B.Bat-Erdene explains why he wants the PM to resign
MP B.Bat-Erdene answered our correspondent’s questions relating to his demand that Prime Minister S.Batbold resign.
Q: What is your reason for demanding the resignation of Prime Minister S.Batbold?
A: The nine MPs who submitted the note demanding his resignation, including me, believe that the Government has not followed the law on Parliament because the Government issued a joint note with a foreign company. [Earlier this month, the Government issued a joint note with Ivanhoe Mines and Rio Tinto, reaffirming all three parties’ commitment to the 2009 Oyutolgoi mining agreement.] We have submitted the resignation demand under the 11th provision of the law on Parliament.
Q: Why did you submit your demand during the session of Parliament?
A: Parliament managing officials refused to accept our resignation demand. That is why we handed the demand over to Speaker D.Demberel during the session.
Q: Can you explain the main reason for the demand?
A: Amendment of the Oyutolgoi agreement is in the interest of the Mongolian people, and some MPs have demanded that the Government amend the Oyutolgoi agreement under the 40th and 57th protocols of Parliament. Prime Minister S.Batbold issued the joint note with Ivanhoe Mines and Rio Tinto. His action confirmed that the Government has no desire to amend the Oyutolgoi investment agreement.
The MPs have demanded his resignation under a provision of the Constitution that says the prime minister must enforce legislation and take responsibility for it before Parliament.
Q: What about the investor companies’ positions?
A: MPs have demand the resignation according to their authority, and we did not submit the issue to Oyutolgoi LLC, Ivanhoe Mines, and Rio Tinto. But Ivanhoe Mines and Rio Tinto have sent letters to the MPs and have tried to influence the decisions of legislative groups. The last note was about Mongolian politicians’ greed.
Q: The Government says it did not violate protocols or laws, and that your demand is unreasonable. What do you say about that?
A: Other countries in similar situations have received payments six to eight years after the initial investment. The MPs demand that Mongolia should own 50 percent of the project after the first investment payment.
Q: Could Parliament decide the investment issue with legislation to circumvent the agreement?
A: We demanded to amend the law on mineral resources before the investment agreement, but Parliament postponed discussion of a draft law on mineral resources. We concluded that the law on mineral resources was passed under the influence of a foreign mining company in 1997. Big foreign mining companies try to influence legislation before they exploit mineral resources in a country.
Q: What will you do if Parliament refuses to discuss the resignation issue?
A: The Speaker stated his position that the Oyutolgoi agreement should meet the protocols of Parliament at the end of the spring session and at the opening of the autumn session. But his position has changed in recent days. He accepted our demand without comment. If Parliament will not discuss the issue, we will raise the issue that the Government has not followed the law on Parliament.
Q: What is your reason for demanding the resignation of Prime Minister S.Batbold?
A: The nine MPs who submitted the note demanding his resignation, including me, believe that the Government has not followed the law on Parliament because the Government issued a joint note with a foreign company. [Earlier this month, the Government issued a joint note with Ivanhoe Mines and Rio Tinto, reaffirming all three parties’ commitment to the 2009 Oyutolgoi mining agreement.] We have submitted the resignation demand under the 11th provision of the law on Parliament.
Q: Why did you submit your demand during the session of Parliament?
A: Parliament managing officials refused to accept our resignation demand. That is why we handed the demand over to Speaker D.Demberel during the session.
Q: Can you explain the main reason for the demand?
A: Amendment of the Oyutolgoi agreement is in the interest of the Mongolian people, and some MPs have demanded that the Government amend the Oyutolgoi agreement under the 40th and 57th protocols of Parliament. Prime Minister S.Batbold issued the joint note with Ivanhoe Mines and Rio Tinto. His action confirmed that the Government has no desire to amend the Oyutolgoi investment agreement.
The MPs have demanded his resignation under a provision of the Constitution that says the prime minister must enforce legislation and take responsibility for it before Parliament.
Q: What about the investor companies’ positions?
A: MPs have demand the resignation according to their authority, and we did not submit the issue to Oyutolgoi LLC, Ivanhoe Mines, and Rio Tinto. But Ivanhoe Mines and Rio Tinto have sent letters to the MPs and have tried to influence the decisions of legislative groups. The last note was about Mongolian politicians’ greed.
Q: The Government says it did not violate protocols or laws, and that your demand is unreasonable. What do you say about that?
A: Other countries in similar situations have received payments six to eight years after the initial investment. The MPs demand that Mongolia should own 50 percent of the project after the first investment payment.
Q: Could Parliament decide the investment issue with legislation to circumvent the agreement?
A: We demanded to amend the law on mineral resources before the investment agreement, but Parliament postponed discussion of a draft law on mineral resources. We concluded that the law on mineral resources was passed under the influence of a foreign mining company in 1997. Big foreign mining companies try to influence legislation before they exploit mineral resources in a country.
Q: What will you do if Parliament refuses to discuss the resignation issue?
A: The Speaker stated his position that the Oyutolgoi agreement should meet the protocols of Parliament at the end of the spring session and at the opening of the autumn session. But his position has changed in recent days. He accepted our demand without comment. If Parliament will not discuss the issue, we will raise the issue that the Government has not followed the law on Parliament.
Comments
Post a Comment