the titles to the company’s Junin mining concessions as part of the government’s plans to recuperate thousands of mining concessions.. The company also lost titles to other
Continue reading 'TEN QUESTIONS YOU SHOULD ASK ABOUT COPPER MESA MINING CORPORATION'»

View Comments

By Carlos Zorrilla, December 8, 2008

Espaniol abajo

More Bad News for Copper Mesa: Company loses all of its Intag mining concessions.
- The Mining Mandate also abolished hundreds of other concessions affecting many Canadian mining companies in Ecuader.

Close to 2,300 mining concessions affecting a total of 3.3 million hectares have been extinguished in Ecuador since the Mining Mandate went into effect more than six months ago (see original government news release below). This includes all of Copper Mesa Mining Corporation’s concessions in Intag, according to information published by the Ministry of Mines and Energy.
Continue reading 'More Bad News for Copper Mesa: Company loses all of its Intag mining concessions.'»

View Comments

By Carlos Zorrilla, November 21, 2008

The government announced this week that Copper Mesa Mining Corporation had reverted back to the state the concessions Golden 1 and Golden 2 (http://www.eltelegrafo.com.ec/actualidad/noticia/archive/actualidad/2008/11/19/Gobierno-extingue-concesiones-mineras-de-_CD00_ntag.aspx and h
ttp://www.presidencia.gov.ec/noticias.asp?noid=16549

This is not a “purported” extinction of the comopany’s mining rights; the legal measure is definitive. The government did not “make observations” to the company’s 2006 Environmental Impact Assesement, it flatly rejected it, and termed it “not-prossesable”. Had it been a case of responding to the observations, it would have done so long ago and re submitted it.

It is all over for Copper Mesa in Intag folks- definintely NOT purported.

View Comments

By Carlos Zorrilla, November 13, 2008

IT’S ALL OVER FOR COPPER MESA MINING CORPORATION IN INTAG
(formerly Ascendant Copper Corporation)
Español más adelante

NOV 13 2008

On Wednesday, November 12th, Ecuador’s Ministry of Mines and Petroleum officially extinguished Copper Mesa Corporation’s Golden 1 mining concession in Intag, Ecuador. The Golden 1 concession formed a key part of the company’s JUNIN mining project, and constituted the company’s most valuable asset. The government measure means that the Golden 1 concession will revert back to the Ministry of Energy and Petroleum.

It is only a matter of time when the other two concessions making up the JUNIN project will be extinguished, in light that they also did not comply with the process of previous consultation with the community and likewise lack a valid environmental impact assessment, which were the basis for the government measure. In fact, not a single of the company’s project in the Intag region has complied with the process of community consultation, nor have a valid environmental impact assessment.

The decision was a direct result of the April 15th mining Mandate issued by the National Assembly, which extinguished most of the country’s mining concessions. The Mandate excludes compensation of any kind for the mining companies.

According to government spokespersons over 4,000 mining concessions were affected by the Mandate. Projects in the exploitation phase were generally left alone, but nearly all of the ones in exploration phase were affected.

According to the new mining legislation being debated in the provisional National Assembly (the “mini-congress” as it is known here), no mining concessions can be awarded until the government determines the areas designated for mining activities in its National Development Plan, something that could last months or even years.

Copper Mesa and its predecessors (Ascendant Copper Corporation and Ascendant Exploration), have been in the Intag area since 2004, and have been accused of serious human rights abuses, including numerous and documented use of paramilitaries against the local population opposed to mining. Its unwelcome presence in the area provoked numerous violent confrontations, which led the government to issue several stop-work orders in late 2006 and early 2007.

The Second Transnational Mining Corporation Defeated in Intag
The communities of Intag, with the full support of all its local governments and organizations, have been resisting mining development since the 1990’s, when the Mitsubishi subsidiary, Bishimetals, discovered copper and molybdenum amidst the Toisan Range’s primary forests and pristine rivers and streams. In 1997 due to overwhelming local opposition, Bishimetals was forced to abandon the project.
ASCENDANT (COPPER MESA MINING CORPORATION) PIERDE CONCESIÓN CLAVE EN INTAG

El día miércoles 12 de noviembre, el Ministerio de Minas y Petróleo del Ecuador extinguió la concesión minera más importante de Copper Mesa Mining Corporation (Ascendant Copper) en la zona de Intag, Provincia de Imbabura, Ecuador.

La decisión revierte al estado las concesiones Golden 1 la cual forma parte del proyecto JUNÍN, que constituía el proyecto minero más valioso de la empresa. El gobierno citó la falta de la realización de la consulta previa por parte de la empresa, al igual la falta de haber realizado un estudio de impacto ambiental válido para el proyecto minero.

La decisión gubernamental fue resultado directo del Mandato Minero decretado el 15 de abril del 2008 por la Asamblea Nacional, con el cual se extinguió aproximadamente 80% de concesiones mineras en el país que no contaban con los respectivos estudios de impacto ambiental, por incumplimiento de pagos de patentes, afectaciones a micro cuencas, y otras causales.

El Mandato excluye la posibilidad de que las empresas reciban indemnizaciones.

Según pronunciamientos oficiales, más de 4.000 concesiones fueron afectadas por el Mandato. Los proyectos en fase de explotación en general no fueron afectados, pero casi todos los que se encontraban en fase de exploración,y en especial los que no contaban con sus respectivos estudios de impacto ambientales, entraron dentro de las concesiones a ser revertidas al estado. Hasta la fecha, aproximadamente 2,000 concesiones han sido revertidas por incumplir con las disposiciones del Mandato.

De acuerdo a la nueva legislación minera elaborada por el gobierno del Presidente Correa, no se podrá otorgar nuevas concesiones mineras hasta que el país elabore su Plan de Desarrollo Nacional, y designe las áreas aptas para actividades mineras- un proceso que podría durar meses, o incluso, años.

Ascendant Copper, la cual cambió su nombre a Copper Mesa Mining Corporation en Julio de este año, ha estado en la zona de Intag desde Mayo del 2004, y su presencia ha estado vinculada a graves violaciones de derechos humanos, enfrentamientos violentos entre comuneros, y la utilización de paramilitares contra campesinas y campesinos opositores a la minería. La violencia y la presencia de paramilitares en la zona provocó que el gobierno suspenda las actividades de la empresa transnacional a fines del 2006, y de nuevo en el 2007.

Puestos de trabajo
La empresa ha sido acusada de emplear a cientos de trabajadores agrícolas de Intag como estrategia de dividir a las comunidades, ya que la empresa nunca obtuvo la aprobación del estudio de impacto ambiental por parte del gobierno, lo cual es un requisito indispensable para iniciar labores mineras.

Las comunidades de Intag han librado una resistencia pacífica contra la minería desde mediados de los 90 cuando Bishimetals, subsidiaria de la empresa Mitsubishi, halló un yacimiento de cobre y molibdeno en medio de bosques primarios y ríos prístinos de la Cordillera del Toisán. El proyecto fue financiado por la Agencia Japonesa para la Cooperación Internacional (JICA por sus siglos en ingles) y ejecutado juntamente con apoyo del gobierno nacional a través de CODIGEM, una dependencia del Ministerio de Minas y Petróleo del Ecuador. El proyecto bi-nacional tuvo que ser abandonado en 1997 después de que las comunidades de Intag

View Comments

By Carlos Zorrilla, November 12, 2008

Copper Mesa and Its Troubles in Ecuador

Tougher Regulations for Mining in Ecuador (Nov 2008)

On Monday, November 10 2008, the El Comercio Newspaper (second biggest in Ecuadoro) carried a story highlighting tougher new fiscal and environmental regulations proposed in the new mining law for mining companies working in Ecuador, including a minimum 5% royalty; clauses to close down a mine for environmental damage, and higher taxes (The Constitution mandates the equivlalent of a 51% income tax on all extractive industries).

http://www.elcomercio.com/noticiaEC.asp?id_noticia=235247&id_seccion=6

COPPER MESA MINING CORPORATION AND ITS TROUBLES IN ECUADOR

Copper Mesa Mining Corporation (ex Ascendant Copper Corporation) continues to make light of very serious problems it is facing with its Ecuadorian mining project. These are the facts:

On 19 September, the company announced that:

That it has received confirmation from the National Director of Mines (“NDM”) that both the Golden 1 and Golden 2 concessions, which comprise the important Junin copper-molybdenum prospect in the Imbabura Province of Ecuador, are to be reinstated to the Company

DECOIN reported two months back that the government had turned down a request from the Ministry of Mines to annul the concessions based on a constitutional issue.

