DOCSLIB.ORG

MYANMAR EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES TRANSPARENCY INITIATIVE (MEITI) SCOPING STUDY REPORT FORESTRY SECTOR Pre-Final RECONCILIATION

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
MYANMAR EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES TRANSPARENCY INITIATIVE (MEITI) SCOPING STUDY REPORT FORESTRY SECTOR Pre-Final RECONCILIATION MYANMAR EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES TRANSPARENCY INITIATIVE (MEITI) SCOPING STUDY REPORT FORESTRY SECTOR Pre-Final RECONCILIATION FOR THE YEARS ENDED 31 MARCH 2015 AND 31 MARCH 2016 February 2018 This Report has been prepared at the request of the Myanmar EITI Multi-Stakeholder Group (MSG) charged with the implementation of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative in Myanmar. The views expressed in the report are those of the Independent Administrator and in no way reflect the official opinion of the MSG. This Report has been prepared exclusively for use by the MSG members and must not be used by other parties, nor for any purposes other than those for which it is intended. Scoping Study Report for the periods April 2014 - March 2015 and April 2015 - March 2016 (Pre-Final) EITI Myanmar – Forestry Sector TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................9 Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative ..................................................................................9 EITI in Myanmar ..............................................................................................................................9 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... 11 1.1. Objective of the Mission .................................................................................................... 11 1.2. Scope of Work .................................................................................................................. 11 1.3. Approach and Methodology .............................................................................................. 11 1.4. Limitation to Scoping Work ............................................................................................... 12 1.5. Findings ............................................................................................................................. 12 1.6. Revenue generated from the forestry sector .................................................................... 13 1.7. Key Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 15 2. OBJECTIVE, APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY ............................................................. 21 2.1. Objective ........................................................................................................................... 21 2.2. Approach ........................................................................................................................... 21 2.3. Methodology...................................................................................................................... 22 3. CONTEXTUAL INFORMATION ............................................................................................ 26 3.1. Forestry Sector in Myanmar .............................................................................................. 26 3.2. Legal Framework .............................................................................................................. 45 3.3. Fiscal Regime ................................................................................................................... 61 3.4. Budget Process ................................................................................................................. 65 3.5. Revenues Collection ......................................................................................................... 65 3.6. Timber Flow Chart ............................................................................................................ 67 3.7. Beneficial Ownership ........................................................................................................ 69 3.8. Auditing and Accounting ................................................................................................... 71 4. MATERIALITY ANALYSIS .................................................................................................... 73 4.1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 73 4.2. Analysis of Payments to Government Agencies ............................................................... 73 4.3. Selection of Payment Flows.............................................................................................. 85 4.4. Selection of Forestry Companies ...................................................................................... 87 4.5. Selection of Government Agencies .................................................................................. 87 4.6. Fiscal Year ........................................................................................................................ 88 4.7. Materiality Deviation .......................................................................................................... 88 4.8. Level of Disaggregation .................................................................................................... 89 4.9. Reliability and Certification of Data to be Reported .......................................................... 90 4.10. Other Considerations ........................................................................................................ 90 5. RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................................... 92 5.1. Timber Trade and Traceability .......................................................................................... 92 5.2. Regulatory Framework and Law Enforcement ................................................................. 