Interviews were conducted with a GEMCO company representative and an Anindilylakwa Land Council representative who works closely with Traditional Owners on issues related to mining. The Traditional Owners themselves were not interviewed as part of the case study due to initial difficulties in establishing contact with them and time constraints once that contact was made possible. De Beers Canada – Victor, Gahcho Kue & Snap Lake projects and a commitment to engage with a First nation on the basis of its FPIC Protocol Name of Projects: Victor, Gahcho Kue and Snap Lake Company: De Beers (80% owned by Anglo American) (Gahcho Kue project is a joint-venture with Mountain Province Diamonds). Location: Ontario and Northwest Territories, Canada Indigenous Peoples: Attawapiskat, Moose, Fort Albany and Kashechewan Cree First Nations and Yellowknives Dene, the Tłı̨ icho, the Lutsel K’e and Kache Dene First Nations Minerals: Diamonds Current Status: Victor and Snap Lake ongoing projects, Gahcho Kue currently in regulatory process to proceed to mining stage. This case study is to be read in the context of the disclaimer on page 41 with regard to De Beers’ current policies and practices. De Beers’ 2012 Community Policy commits it to seek FPIC of communities for projects with potentially substantial impacts on their rights. The company currently has operations in Botswana, Canada, Namibia and South Africa. Since 2008, De Beers Canada has had a policy in place which requires consent at the exploitation phase of projects and recognized First Nations right to veto mining projects. This case study briefly addresses De Beers Canada’s experience in three of its projects. Two are operational mines, the Victor and Snap Lake mines, and the third is the currently proposed Gahcho Kue project. Finally, the positive experience of a Canadian First Nation in obtaining a commitment from De Beers to respect their FPIC protocols is also addressed. Victor project: In the case of the Victor project, three impact benefit agreements were entered into with the Attawapiskat (2005), Moose Cree (2007) and Fort Albany and Kashechewan (2009) First Nation communities in the James Bay area of Ontario. The communities are remote, with no permanent road access, and rely on a subsistence economy. None had experience with mining operations in or near their territories. They continue to be particularly socio-economically disadvantaged, with unemployment up to 90% in some communities. Educational attainment is low and health and drug abuse problems common. The De Beers representative explained that they had followed the guidance of the Canadian courts in Corbiere v. Canada167 that for consultations to be meaningful they had to involve a majority of people both on and off reserves. A referendum was held in 2005 in the Attawapiskat community in which up to 85% of the people who turned out to vote, with the support of their leaders, had voted in favour of the agreement. The percentage of the actual population who voted is estimated to be between 22 and 48 per cent of the population, which the company holds is in line with the turnout for leadership elections.168 Over the last three years there have been blockades by Attawapiskat community members of the seasonal ice road, which De Beers uses to deliver fuel and other supplies to the mine. The 2009 protests arose in part as a result of frustration around inadequate information the community felt it had received from their Chief and Council members on specific Impact and Benefit Making Free, Prior and Informed Consent a Reality 63

Select target paragraph3