The more serious issue of the validity of the company’s concessions is more closely related to the April 2008 Mining Mandate (see below), by which the equivalent of Ecuador´s Congress annulled more than 4,000 mining concessions- including- according to government officials- all of the company’s concessions in Intag- Golden 1 and 2 inclusive. SEE BELOW FOR MORE DETAILS

On August 2008, the Municipality of Cotacachi, where Copper Mesa´s Junin mining concessions are found created an 18,009 hectare protected area right over most of Copper Mesa´s concessions. Mining is prohibited in the protected area.Constitution and Mining- Article 208 of Ecuador´s newly drafted Constitution, obligates the country to take NOT LESS than 50% of the benefits, or profits, gained from the exploitation of the country’s mineral resources. In other words, the automatic tax on mining earnings will be at least 50%, and it does not include other taxes, such as corporate tax, the 15% they must share with their workforce, and other taxes the new law may impose, such as windfall tax. Given all these taxes on mineral extraction, corporate taxes may end up being over 75%.. The referendum for the approval of the Constitution was held on Sept 28 and the Constitution approved approved.

There are many other reasons why the JUNIN mining project will never go forth in Intag, including the extraordinary biological importance where the copper deposit is located (primary forests home to dozens of endangered species), the illegality of mining in archeological areas, the unique opposition by local governments and communities (unanimous opposition), the human rights violations linked to the company’s presence, the lawsuits presented in Canada, to mention just a few of the issues discussed in details below.

Validity of the concessions and the Mining Mandate. In the past DECOIN has put in doubt the validity of the company’s concessions. In April of 2008, the equivalent of the country’s Congress emitted the Mining Mandate, annulling over 4,000 mining concessions, or approximately 80% of the mining concessions in the country. This, according to government officials, includes all of Copper Mesa’s concessions in Intag.

Estimate at the Junin site. The Estimate, was nearly FOUR TIMES LARGER than what years of Japanese exploration work at the site uncovered (total only of 2.2 million tons of copper of possible reserves, but the reserves have never been proven) The last exploration taking place in the Junin mining concessions were in 1996.

TRUE MAGNITUDE OF RESERVES: Questions surrounding the company’s real assets: IN 2007, Micon International, publicly admitted that due to termite damage and other factors IT COULD NOT CONFIRM ITS EARLIER COPPER

2007. Early in the year, the government ordered the company to stop work in the Intag area, telling the company the concessions were annulled. The company told its investors that the government had purported to annul the concessions.

Loss of 17 Properties. Something else the company “forgot” to tell its investors was that in 2007, the government abolish 17 of the company’s properties around the Junin mining site

STOP WORK ORDER. On December 19th 2006, the company incorrectly told the public that the government had not ordered it to stop its activities within the Junin project concessions. Yet, the document from the Ministry of Energy and Mines dated December 8 th 2006 plainly asked the company to stop its activities, until its Environmental Impact Study was approved, a process that could take many months or a year to complete. It’s important to highlight that the Ministry did not limit the stop-work order to just mining activities. This drastic step was taken principally because of the environment of violence and terror generated when The company Cooper’s contractor, Falericorp–financed by Copper Mesa Mining Corporation–hired armed personnel to force their way, with guns and tear gas, into Copper Mesa’s concessions. They were unsuccessful. The company has falsely claimed Falericorp is an agricultural company; in reality it sells communication equipment. The use of armed thugs and violence turned the press and public against the company. It also shattered virtually all the support the company had within the government, Intag and the rest of the country.

LOCAL OPPOSITION. One of the most troubling aspects about The company’s distortion of information is how it has kept from Canadian regulators and its investors the facts about the nature of the local opposition it faces. The company has continually claimed that it is just a few radical people—”ecoterrorists” in their parlance–and mainly one local organization, DECOIN, that oppose its project. Yet every single Township government in the Intag region, both Cotacachi County and the Provincial governments, not to mention most communities within and adjacent to the company’s mining concessions, have publicly expressed their opposition to the mining project. This makes local government opposition unanimous, something seldom achieved in Ecuador’s history of resistance to mining. In addition, approximately 90% of the NGOs working in Intag and Cotacachi County (where the Junin project is located) also have expressed their opposition.

