Acosta had letter -- but not carte blanche
Crystallex International Corporation KRY
Shares issued 34,000,000 Mar 20 close $5.35
Fri 20 Mar 98 Street Wire
ALVAREZ A LAME DUCK
by Stockwatch Business Reporter
Dr Bernardo Alvarez, the Venezuelan congressman who presides over that
country's parliamentary energy-and-mines committee, says yes, he gave
Crystallex International super-critic Rafael Rodriguez Acosta a letter of
introduction for a Miami mining conference, but no, this letter did not
authorize him to inflame the Crystallex controversy by going public with
his allegations.
Or so says a report by Roy Carson, the Crystallex super-supporter and
editor of an English-language Venezuelan news service on the Inernet,
VHeadline/VNews. "It's one thing to speak for Venezuelan investments at the
meeting and another that he takes liberties at a press conference to
directly compromise the opinion of the energy-and-mines committee," Dr
Alvarez apparently told Mr Carson. "Rodriguez Acosta had routinely asked
for a letter of introduction and it was drafted by his personal assistant
and signed by himself."
Mr Acosta is president of an energy and mines subcommittee, named formally
the Subcommittee of Mines of the Committee of Mines and Energy of the Lower
House of Representatives, and so reports to Dr Alvarez, president of the
Committee of Mines and Energy of the Lower House of Representatives.
Happily for Mr Acosta and other Crystallex knockers, Dr Alvarez has been
served notice that his party has lost control of the senior committee,
which means the doctor is a lame duck until his replacement appears.
The existence of Dr Alvarez's introduction letter, the text of which was
released in Stockwatch on Thursday, the day after Mr Acosta's Miami
teleconference, appeared to contradict statements made by Dr Alvarez in
VHeadline/VNews. In a VNews story by Mr Carson, Dr Alvarez was quoted as
saying that Mr Acosta was not authorized to represent the energy-and-mines
committee. "I have to emphasize beyond all reasonable doubt that
Representative Rodriguez Acosta was not speaking on behalf of the
energy-and-mines committee," the about to be deposed Dr Alvarez reportedly
said.
In the letter of introduction dated March 10 and secured by Stockwatch,
however, Dr Alvarez said Mr Acosta, "as president of the Subcommittee of
Mines of the Committee of Mines and Energy of the Lower House of
Representatives, will assist as representative of same in the event
'Investing in the Americas'" in Miami.
In an interview with Stockwatch from Caracas late on Friday, Dr Alvarez
denied statements attributed to him by Mr Carson to the effect that Mr
Acosta would face a disciplinary hearing for his Miami comments. "I am not
at this point thinking of any disciplinary measures," Dr Alvarez stresses.
"I didn't say that to Mr Carson -- no, not at all. This is a very
complicated issue; you have to go through a very complicated (disciplinary)
process."
In Mr Carson's Internet account, Dr Alvarez was quoted as saying:
"Certainly (Mr Acosta) will be asked to explain himself before an internal
disciplinary committee and thereafter we will see."
Dr Alvarez says it is his committee's policy not to take sides on the
Crystallex controversy, adding he is not denying Mr Acosta his right to
free speech. "He is speaking his own opinions," Dr Alvarez says. "The
opinion of the congress is that we don't interfere with that (due process
before the courts). That's official. He went as a representative of the
committee but he was not speaking for the committee."
Dr Alvarez says the first thing he wants to do is to speak with Mr Acosta
to determine what the next course of action will be, if any. He adds that
his main concern in the Miami brouhaha was countering the impression in the
media that Mr Acosta was head of the country's mines-and-energy committee
or that he was speaking on behalf of either the committee, or even the
subcommittee, which Mr Acosta heads.
When Dr Alvarez made his comments, he had known for two days of his
upcoming demise as president of the mines-and-energy committee. According
to Caracas media reports, Dr Alvarez's party, the Radical Cause, lost
control of the committee. That apparently took effect on Wednesday at
midnight. According to a legal source in Caracas, however, Dr Alvarez
technically remains committee president until a replacement is named from
the rival Christian Democrats, probably early next week. Dr Alvarez did not
mention this development during the interview.
In September 1994, Mr Acosta's subcommittee issued a report into
allegations of bribery, corruption "and other irregularities" that
supposedly led to the transfer of a set of gold properties known
collectively as Carabobo to Crystallex. That report resulted in the
absolute nullification of the transfer by the federal government in July
1995. The properties included Carabobo, Santa Elena 7 and 8, and San Miguel
8 concessions. According to the report, transferal of the properties
benefited a few senior members of the ACOMIXSUR cooperative, to the
detriment of the majority.
When asked about the existence of the report, Dr Alvarez claimed to have no
knowledge of the matter. "I wasn't present on this committee" at the time,
he says. "I don't know anything about it." Dr Alvarez says he joined the
committee in April 1997. The full title of the report, which runs to over
50 pages, is "Special Committee to Investigate Alleged Acts of Corruption
and Other Irregularities in the Southern Mixed Mining Cooperative, in the
State of Bolivar."
When asked whether the energy-and-mines committee officially received the
subcommittee's report, Dr Alvarez said: "Look, I don't really know," he
says. "I don't know whether . . . I have to check it, check it out."
While promising to investigate the existence of the document, Dr Alvarez
says there are "a lot of pressures" on the committee over the
Crystallex-Placer Dome issue. "I took a decision . . . that particularly in
this dispute I would not take action because I think it has been very much
like a public quarrel. I haven't met people from Crystallex, I haven't met
people from Placer Dome. I don't know anybody . . . I don't know the status
(of the report). These are the things I want to talk to him (Mr Acosta)
about, you see."
While Crystallex acknowledges in regulatory disclosure statements that the
properties were declared null and void on July 5, 1995, it also says
repeatedly that it has had a challenge before the Venezuelan Supreme Court,
and that no judicial developments have taken place in this matter since
1995. Says a Crystallex statement to the SEC in May 1997: "The company has
applied directly to the Supreme Court of Venezuela in repsonse to this
position of (the mines ministry) for an order to affirm ACOMIXSUR's right
to sell the concessions and the company's entitlement thereto, subject to
making the final payment under the ACOMIXSUR agreement. The company does
not know when the court will hear and rule on the appeal."
At the Miami teleconference, Mr Acosta said Crystallex applied to the
supreme court to challenge the government's nullification order on
constitutional grounds but that the court dismissed the application.
Through an intermediary on Friday, Mr Acosta says Crystallex's court
challenge over Carabobo was dismissed "shortly after" July 5, 1995, however
he could not recall the exact date.
That dismissal was the end of the matter and there are no provisions for
appeal, he adds.
Crystallex officials, who attended the Miami investment conference that
ended on Thursday, remained unavailable for comment. |