92 Moore Stephens LLP |P a g e 2 Scoping Study Report for the periods April 2014 - March 2015 and April 2015 - March 2016 (Pre-Final) EITI Myanmar – Forestry Sector 5.3. Reliability of the Data Reported ........................................................................................ 93 5.4. Budget Comprehensiveness and Transparency............................................................... 93 5.5. Enactment of EITI Reporting Regulations ........................................................................ 94 5.6. Lack of Unique Taxpayer Identification Number ............................................................... 94 5.7. Lack of Distinction Between Forestry and Non-Forestry Revenues ................................. 94 5.8. Reporting System for Employment data ........................................................................... 95 5.9. Accuracy of Production Data ............................................................................................ 95 5.10. Accuracy of Exports Data ................................................................................................. 95 5.11. Award of contracts ............................................................................................................ 96 5.12. Unclear NTFP Licencing Process ..................................................................................... 96 5.13. Completeness of the Data Reported on License Register ............................................... 96 5.14. Resource Revenue Sharing System for Forestry Revenues ............................................ 97 5.15. Governance of MTE .......................................................................................................... 97 ANNEXES ........................................................................................................................................ 98 Annex 1: Detail of Production during FY 2014/15 ................................................................. 99 Annex 2: Comparison of Hardwood Produced during FY 2014/15 with the AAC ............... 102 Annex 3: Comparison of teak produced during FY 2014/15 with the AAC ......................... 105 Annex 4: Detail of Production during FY 2015/16 ............................................................... 107 Annex 5: Comparison of Hardwood Produced during FY 2015/16 with the AAC ............... 110 Annex 6: Comparison of Teak Produced during FY 2015/16 with the AAC ........................ 113 Annex 7: Details of Exports by Product and Destination during FY 2014/15 ...................... 115 Annex 8: Details of Exports by Product and Destination during FY 2015/16 ...................... 116 Annex 9: SEE’s Profit and Loss Statement ......................................................................... 117 Annex 10: Taxes Collected by Region or States .............................................................. 118 Annex 11: Revenues levied on Hardwood in State/Region Funds during FYs 2014/15 and 2015/16 119 Annex 12: Royalties Collected on Timber during FY 2014/15 .......................................... 120 Annex 13: Royalties Collected on Timber during FY 2015/16 .......................................... 121 Annex 14: List of Forestry Companies Below the Materiality Threshold .......................... 122 Annex 15: Reporting Templates and Supporting Schedule .............................................. 123 Annex 16: Persons Contacted or Involved ........................................................................ 135 Moore Stephens LLP |P a g e 3 Scoping Study Report for the periods April 2014 - March 2015 and April 2015 - March 2016 (Pre-Final) EITI Myanmar – Forestry Sector LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Timeline of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Myanmar AI Index: ASA 16/034/2007 Date: 23 October 2007
    Amnesty.org feature Eighteen years of persecution in Myanmar AI Index: ASA 16/034/2007 Date: 23 October 2007 On 24 October 2007, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi will have spent 12 of the last 18 years under detention. She may be the best known of Myanmar’s prisoners of conscience, but she is far from the only one. Amnesty International believes that, even before the recent violent crackdown on peaceful protesters, there were more than 1,150 political prisoners in the country. Prisoners of conscience among these include senior political representatives of the ethnic minorities as well as members of the NLD and student activist groups. To mark the 18th year of Aung San Suu Kyi's persecution by the Myanmar, Amnesty International seeks to draw the world's attention to four people who symbolise all those in detention and suffering persecution in Myanmar. These include Aung San Suu Kyi herself; U Win Tin, Myanmar's longest-serving prisoner of conscience; U Khun Htun Oo, who is serving a 93 year sentence; and Zaw Htet Ko Ko, who was arrested after participating in the recent demonstrations in the country. Read more about these four people: Daw Aung San Suu Kyi Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s party won the general elections in Myanmar in 1990. But, instead of taking her position as national leader, she was kept under house arrest by the military authorities and remains so today. At 62, Aung San Suu Kyi is the General Secretary and a co-founder of Myanmar’s main opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD).
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of Myanmar-US Relations