VIOLENCE. One of the central themes of the company’s misinformation campaign is to lay blame on anti-mining forces for the violence in Intag. It was the company, however, through its contractor Falericorp, that in November used tear gas against defenseless local people. It was also The company that hired an army helicopter and financed the hiring of the armed military and ex-military personnel who tried unsuccessfully to storm the company’s concessions on December 2 nd of this year. And it was pro-mining forces, allegedly led by several The company employees, who, on the 6 th of December 2006, threw stones, Molotov cocktails and burning tires and fired shots at a anti-mining group. These were directed at the Mayor of Cotacachi and the Governor of the province of Imbabura, who, together with journalists and a large anti-mining group, were trying to reach the community of Junin.

This violence came on the heels of the October 17 th pre-dawn raid to the home of a well-known anti-mining activist by nineteen heavily armed police. The police came bearing arrest and search warrants as a result of completely trumped-up robbery charges made by someone supposedly working for The company. They came in unmarked cars, some of which were identified as belonging to the company.

As a result of actions such as the above, national and international human rights bodies, including the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Amnesty International and Global Witness, looked into and reported on the violence and human rights violations affecting individuals and organizations opposed to The company’s project in Intag.

Land purchases. Many of the properties The company purchased around the Junin site are illegal, either because the company bought land that is supposed to be used exclusively for agricultural purposes, they lie within protected forests (Chontal), or because government entities illegally adjudicated state land within mining concessions. Already several land titles have been declared invalid in this area and the authorities and in total, in 2007 the company lost 17 of its properties for irregularities linked to the transnactions, something which was never reported to its stockholders.

Although DECOIN has been unable to confirm the persistent reports of kickbacks involving land deals, it is a very well known fact that The company has paid up to 30 times the real worth of properties, and purchased some outside the mining concessions.

The Environmental Impact Study. The company’snews releases have repeatedly stated that the EIS was finished, had been presented to the government, and that approval was expected in a matter of weeks (in the company’s 2005 annual report it stated that it had completed the EIS, and that it would be submitted in April of 2005 [it is interesting, to say the least, that the Terms of Reference for the EIS was approved in June 2006!!]) Yet, in the June 2006 Financial Statement the company stated that the EIS had not yet been submitted. On December 8, 2006, the Ministry of Energy and Mines informed The company’s Ecuador General Manager that their Junin Environmental Impact Study was so flawed that they were unable even to process it. They pointed out, among other things, that the company had not socialized its content with communities most at risk.

The government stated in an official letter to Ascendant, will have to comply with (tough newly created) regulations controlling the consultation process with the communities.If done properly, an EIS can take months and hundreds of thousands of dollars to complete. With the change in government, there will be new officials in the Ministry of Energy and Mines who will be more stringent in seeking complete compliance. No more friends in High Places for the company. It is also certain that the new progressive government will annul many of the country’s mining concessions, granted after Ecuador’s 1998 Constitution came into effect, which required communities to be previously consulted.

ECOLOGICAL, SOCIAL, ARCHEOLOGICAL AND OTHER FACTORS. The Junin mining project is adjacent to two legally protected areas: the Chontal Bosque Protector, and the Cotacachi-Cayapas Wilderness Area. In spite of what The company has been saying, most of the concessions encompass PRIMARY cloud forests, which are part of the Tropical Andes Biological Hotspot, the hottest of all Hotspots. The threatened forests protect dozens of pristine streams and rivers, are home to dozens of endangered mammal, amphibian, bird and plant species. These include Jaguars, Ocelots, Spectacled Bears, Pumas, the critically endangered Brown-headed Spider Monkey, and Plate-billed Mountain Toucan, to mention only some of the most prominent. The threat to the spider monkey, which requires mature forests, constitutes a major obstacle to the project, as was highlighted in the scientific work at the nearby Los Cedros Biologial Reserve in 2006.After reviewing all the information regarding the project’s environmental impacts, our organization concluded that there is no other mining project in the world that threatens so many endangered species.

ECOLOGICAL ORDINANCE. In April of 2000, Cotacachi County, where Copper Mesa’s Junin concessions are located, created a strict environmental ordinance that prohibits activities that threaten the County’s native forests, or to contaminate its water resources with heavy metals, such as The company’s project threaten to do. Social Impacts. The earlier Japanese Environmental Impact Study carried out for the Junin mining project, and based on four years of drilling, and a small portion of the total of the 2.3 million tons of copper they inferred they discovered, called for the relocation of four communities to make room for the mine (this is nearly 4X less than The company’s estimate) All of these communities oppose the mining project, and they have stated they will not relocate peacefully.

