McCarthy also said that Barrick is liable and responsible for any judgment that the province might obtain against PDI in the case. “Considerations of equity and efficiency, as well as a need for realism, therefore demand that Barrick be joined as a named Defendant in this litigation, if only to insure that no additional proceedings to collect against Barrick are required.”

“Because Barrick has long been aware of this lawsuit, and has long been involved in this lawsuit, it is not prejudiced by its addition as a party. That lack of prejudice is especially obvious in the circumstances of this lawsuit, where – despite its eight month tenure in the courts – no Defendant has filed an answer or given any discovery, even the jurisdictional discovery that Placer Dome now concedes to be proper, and no Defendant has done anything whatsoever to address the merits of this lawsuit,” the lead counsel explained.

Reservations

Macec’s executive secretary Miguel Magalang says he’s hopeful that the case will achieve a significant victory for the people. “Otherwise, we can only expect a ceremonial victory against Placer Dome because it has no more assets to use in case the court decides in our favor.”

Though Macec supports the case in Nevada, which they regard as a crucial venue in the struggle for environmental justice, Magalang admits to having some reservations because of the non-inclusion of the directly-affected individuals as plaintiffs in the case. If the court decides to grant compensatory awards, he said their group will ensure that the poor victims from mining-affected communities shall be given priority.

Meantime, Macec is set to present a declaration of support to the Nevada case signed by about 9,000 people and a resolution of endorsement from various barangay (village) councils in the province. Bulatlat

 Save as PDF