DOCSLIB.ORG

Declaration Kintinian

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Declaration Kintinian DECLARATION ON THE INVOLUNTARY RESETTLEMENT OF AFFECTED COMMUNITIES OF "AREA ONE" BY THE ANGLOGOLD ASHANTI COMPANY OF GUINEA (SAG) We, as defenders of the rights of communities and as members of the Guinean civil society organizations the Center for International Commerce for Development (Centre de Commerce International pour le Développement, or CECIDE) and Equal Rights for All (Mêmes Droits pour Tous or MDT), express our grave concerns regarding the use of violence by the military in the conflict between the people of Kintinian and the AngloGold Ashanti Company of Guinea (Société AngloGold Ashanti de Guinée S.A., or SAG) over the company’s claim to a zone known as “Area One” for the purpose of expanding its mining operations. In fact, during the month of August 2016, SAG – a Guinean company of which 85% of the shares are held by the South African company Anglo Gold Ashanti Limited and 15% by the Republic of Guinea – intends to start a crucial step of the involuntary resettlement process involving approximately 377 households in the District of Kintinian 2 in the Rural Commune of Kintinian in Siguiri Prefecture, located roughly 770 km from Conakry. This step involves moving people into 19 out of an estimated 60 houses and 200 huts initially planned. CLAIMS There are numerous indications that communities’ rights have been violated over the course of the resettlement process, including: Physical violence by military forces against affected communities. In November 2015, according to a mission report authored by the commander of the 3rd military region in Kankan, 210 men were appointed by a requisition from the Governor of the city of Kankan in order to clear out Burkinabe and Malian foreigners who were present in the area engaged in semi-industrial exploitation of gold without authorization. Unexpectedly, the force proceeded to attack the people of Kintinian with clubs, tear gas, and even live ammunition. These attacks resulted in the wounding of a woman who was struck in the chest. The force also carried out mass arrests. In truth, the purpose of this mission was not only to allow an inventory of the household goods, but ultimately to force eviction of communities from "Area One." Consent obtained through violence. Several heads of household surveyed indicated that their consent to the terms of the resettlement agreements was obtained as a result of violence and intimidation, including fear of possible physical or emotional harm. For example, one head of household from Area One said: “The former Prefect called me to his home late at night. I was so scared. He told me that he had been directed by the government to arrest me if I continued to oppose the cession of Area One along with other affected people. He also told me that no one can oppose the cession of Area One to SAG, that it was an irreversible decision and I had to submit, whether willingly or by force. But if I stopped opposing SAG’s access to the area, he would not arrest me. I had no choice and I agreed.” Another head of household added: “We are really afraid of the use of force in case we refuse to cede our land. The army is capable of using violence against us again. That is why we signed this agreement, even though we did not really want to. The military officers, gendarmes and police steal from us here. They stole our bikes, phones, large amounts of money, machinery, etc.” Consent by error. Other heads of household from Area One said they signed the resettlement agreement in error. They say they learned of the content of the resettlement and compensation agreements only after having signed them in May and April. What is more, the pressure coming from the Prefect of Siguiri, the Kankan Governor, and other various Ministers including the President of the Republic since 2015, who have all traveled to Kintinian, has been exerted with the intent to coerce the people of Kintinian to consent to the cession of “Area One” without taking into account the conditions of the cession or even the protections of the law. Failure to consult affected communities on the involuntary resettlement plan, despite legal requirements. SAG has not consulted the people of Area One on the development in 2013 of the terms of the Resettlement Action Plan (Plan d’action pour les relocalisations et les compensations, or PARC), as required by national law and international standards. According to the PARC, the villages of Kintinian and Sétiguia were “excluded” from the consultations. The consultancy carrying out the study only consulted a few neighboring villages, “given the impossibility of conducting consultations in the villages of Kintinian and Sétiguia: which constitutes a serious violation of the law. Failure to make public and fully implement the involuntary resettlement plan, as required by law: The people of Kintinian say they have not seen the Resettlement Action Plan (or PARC) developed by SAG. They are completely ignorant of its contents. According to one head of household: “The Community Relations Manager said that SAG has the PARC. The company has permission from the State not to apply it this time, and this is non-negotiable. That is where the conflict between us started.” SAG representatives did not provide a copy of the PARC when it was requested by a delegation from CECIDE, MDT and the press. It took the intervention of an international interlocutor to get even an incomplete copy, without annexes. What is more, it is unclear how gender issues have been taken into account throughout the resettlement process. These indications and the very rushed manner in which SAG is carrying out the different steps of the resettlement process show that the company is not fully respecting the obligations to which it committed itself in the PARC, let alone its obligations under law. Paltry