Tuesday, 13 January 2009

Peru: Majaz and Richard Ralph

For anyone following the Majaz torture story: see also this piece by blog ten percent on the involvement of British ambassador Richard Ralph.

So here’s the rub, a UK ambassador in Peru at a time when a UK mining company in conjunction with the police is behind the kidnap and torture of peaceful protesters with a legitimate grievances against an illegal mining project. Who then goes on to head this mining company. Is it reasonably possible he was ignorant of their crimes? Of the racist component? Of their laughable attempt to call protesters terrorists even as they tortured them? At the time he was an ambassador did he uphold any commitment to human rights and look to investigate this British company and Peruvian police abuses? Surely a UK ambassador to Peru who then goes on to become chair of a UK company abusing people in Peru should do due diligence to see what the company did in Peru? Are we to believe he knew nothing of what went on in Majaz? As his history shows his personal ethics are… a tad shaky shall we say, the question is- Were human right abuses swept under the rug on behalf of a UK mining company and the host government by an ambassador who then went on to chair that company?

I should have learnt better by now, but I keep falling into the trap of thinking that people representing countries abroad should be absolutely above board in all their dealings, so as not to reflect badly on their position and, by extension, their nation. If only, eh.

No comments: