Dan Gertler Denies Allegations by ‘The Congo is not for sale’ platform

Faced with the recent allegations of the platform “The Congo is not for sale” (CNPAV), the Israeli businessman Dan Gertler reserves a categorical response.

In a letter addressed to the various organizations that have adhered to CNPAV’s position, Dan Gertler rejects the allegations put forward by this structure of Congolese civil society.

Below is the full letter sent by the Israeli billionaire to the various NGOs involved in the CNPAV platform.

Thank you for your letter of March 15, 2023, in response to the letter I sent to you (and other members of civil society) on February 7, 2023.

I also refer to the exchanges I have had with most of you since that initial letter.

The purpose of my previous letters was clear to you. Despite many years of your advocacy against me and my business interests, I have invited you to a roundtable so that I can share with you, on a transparent and collaborative basis, all the documents, materials and calculations you may wish to see. regarding my business activities in the DRC. (Indeed, I have made similar invitations before, in particular the one I sent to you in February 2021 (attached), in which I offered you the opportunity to review my past transactions in full transparency and openness. Unfortunately , you declined this invitation. If you had accepted this offer, your current questions would not have arisen – they would all have been answered).

My offer was without preconditions. I did not demand that you renounce your prior allegations against me, or commit to any process or outcome. My offer was genuine and sincere and it remains open.

Although I have consistently rejected allegations made by some NGOs in the past, I have never sought to stifle the work of civil society groups. Indeed, contrary to your position, the majority of civil society groups in the DRC today support the settlement. 

While generally supporting the work of civil society, I cannot be expected to stand by or defend freedom of expression under the guise of a civil society that is defamatory of me and to my detriment immediate staff and who, on occasion, broke the law.

I do not intend to respond to each of the allegations and implications of wrongdoing contained in your letter. Suffice it to say that I reject them all outright. However, I would like to draw your attention to a few points:

You are referring to the assets that my company will “return”. Please note that all assets were returned promptly after the settlement was signed. 

The transfer process, including all asset-related data and all hardware and software required to use that data, was completed during the months of March and April 2022.

An independent international Level 1 expert has carried out the valuation of the returned assets, which allows you to understand that the estimated value of $2 billion in assets and cash returned to the DRC is a conservative estimate.

– The amount of lost costs to be reimbursed by DRC to Ventora has been verified and audited by DRC and can be fully supported by documentary evidence. 

This sum has not yet been paid by the DRC although it received the assets nearly 12 months ago. Together with the level 1 assessment report mentioned above, this is an example of the documents that you will be familiar with during the roundtable to which I have invited you.

– The Settlement Agreement which you have already seen and which has been released in the public domain, contains the entire agreement between Ventora and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. 

The missing schedule (not the schedules) was the non-binding document dated February 9, 2022 which outlined the exact same terms of the settlement agreement, but in a non-binding format. 

The purpose of the February 24 agreement was to enshrine in a binding nature the terms that had previously been agreed. By its very nature, there is nothing in this appendix that can alter any of the terms of the settlement of which you are aware. You will be invited to review the non-binding terms sheet when we meet.

– I have stated on several occasions, and I confirm it today, that neither I nor any company of the Ventora group, nor any person or entity related to me or in which I or my family are beneficiaries have any interest in any mining or natural resource asset, permit, license or project in the DRC, except for the three remaining passive royalties of which you have already become aware.

– Ventora’s acquisition of royalty rights has been verified multiple times. These transactions were investigated and audited by independent parties such as Ernst & Young, as well as by the Democratic Republic of Congo (prior to the settlement) and the General Inspectorate of Finance (IGF) in their report on Gécamines.

 In each case, the parties have concluded that the transactions were made on fair commercial terms and at market value taking into account all available data and market conditions at the time of such transactions.

 Given the evolution of certain parameters and circumstances in the years following these acquisitions, Ventora agreed to pay an additional €249 million in royalties from KCC that it had previously acquired. 

This additional amount equates to actual future royalties of approximately €685 million in absolute terms. According to CNPAV calculations, the net present value of all KCC royalties being 380 million dollars (about 360 million euros), Ventora’s additional payment represents 70% of the total value of KCC royalties.

– As you know, I categorically deny the defamatory allegations made against Afriland in the July 2020 Global Witness and PPLAAF report. As a result, I have taken legal action against them in multiple jurisdictions.

 It should be noted that Bloomberg’s article on the report states that the organizations (i.e. GW and PPLAAF) “could not prove that the network was used to evade US sanctions and that he does not allege any criminal behavior”. Indeed, Global Witness and PPLAAF themselves state on page 8 of the report that they “cannot conclusively prove that Gertler actually set up this complex network to evade US sanctions since 2017.”

– I would be happy to share more details about my governance and compliance protocols with you at a future meeting.

Within the framework of a short letter, I do not expect to convince you of the errors of the decade-long campaign that you and your predecessors have waged against me.

 Nevertheless, and despite your mistaken belief that I have caused losses to the DRC, your consistent refusal to acknowledge the magnitude of the investments I have made and brought to the DRC is disappointing.

 Since my involvement in commercial activities in the DRC, I have invested more than 2 billion dollars in the acquisition, financing, maintenance, exploration and development of mining projects and have attracted other foreign investors in the DRC who have invested an unprecedented $15 billion in mining projects in the DRC.

These projects then brought in billions of dollars in taxes to the DRC, created jobs en masse, and dramatically increased production and value (which the DRC benefits from as a shareholder, royalty owner, and through taxes). ). The considerable and long-term benefits for the country are incalculable.

In conclusion, I believe the terms of the settlement are unprecedented and should be received positively, even by my critics. Your response and your continued campaign against me suggests that no settlement agreement would ever have satisfied you – only an illegal expropriation of Ventora’s assets, which itself would have plunged Ventora and the DRC into a decade-long arbitration in which the assets would have been blocked and worthless to the DRC.

 The consequences of the outcome you want for Ventora and the DRC are fundamentally bad for the Congolese people and I would be able to demonstrate this to you if you accepted the invitation that I address to you in this letter.

Instead, you should defend the settlement agreement as the first significant success of the United States’ Global Magnitsky sanctions regime and use it as a model for other sanctioned persons. Your current reaction is likely to lead to the opposite result – in the future, why would a sanctioned person reach a consensual settlement, transfer significant assets, and pay such a high price as I paid?

I respectfully ask that you consider the voices of the overwhelming number of hard-working local NGOs in the DRC who have been involved in and support the settlement, but whose opinion you seem to consider unworthy. These include NGOs that previously worked tirelessly against me.

You and any other NGO are invited to accept my meeting offer for a full and transparent engagement, without preconditions. This is an opportunity you should welcome, and if you truly represent the interests of the Congolese people, you will not pass up this offer.

Please accept, Mr President, the expression of my best regards,