ARCHEOLOGY. Parts of the mining area are rich in pre-Incan archeological sites–including earthen pyramids and thousands of tombs. This was confirmed in The company’s own Environmental Impact Study. What possibly The company has kept from you is that Ecuadorian law prohibits mining in archeological areas.

FUTURE CHANGES TO THE MINING LAW. For mining companies doing business overseas, modifications to mining legislation can be a company’s worse nightmare (this already occurred, see beginning of article). The recent violence surrounding Canadian mining companies in Ecuador–including the violence of armed groups in Junin financed by The company–not only shocked the nation, but led government officials to propose major changes to Ecuador’s mining legislation (see above) The proposed new mining law, soon to be submitted for approval, is starkly different than the current law, and is by far the toughest mining legislation in the continent.

FINANCIAL ISSUES. If you still feel this is a viable project and company, consider the following: The company has raised over 20 million dollars since its creation in 2004 (more counting Ascendant Exploration), with little to show by way of positive accomplishment. The company’s March 31 st 2006 first quarter report stated that “The Company currently has approximately US $5 million earmarked this year for a 22 hole, 15,000 meter, drilling program for Junin once the EIS process is complete…..” (*see above for EIS irregularities)The report further noted that The work program will concentrate on the exploration and development of the Junin property . Maintenance fees will be paid and the Chaucha concession will be maintained in good order (p. 10; Outlook Section- bold mine) As pointed out earlier, Copper Mesa has not drilled a single meter in the Junin site as part of its suppossed exploration program.

An investor might well question where the millions supposedly spent in exploration ended up.

Perhaps they went here.

Copper Mesa officials has carried out several questionable deals with other directors, either hiring them or their companies directly for management support or the like, or buying mining concessions outright on The company’s home turf from companies owned by common directors. For example, on May 10th of 2006, The company purchased the Magdalena mining property from Ascension Gold, a company partly owned by Paul Grist, for $ 25,000, and ceded a 2% net smelter royalty fee for Ascension. Grist was one of The company’s directors at the time of the transaction. Had the company itself done the concession paperwork, it would have cost a fraction of what was paid, and it would not have had to give up any royalty rights. In most parts of the world, these kind of deals would likely qualify as conflict of interest. Perhaps it helps that The company’s quarterly financial statements are unaudited.

Investors should also take note of the guesswork involved in Junin’s inferred mineral deposit.

Under Canadian law, a ‘Qualified Person’ is obliged to undertake a site visit when preparing the technical report to determine a mining property’s inferred mineral deposit. In the case of the Junin property, the visit was to determine the amount of the inferred copper and molybdenum deposit. However, in a letter dated July 12, 2006 The company’s CEO admitted to the Canadian Ambassador that the company had, to date, been unable to access its “legally-owned concessions” in the Intag region (the Junin property) Yet the supposed site visit, an obligatory part of the appraisal of the mineral deposit, allegedly took place more than a year prior to the letter being written.

As stated earlier, Micon Internantional said in 2007 that due to damage to the core samples, they could no longer confirm their estimates.

In 2006, based on the above information, the Canadian Environmental Law Association presented a claim to the Ontario Securities Commission. The results of the ongoing investigation could seriously undermine the inferred amount of minerals at the Junin property. Risky Business? In June of 2006, RAB CAPITAL (UK) sold all of its 2.3 million The company shares (amounting to 11.8% of The company’s shares) The question begs itself: which one of the multitude of risk factors finally forced the prestigious investment firm to rid itself of The company’s investments.

The above is only a sampling of the abundant examples of troubling financial information coming out of The company. We hope it’s enough to motivate you to ask Copper Mesa a few tough questions. Prepared by DECOIN, Defensa y Conservación Ecológica de Intag, January 1, 2007 For additional information, please see: wwww.decoin.org, miningwatch.ca; the ascendantalert.ca, intagsolidarity.org, the companycopper.com, and sedar.comsedar.com

View Comments

By Carlos Zorrilla, August 21, 2008

espaniol abajo
On August 18 the County government of Cotacachi unanimously approved a new Ordinance creating the County’s first municipal protected area encompassing 18, 000 hectares pristine micro watersheds and primary and seconary forests harboring dozens of threatened species, incluing the critically endangered brow-faced spider monkey, jaguars, and Spectacled Beas. The protected area include significant amounts of the area under Copper Mesa Mining Corporation’s Golden 1 and 2 concessions, which were reverted to the Ecuadorian government earlier this year. The municipal area includes the 1,500 hectares forest reserve managed by the community of Junin for its ecotourism activities since 1997. Ecuador´s current Constitution gives local governments the right to create protected areas.

The protected area will be managed by the different communties, and no activities that may degrade water, forests or biodiversity will be allowed, including mining.

El 18 de agosto, el gobierno municipal d Cotacachi unanimamente aprovo una nueva ordenanza creando su primera area protegida municipal, la cual abarca 18,000 hectareas que protegen micro cuencas pristinas, bosques primarios y secundarios y el habitat de decenas de especies de animales en peligro de extincion, incluyendo jaguares, osos de anteojos y el criticamente amenazado mono arana cabeci-café. La area cubre una buena parte del area minera de Copper Mesa Mining Corporation (Ascendant Copper) del proyecto JUNIN, y también abarca las 1,500 hectáreas manejadas por la comunidad de Junin como parte de su proyecto de turismo comunitario desde 1997. La Constitución actual le da el derecho a los gobiernos locales de crear sus propias areas protegidas.

La area protegida sera maneajada por las comunidades, y no se permitira actividades que degraden el agua, los bosques o la biodiversidad, incluyendo la minería

View Comments

By Carlos Zorrilla, August 6, 2008

Ascendant’s new name; Copper Mesa Mining Corp
The Constitutional Tribunal rules- too late- in favor of Ascendant.
Lawsuit against Carlos Zorrilla declared illegal and malicious;
Upcoming lawsuit in Canada

In the last few years, the shares of Copper Mesa Mining Corp (formerly Ascendant Copper Corporation) have lost approximately 94% of their value, so it was only a matter of time before they would try to change their name, which is what they announced on June 27th (a decision apparently taken by a tiny percentage of its shareholders- most of them company officers).

The proposed new name is Copper Mesa Mining Corp. The company is waiting for regulatory approval.(http://www.canadanewswire.ca/en/releases/archive/June2008/27/c8603.html.If they are dreaming the name-change will help “clean up their image” and to make it harder to link the company to its dark past here in Ecuador, or for its officers to avoid criminal lawsuits in Canada, they indeed are dreaming.

Constitutional Court rules- too late- in favor of Ascendant.
In July of 2008 DECOIN found out the constitutional court threw out the case presented last year by the Ministry of Mines and Petroleum against Ascendant’s mining concessions in Intag. However, the ruling will not, in the least, affect Ascendant’s loss of its concessions under the resolutions taken by the National Assembly in April of this year, which annulled 88% of Ecuador’s mining concessions. We believe that Ascendant and its subsidiaries will lose all of its concessions in the country in the coming weeks.

Lawsuit declared malicious.
On July of 2006, Leslie Brooke Chaplin, a US citizen, accused Carlos Zorrilla of theft, assault and other made up things, during a completely peaceful public event, and in which hundreds of anti-mining protesters participated (and which was also filmed and monitored by police). The false charges led to arrest and search warrants and a police raid on Mr. Zorrilla’s home, violating a surprising number of laws and basic human rights.The 19 heavily armed police failed to find Carlos, but did leave behind a gun and a probable drug substance meant to further incriminate him in other criminal lawsuits (which, indeed, resulted in another arrest warrant). On July 3rd of this year, the judge overseeing the case finally ruled that the charges WERE MALICIOUS AND RECKLESS.This is the legal definition of malicious lawsuit: involving malice; characterized by wicked or mischievous motives or intentions.“An act done maliciously is one that is wrongful and performed willfully or intentionally, and without legal justification”.In other words, made up to cause harm; false without legal grounds.

The ruling opens the way for Mr. Zorrilla to sue for libel and damages and to open a full-scale investigation to identify the company and/or individuals responsible for the orchestration and funding of this travesty of justice.This, by the way, is the same lawsuit in which Chaplin’s lawyer says he never met Leslie Brooke Chaplin and that his signature was forged on all the legal documents presented in the case. The lawyer is suing Chaplin for the equivalent of identity theft- an extremely serious criminal offense in Ecuador.