compensation. The inventory of household assets was not done by experts. Affected communities in Area One are greatly angered by the under-valuation of several types of assets. For example, the value of the land identified was not properly considered in determining levels of compensation. For starters, the relocation land is inferior to the land currently occupied, according to the affected communities. In addition, the land SAG intends to take is being compensated at below market rates. Plots of 25m x 20m will be compensated at 6,000,000 Guinean francs (around 670 USD), whereas a plot of the same dimensions is sold privately for 15,000,000 Guinean francs (around 1,675 USD). Abusive clauses in the resettlement agreements. Several clauses in the resettlement and compensation agreements that were submitted to the residents of Area One are abusive. First, certain clauses make reference to the PARC – a document that is neither known nor accessible to affected households. Second, the clause on resolution of grievances constitutes an excessive limitation on the right of access to remedy: “All disagreements between the Affected Household or any one of its members … will be registered and handled according to the grievance procedure established by the execution of the PARC.” The clause waiving all objections likewise constitutes a renunciation of rights that is excessive in scope. DEMAND FOR CORRECTIVE MEASURES Considering the laws of Guinea (including Article 142 of the Mining Code and Articles 649 to 655 of the Civil Code); Considering Performance Standard 5 of the International Finance Corporation on Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement which SAG is obligated to respect in accordance with the AngloGold Ashanti policy, Management Standard: Land Access and Resettlement of October 19, 2011; Considering the AngloGold Ashanti policy on respect for human rights, AngloGold Ashanti Human Rights Policy of August 5, 2013; Considering the Action Plan for Resettlement and compensation: Project Seguelen, completed by the consultancy firm INSUCO for AngloGold Ashanti in October 2013; Considering the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights in which AngloGold Ashanti is a participant; We issue an urgent appeal to AngloGold Ashanti and, particularly, its subsidiary SAG in Guinea, to suspend any next steps for the planned relocations until: 1. SAG has made available to affected communities a complete copy of the PARC, including all annexes and any updates since 2013, as well as a summary version of the PARC translated in a language accessible to affected communities; 2. CECIDE and MDT have completed an independent fact-finding inquiry – with full cooperation from AngloGold Ashanti and its subsidiary SAG in Guinea – on the issues of consultation, consent to the resettlement agreements, and the compensation measures; 1. 3. Based on this inquiry, the affected communities – with the assistance of independent legal counsel – and the company have freely agreed on a constructive, rights-based roadmap, with the facilitation of a mediator chosen jointly by the two parties. This roadmap should include issues such as consent of the community to the terms of relocation and compensation, and a fixed timeline that defines the deadlines for relocation (i.e. which households will be moved and on what dates). We appeal to the Guinean state to ensure the full enjoyment of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Guinean Constitution, particularly the right to life, the right to freedom of expression, the right of access to public information, the right to petition, the right to demonstrate, and property rights. Issued at Conakry, August 18 2016 For CECIDE For MDT Mr. CISSE Kabinet Me LOUA FrédéricForomo Executive Director President For more information, please contact : CECIDE : [email protected] Me LOUA Frédéric Foromo : [email protected] ; Tel : +224 622 33 46 19 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Seasonal Malaria Chemoprevention in Guinea Maya Zhang, Stacy Attah-Poku, Noura Al-Jizawi, Jordan Imahori, Stanley Zlotkin
    Seasonal Malaria Chemoprevention in Guinea Maya Zhang, Stacy Attah-Poku, Noura Al-Jizawi, Jordan Imahori, Stanley Zlotkin April 2021 This research was made possible through the Reach Alliance, a partnership between the University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy and the Mastercard Center for Inclusive Growth. Research was also funded by the Ralph and Roz Halbert Professorship of Innovation at the Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy. We express our gratitude and appreciation to those we met and interviewed. This research would not have been possible without the help of Dr. Paul Milligan from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, ACCESS-SMC, Catholic Relief Services, the Government of Guinea and other individuals and organizations in providing and publishing data and resources. We are also grateful to Dr. Kovana Marcel Loua, director general of the National Institute of Public Health in Guinea and professor at the Gamal Abdel Nasser University of Conakry, Guinea. Dr. Loua was instrumental in the development of this research — advising on key topics, facilitating ethics board approval in Guinea and providing data and resources. This research was vetted by and received approval from the Ethics Review Board at the University of Toronto. Research was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic in compliance with local public health measures. MASTERCARD CENTER FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH The Center for Inclusive Growth advances sustainable and equitable economic growth and financial inclusion around the world. Established as an independent subsidiary of Mastercard, we activate the company’s core assets to catalyze action on inclusive growth through research, data philanthropy, programs, and engagement.