And, stay tuned for some earth-shaking news related to an upcoming lawsuit in Canada.

Those pesky other obstacles
Another look at Copper Mesa.Ascendant’s 2008 First Quarter Reports and What the Company is Not Telling and MANY other Pesky Obstacles.

Loss of Concessions.In past economic reports, Copper Mesa officials do a great job of not admitting that the government basically took away their Junin mining concession (Golden 1 and Golden 2) This is what the company says in its latest financial report:”In late January 2008, Ascendant received notices from the Regional Director of Mines, Province of Pichincha, that purport to nullify two concessions, the Golden 1 and Golden 2, that form part of the Junin copper/molybdenum project in Ecuador on the basis that these concessions were granted unconstitutionally”. The government didn’t ‘purport’ to nullify the concessions- it nullified them, plain and clear…. AND legally. Whether a higher court or the Ministry rule otherwise in the future on appeal is totally besides the point. What the company should have told its investors was that their concessions were abolished but that they were negotiating with the government, appealing, begging, threatening to sue, etc.- anything but that the government purported to nullify their concessions. So, legally, right now they do not own Golden 1 nor Golden 2. And even with the latest ruling, the Mining Mandate (explained) below assures that the concessions will stay out of their hands.The Mining Mandate.

On prior releases, the company has given the impression that the Mining Mandate, approved by a 95-1 margin by the nation’s Constituent Assembly on April of 2008, merely froze mining activities in the country. True enough, but the Mandate also abolished concessions rights – without recourse to payment- of 80% of the country’s concessions- including Ascendant’s and any other that: a) threatened water resources; b) was not up to date on its payments to the government; c) did not have an Environmental Impact Study approved, and it limits concessions to 3 concessions per company (including subsidiaries). This sure seems material in nature. The Mandate also called for the creation of a state mining company. Under the Mandate there is no guarantee whatsoever that the companies will recuperate their concessions once the new mining law is drafted. The law will set forth totally new conditions on which to grant mining concessions and approve mining activities, and they are bound to include payment of royalties, a high windfall profit tax, a higher income tax bracket for mining companies, much stricter social and environmental regulations, and a steep per-hectare registration fee. And, there’s a very good chance the state-owned mining company will usurp the juiciest mining projects. The new law, by the way, cannot modify or be in conflict with the Mandate. According to recent (August 2008) Northern Miner article, the expected changes in the law do not bode well for mining companies in Ecuador.

Exploration? In Junin? The company has claimed on several occasions that it has spent money on exploring in the Junin concessions. This is patently false. The last exploration that took place in the Junin area was done by Bishimetals, back in 1996. In case there is any doubt about the above statement, Copper Mesa, formerly Ascendant Copper Corporation has not spent a single penny on exploratory activities in its Junin project. If you look back in the last of the company’s finacial reports, you will find the company saying it has spent millions of dollars on this.

Below is the latest claim:The Company used $1,745,000 in operating activities during the three months ended March 31, 2008, primarily for general and administrative expenses and exploration costs relating to the Junin and Chaucha properties (emphasis mine)
The Problematic Junin Deposit (made more problematic by damn termites!!)On the latest report, the company makes reference to the Micon International’s NI 43-101 report, which designated the Junin deposit to be four times larger than what the Japanese inferred through years of exploration. However, the company failed to inform the public in its latest report that Micon publicly said last year that it can no longer verify its claim, due to damage sustained to the original core samples by, among other factors, termite damage. If a company was, for some obscure reason, wanting to cover up misleading information it generated, this is a damn good way to do it (of course Decoin is not suggesting anything of the sort). The company also failed to inform the public that there a complaint was filed in Canada questioning the procedure used by Micon to assess Ascendant’s Junin’s mineral deposit.Loss of Properties.The company did not report the loss of 17 of its properties in the Junin area. The company permanently lost title to these lands, land which were sitting on top of the copper deposit, when the National Institute for Agrarian Development (INDA) legally abolished the company’s ownership rights due to illegalities in the granting of the original land titles. Given that the company had said that part of their strategy to acquiring properties in the Junin area was to gain access to their concessions- this could constitute a material event.Those Pesky Obstacles.The obstacles listed above are just some of the many the company faces. For example, there is still the fact that most of the Junin concession is covered in primary cloud forests harboring dozens of threatened mammals, birds and amphibians (including the critically endangered brown-faced spider-monkey, jaguars, and spectacled bears). The area is also extremely rich in archeological sites. Under Ecuadorian law, mining in these areas is illegal.