    [Show full text]
  • Appraisal Report Kankan-Kouremale-Bamako Road Multinational Guinea-Mali
    AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FUND ZZZ/PTTR/2000/01 Language: English Original: French APPRAISAL REPORT KANKAN-KOUREMALE-BAMAKO ROAD MULTINATIONAL GUINEA-MALI COUNTRY DEPARTMENT OCDW WEST REGION JANUARY 1999 SCCD : N.G. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PROJECT INFORMATION BRIEF, EQUIVALENTS, ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS, LIST OF ANNEXES AND TABLES, BASIC DATA, PROJECT LOGICAL FRAMEWORK, ANALYTICAL SUMMARY i-ix 1 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Project Genesis and Background.................................................................................... 1 1.2 Performance of Similar Projects..................................................................................... 2 2 THE TRANSPORT SECTOR ........................................................................................... 3 2.1 The Transport Sector in the Two Countries ................................................................... 3 2.2 Transport Policy, Planning and Coordination ................................................................ 4 2.3 Transport Sector Constraints.......................................................................................... 4 3 THE ROAD SUB-SECTOR .............................................................................................. 5 3.1 The Road Network ......................................................................................................... 5 3.2 The Automobile Fleet and Traffic.................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • REPUBLIC of GUINEA Labor–Justice–Solidarity
    REPUBLIC OF GUINEA Labor–Justice–Solidarity MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND LIVESTOCK NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF RICE GROWING APRIL 2009 Table of contents LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 5 SUMMARY 6 I. INTRODUCTION 8 II. REVIEWING THE RICE SECTOR 9 2.1. The policy position of rice 10 2.2 Preferences and demand estimates 10 2.3 Typology and number of rice farmers, processors and marketers 11 2.4. Gender dimensions 13 2.5. Comparative advantage of national rice production 14 III. CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES 14 3.1. The potential of local rice for rural poverty reduction and economic growth 14 3.2. The land system 15 3.3. Social issues 16 3.4. Trans-border and regional issues 16 3.5. Knowledge and lessons learnt from R&D in rice 16 VI. PRIORITY AREAS AND PERSPECTIVES 17 4.1. Ranking by order of priority in terms of potential contribution to national production 17 4.2. Identification and ranking specific environmental challenges and related opportunities by order of priority 18 4.3. Identification of policy challenges/opportunities 20 4.3.1. Policy challenges 20 4.3.1. Opportunities 21 V. VISION AND FRAMEWORK OF THE NATIONAL RICE STRATEGY 21 5.1. Objectives of rice production 21 5.5.1. Overall target: 21 5.5.2. Quantified objectives: 21 5.2.3. Strategy development phase 23 5.2.4. Key interventions 24 5.2.5 Scientists, technicians and agricultural advisory agents in 2008 and beyond 25 5.2.6. Governance of the Rice Growing Development Strategy 25 5.2.7.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Development Funds and Agreements in Guinea Under the New Mining Code
    Community Development Funds and Agreements in Guinea Under the New Mining Code June 2013 With support from: 1 This report was prepared as part of a project, funded by AngloGold Ashanti (AGA), in which the Earth Institute at Columbia University, in partnership with Millennium Promise, worked with local governments and communities around the gold mines in Northern Guinea to formulate integrated MDG-based local development plans. In addition, the Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment (CCSI), a joint Center of Columbia Law School and the Earth Institute, assessed the legal and fiscal framework for investments in gold in the region to better understand the total impact of and contribution to development of this sector. This report forms part of that analysis: specifically looking at how revenues from the mines could support local development plans. At the time of the drafting, in mid-2013, the Government of Guinea was formulating new regulations to govern how resource revenues would fund local development. The purpose of this report is to serve as the basis for discussion and consultation between the Government of Guinea and its development partners in the public and private sector as the regulations are being finalized; the report helps to shed light on relevant aspects of the legal framework to-date, including how they have operated in practice, and shares models and good practices of community development agreements and community development funds from elsewhere in the world. This is a work product of CCSI and does not necessarily reflect the views of any other organizations or partners in the Northern Guinea projects, including the Government of Guinea and Anglo Gold Ashanti.
    [Show full text]
  • West Africa – Ebola Outbreak Fact Sheet #27, Fiscal Year (Fy) 2015 March 31, 2015
    WEST AFRICA – EBOLA OUTBREAK FACT SHEET #27, FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2015 MARCH 31, 2015 NUMBERS AT HIGHLIGHTS USG HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE TO EVD OUTBREAK RESPONSE A GLANCE TO DATE IN FY 2014 & FY 2015 Last confirmed EVD case dies in 25,178 Liberia; no new confirmed cases USAID/OFDA1 $515,176,019 detected since March 20 USAID/FFP2 $57,479,546 Number of Suspected, Sierra Leone’s three-day stay-at-home Probable, and Confirmed USAID/GH3 $20,076,000 Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) period occurs with widespread Cases in Acutely Affected compliance USAID/Liberia $16,100,000 Countries* President of Guinea Alpha Condé USAID/Guinea $3,482,000 UN World Health Organization declares a 45-day health emergency (WHO) – DoD4 $360,255,000 March 31, 2015 period; closes border between Guinea and Sierra Leone CDC5 $391,576,1366 10,445 $1,364,144,701 Number of EVD-Related USG ASSISTANCE TO THE WEST AFRICA 7 Deaths* EVD OUTBREAK RESPONSE WHO – March 31, 2015 KEY DEVELOPMENTS 11,974 The Government of Sierra Leone (GoSL) enacted a three-day stay-at-home period on March Number of EVD Cases in 27–29. Approximately 8,300 three-person teams—each comprising a nurse, a social Sierra Leone* mobilizer, and a community task force member—went door-to-door to distribute soap, WHO – March 31, 2015 promote good hygiene practices, and identify possible EVD cases. The GoSL National Ebola Response Center (NERC) reported that teams focused on EVD hotspot areas and did not 9,712 deploy to four districts that have no current active transmission chains.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the Final Evaluation for Adra's
    REPORT ON THE FINAL EVALUATION FOR ADRA’S PROJET D’AUGMENTATION DES RESSOURCE ALIMENTAIRES DE SIGUIRI (PADRAS) PROGRAM (FFP-A-00-00-00085-00) March 2005 External Consultants Dr Joseph F Dorsey, Jr (Agricultural Economist/Credit Expert) and Dr Joseph J Adu-Gyamfi (Agronomist//Natural Resources Management Expert) Foreword The purpose of the final evaluation is to assess ADRA’s achievements toward the goal of improving food security in the Siguiri prefecture of northeastern Guinea. ADRA has approached food security with a two-pronged strategy of increasing food availability through a set of agricultural technologies appropriate to the region and of increasing food access through increased incomes of participants in project activities. It also incorporated concerns which it shares with the funding agency, USAID, for improved and sustainable natural resource management. It should be noted that the use of agro-chemicals was not part of PADRAS’ strategy because of USAID/Guinea policy until early 2004. The conclusions and findings of the final evaluation report focus mainly on the projects impacts as input delivery and process concerns were well addressed in the mid-term evaluation. The Evaluation Team hopes that the conclusions and recommendations of this report will be useful to ADRA in the final months of the PADRAS project and in any future ADRA project in Guinea and indeed elsewhere in the region. Acknowledgements The External Consultants of the Final Evaluation Team for the PADRAS program wish to express their sincere appreciation to the management and staff of ADRA/Guinea for their full and cordial cooperation throughout the evaluation. The Evaluation Team (ET) is particularly thankful for their constructive and open attitude, and for their generous time and help given whenever requested.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the Final Evaluation for Adra's
    REPORT ON THE FINAL EVALUATION FOR ADRA’S PROJET D’AUGMENTATION DES RESSOURCE ALIMENTAIRES DE SIGUIRI (PADRAS) March 2005 External Consultants Dr Joseph F Dorsey, Jr. (Agricultural Economist/Credit Expert) and Dr Joseph J Adu-Gyamfi (Agronomist//Natural Resources Management Expert) Transfer Authorization Award No. FFP-A-00-00-00085-00 SO2: Increased effectiveness of FFP’s PVO and Mission partners in carrying out Title II development activities with measurable results related to food security, with a primary focus on household nutrition and agricultural productivity. Foreword The purpose of the final evaluation is to assess ADRA’s achievements toward the goal of improving food security in the Siguiri prefecture of northeastern Guinea. ADRA has approached food security with a two-pronged strategy of increasing food availability through a set of agricultural technologies appropriate to the region and of increasing food access through increased incomes of participants in project activities. It also incorporated concerns which it shares with the funding agency, USAID, for improved and sustainable natural resource management. It should be noted that the use of agro-chemicals was not part of PADRAS’ strategy because of USAID/Guinea policy until early 2004. The conclusions and findings of the final evaluation report focus mainly on the projects impacts as input delivery and process concerns were well addressed in the mid-term evaluation. The Evaluation Team hopes that the conclusions and recommendations of this report will be useful to ADRA in the final months of the PADRAS project and in any future ADRA project in Guinea and indeed elsewhere in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Citizens' Involvement in Health Governance
    CITIZENS’ INVOLVEMENT IN HEALTH GOVERNANCE (CIHG) Endline Data Collection Final Report September 2020 This report was prepared with funds provided by the U.S. Agency for International Development under Cooperative Agreement AID-675-LA-17-00001. The opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Agency for International Development. Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................... 1 I. Introduction ............................................................................................... 5 Overview ...................................................................................................... 5 Background................................................................................................... 5 II. Methodology ............................................................................................ 6 Approach ...................................................................................................... 6 Data Collection ............................................................................................. 7 Analysis ....................................................................................................... 10 Limitations .................................................................................................. 10 Safety and Security ..................................................................................... 11 III. Findings ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Invest in Guinea Dear Readers, I Have the Great Honour of Presenting This Guide for International Investors
    Invest in Guinea Dear readers, I have the great honour of presenting this guide for international investors. I am convinced that good-quality investors, whether they come from the UK or elsewhere, can play a key role in the future development and prosperity of Guinea and its people. This guide is part of ongoing efforts made by the British Embassy in Guinea to support the Government of Guinea in its objective of attracting quality international investment into the country. Written in close collaboration with the Government of Guinea and stakeholders from the various sectors covered, this guide aims not only to demonstrate the incredible economic opportunities present in Guinea but also to share the country’s commitment to building a stable and prosperous future. While Guinea is considered one of the most important growth areas on the continent due to its geographical diversity and mineral endowment, improvements still need to be made to the investment climate. Several measures have been adopted by President Alpha Condé and his Government to create an attractive environment for investors looking to manage their businesses in a climate of trust and stability. The British Government is encouraging continued efforts in this vein in order to improve Guinea’s business environment. I would like to thank, in particular, all the members of the editorial committee for their valuable contributions and constant availability. HE Graham Styles, Ambassador of the United Kingdom in Guinea 2 Invest in Guinea Table of contents 04 Introduction to Guinea 06 Political and social context 08 Guinean economy 10 Business climate 12 Agriculture 14 Energy 16 Mines 20 Fishing 22 Tourism and Handicrafts 24 Doing business 3 Introduction to Guinea History 7th - 9th century The Baga, Nalu and Landoma people live in the area that is now Guinea.
    [Show full text]
  • Livelihood Zone Descriptions: Guinea
    REVISION OF THE LIVELIHOODS ZONE MAP AND DESCRIPTIONS FOR THE REPUBLIC OF GUINEA A REPORT OF THE FAMINE EARLY WARNING SYSTEMS NETWROK (FEWS NET) November 2016 This report is based on the original livelihoods zoning report of 2013 and was produced by Julius Holt, Food Economy Group, consultant to FEWS NET GUINEA Livelihood Zone Map and Descriptions November 2016 2013 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Changes to the Livelihood Zones Map ...................................................................................................................... 5 The National Context ................................................................................................................................................. 6 Livelihood Zone Descriptions .................................................................................................................................. 10 ZONE GN01 LITTORAL: RICE, FISHING, PALM OIL .................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Study on Artisanal (Small-Scale) Fisheries Development Final Report
    No. Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) Ministry of Fisheries and Aquaculture, the Republic of Guinea STUDY ON ARTISANAL (SMALL-SCALE) FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT FINAL REPORT （MAIN REPORT） AUGUST, 2003 OVERSEAS AGRO-FISHERIES CONSULTANTS CO., LTD. IC NET LIMITED AFF JR 03-49 Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) Ministry of Fisheries and Aquaculture, the Republic of Guinea STUDY ON ARTISANAL (SMALL-SCALE) FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT FINAL REPORT （MAIN REPORT） AUGUST, 2003 OVERSEAS AGRO-FISHERIES CONSULTANTS CO., LTD. IC NET LIMITED PREFACE In response to a request from the Government of the Republic of Guinea, the Government of Japan decided to conduct a development study on artisanal fisheries development and entrusted the study to the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). In the 2-year period from March 2000 to June 2003, JICA sent to Guinea three times, a study team lead by Mr. Yasuo Ishimoto from Overseas Agro-Fisheries Consultants Co. Ltd.. The team held discussions with concerned officials from the Government of Guinea, and conducted a field study at the study area. After the team returned to Japan, further studies were made, and as a result, the present report was finalized. I hope that this report will contribute to the promotion of the project and to the enhancement of the friendly relationship between our two countries. I wish to express my sincere appreciation to the concerned officials of the Government of the Republic of Guinea for their close cooperation extended to the teams. August, 2003 Takao Kawakami President Japan International Cooperation Agency August, 2003 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Mr. Takao Kawakami President Japan International Cooperation Agency Dear Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Standard Project Report 2016 Table of Contents
    Project Number: 200326 | Project Category: Country Programme Project Approval Date: November 13, 2012 | Planned Start Date: January 01, 2013 Actual Start Date: January 01, 2013 | Project End Date: December 31, 2017 Financial Closure Date: N/A Contact Info Alseny Barry, Programme Officer [email protected] Fighting Hunger Worldwide Country Director Edouard Nizeyimana Further Information http://www.wfp.org/countries SPR Reading Guidance Country Programme - Guinea (2013-2017) Standard Project Report 2016 World Food Programme in Guinea, Republic of (GN) Standard Project Report 2016 Table Of Contents Country Context and WFP Objectives Country Context Response of the Government and Strategic Coordination Summary of WFP Operational Objectives Country Resources and Results Resources for Results Achievements at Country Level Supply Chain Implementation of Evaluation Recommendations and Lessons Learned Project Objectives and Results Project Objectives Project Activities Operational Partnerships Performance Monitoring Results/Outcomes Progress Towards Gender Equality Protection and Accountability to Affected Populations Figures and Indicators Data Notes Overview of Project Beneficiary Information Participants and Beneficiaries by Activity and Modality Participants and Beneficiaries by Activity (excluding nutrition) Nutrition Beneficiaries Project Indicators Resource Inputs from Donors Guinea, Republic of (GN) Country Programme - 200326 Standard Project Report 2016 Country Context and WFP Objectives Country Context Located in West Africa, the Republic of Guinea is a low-income and food-deficit country with a population of about 12 million. The 2015 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) report ranked Guinea 182 out of 188 countries on Human Development Index. Despite an abundance of natural resources, Guinea is classified as one of the poorest countries in the world and is facing major socio-economic and political challenges.
    [Show full text]