Others include the fact that there is just not enough water in the site or adjacent areas to undertake a mining project the size envisioned by Ascendant; the long-standing opposition by local governments and communities, and of course, the fact that there is a County government law that prohibits mining in native forests! Not to mention that the area above the minerals is not only in primary and secondary native forests, but that it has been managed and occupied by the Junin Community since 1997 and forms part of its community tourism project!Then there was Telimbela…. And ChauchaWith nothing to show as far as real exploratory results, a mining mandate freezing all mining activities, no environmental impact study approved- nor likely in the near or mid-term future….. well, you get the picture. As for Chaucha:: no exploration can take place; and, if it hasn’t already, the company may lose its concession. And wasn’t it last year that the Chilean miner Antofagasta pulled out of the deal it had to develop this site because of very poor results?

Resumen: El juez penal sentenciO que la demanda presentada por Leslie Brooke Chaplin en Julio del 2006 por robo en contra de Carlos Zorrilla fue maliciosa y temeraria, abriendo el camino a que Carlos enjuicie penalmente a Chaplin y se pueda realizar una investigacion para dar con los responsables reales del montaje judicial en contra de Carlos.Mientras tanto, Ascedandt Copper esta tramitando un cambio de nombre a Copper Mesa Mining Company, despues de que sus acciones habrían perdido cerca del 95% de su valor inicial en los ultimos años…Y, el Tribunal Constitucional sentenciO que la demanda de inconstitucionalidad presentada por el Ministerio de Minas y Petróleo el año pasado en contra de las concesiones mineras de Ascendant en Intag no procede- una resolución muy tardía, ya que la empresa perdiO sus concesiones en Abril de este anio por via del Mandato Minero, el mismo que anulO el 88% de las concesiones en el país.

View Comments

By Carlos Zorrilla, July 20, 2008

One thing is clear: Asscendant’s name change hasn’t affected the distortion of facts.

Below is a couple of excerpts from their brand new web page http://www.coppermesacorp.com/properties/south_america/junin/

Property claims… the company claims it owns the JUNIN mining concessions, but does not tell the public or potential investors that the Ecuadorian Government annulled 88% of the country’s mining concessions, and that the company had to abandon the Intag area in early 2008

2 : Ascendant’s short-term objective is to gain access to the Junin property for commencement of exploration

The truth is that Ascendant Coppper / Copper Mesa Mining Corp doesn’t even have an Environmental Impact Study approved. The last one turned in to the government was flatly rejected. THIS WAS IN 2006. They haven’t submitted another one. Want to guess why?

The company has the following amusing heading :
signed exploration agreement with communities in 2006:
It would be great if the company would publish the alleged document. If they are referring to one signed in 2006 by an organization completely discredited by local authorities, not representative of anyone or anything, and the same organization which was offered 1 million per year if Ascendant got the go-ahead for exploration- then they are grasping at straws in the wind. Said document was annulled by the local government, and there is no agreement with the communities around the mining site. There is only rejection. And, if this wasn’t enough, all local governments are continuing their rejection of mining in the area.

How much Copper really? What is really there? The company claims that its JUNIN concessions hold about 3-4 times more copper and Molybdenum , than what was INFERRED by a Mitsubishi subsidiary in the early 1990′s after years of drilling (the last drilling taking place in JUNIN was in 1996). In 2007 Micon international, the outfit that created the higher estimate for Ascendant, said that it was unable to confirm its inferred amount. In the meantime, Ascendant has been telling the public and regulators that it has spent millions of dollars in exploration costs, even though Ascendant has not explored anything at all in its Junin mining concessions.

Why, if the “new” company is serious about working in Ecuador and being transparent with its investors, doesn’t inform them on their web site that their titles are in serious trouble, that they in fact, have spent money on other things but exploration, that they lost 17 of their properties in and around the JUNIN area, and that their much higher inferred estimate of the mineral deposit may be incorrect? Why do they not update their site and the information and start reporting real facts? The only conclusion must be that though the name changed, everything else remains the same.

More next week on a very important event in Canada.