    INDEX A strike at Hi-Mo factory and, 146, “A Study of Myanmar-US Relations”, 147 294 All Burma Students’ Democratic abortion, 318, 319 Front, 113, 125, 130 n.6 accountability, 5, 76 All India Radio, 94, 95, 96, 99 financial management and, 167 All Mon Regional Democracy Party, administrative divisions of Myanmar, 104, 254 n.4 170, 176 n.12 allowances for workers, 140–41, 321 Africa, 261 American Centre, 118 African National Congress, 253 n.2 American Jewish World Service, 131 Agarwal, B., 308 n.7 “agency” of individuals, 307 Amyotha Hluttaw (upper house of Agricultural Census of Myanmar parliament), 46, 243, 251 (1993), 307 Anti-Fascist People’s Freedom Agricultural Ministers in States and League, 23 Regions, 171 Anwar, Mohammed, 343 n.1 agriculture, 190ff ANZ Bank (Australia), 188 loans for, 84 “Arab Spring”, 28, 29, 138 organizational framework of, “arbitrator [regime]”, 277 192, 193 Armed Forces Day 2012, 270 Ah-Yee-Taung, 309 armed forces (of Myanmar), 22, 23, aid, 295, 315 262, 269, 277, 333, 334 donors and, 127, 128 battalions 437 and 348, 288 Kachin people and, 293, 295 border areas and, 24 Alagappa, Muthiah, 261, 263, 264 constitution and, 16, 20, 24, 63, Albert Einstein Institution, 131 n.7 211, 265, 266 All Burma Federation of Student corruption and, 26, 139–40 Unions, 115, 121–22, 130 n.4, 130 disengagement from politics, 259 n.6, 148 expenditure, 62, 161, 165, 166 “fifth estate”, 270 356 Index “four cuts” strategy, 288, 293 Aung Kyaw Hla, 301 n.5 impunity and, 212, 290 Aung Ko, 60 Kachin State and, 165, 288, 293 Aung Min, 34,
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Current Situation Monthly Trend Analysis
    Chronology of Political Prisoners in Burma for February 2009 Summary of current situation There are a total of 2,128 political prisoners in Burma. 1 These include: CATEGORY NUMBER Monks 220 Members of Parliament 15 Students 229 88 Generation Students Group 47 Women 186 NLD members 456 Members of the Human Rights Defenders and Promoters network 42 Ethnic nationalities 203 Cyclone Nargis volunteers 20 Teachers 26 Media activists 43 Lawyers 15 In poor health 115 Since the protests in August 2007 leading to last September’s Saffron Revolution, a total of 1,052 activists have been arrested and are still in detention. Monthly trend analysis 250 In the month of February 2009, 4 200 activists were arrested, 5 were sentenced, and 30 were released. On 150 Arrested 20 February the military regime Sentenced 100 Released announced an amnesty for 6,313 50 prisoners, beginning 21 February. To date AAPP has been able to confirm 0 Nov-08 Dec-08 Jan-09 Feb-09 the release of just 30 political prisoners. This month the UN Special Envoy Ibrahim Gambari and the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Myanmar Tomas Ojea Quintana both visited Burma. At the time of the Special Rapporteur’s visit, political prisoners U Thura aka Zarganar, Zaw Thet Htway, Thant Sin Aung, Tin Maung Aye aka Gatone, Kay Thi Aung aka Ma Ei, Wai Myo Htoo aka Yan Naing, Su Su Nway and Nay Myo Kyaw aka Nay Phone Latt all had their sentences reduced. However they all still face long prison terms of between 8 years and 6 months, and 35 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Monthly Chronology of Burma Political Prisoners for March 2009
    Chronology of Political Prisoners in Burma for March 2009 Summary of current situation There are a total of 2,146 political prisoners in Burma. 1 These include: CATEGORY NUMBER Monks 220 Members of Parliament 15 Students 2722 Women 18 7 NLD members 458 Members of the Human Rights Defenders and Promoters 43 network Ethnic nationalities 203 Cyclone Nargis volunteers 21 Teachers 26 Media a ctivists 46 Lawyers 12 In poor health 113 Since the protests in August 2007 leading to last September’s Saffron Revolution, a total of 1,070 activists have been arrested and are still in detention. Monthly trend analysis During the month of March 2009, at least 22 arrested and still detained, 42 250 sentenced and 11 transferred, 7 released, 200 and 8 in bad health show the Burmese 150 Arrested regime continues to inflict human rights 100 Sentenced abuses. The UN Working Group on 50 Released Arbitrary Detention issued an opinion 0 S N Jan- Ma report which declared the detention of ep- ov- 09 r- Daw Aung San Su Kyi to be illegal and 08 08 09 in violation of the regime’s own laws. This is the first time the UNWG AD has declared that it violates the regime’s own laws. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention also ruled that the imprisonment of Min Ko Naing, Pyone Cho, Ko Jimmy and Min Zayar violates minimum standards of international Flaw. The Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Burma released his report following his visit in February. The report recommendations call for the progressive release of all political prisoners.
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to the 12Th ASEAN SUMMIT 11-14 December 2006 CEBU, Philippines
    Cambodian League for the Promotion and Defense of Lao Movement Human RightS for Human Rights (LICADHO) Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates Think Centre (Singapore) Association for Human Vietnam Committee on Rights and Development in Union for Civil Human Rights Cambodia ADHOC Liberties UCL Submission to the 12th ASEAN SUMMIT 11-14 December 2006 CEBU, Philippines 1. HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS Throughout 2006, human rights defenders in many Asian States have been subjected to severe repression. In a number of ASEAN states, human rights defenders are still victims of assassination (Philippines, Thailand) or are arbitrarily arrested or under house arrest (Burma, Vietnam). In other countries, the right to freedom of assembly is severely restricted (Cambodia, Malaysia, Singapore). In Laos, it remains virtually impossible to carry out activities in the defence of human rights because of the extremely harsh repression. In Burma, escalating human rights violations are being perpetrated by the Burmese regime, the military junta known as the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC). Recently, the SPDC has further increased political repression. Indeed, on 27 September 2006, the three most prominent student leaders of Burma, Min Ko Naing, Ko Ko Gyi and Htay Kywe were arrested by the Burmese military regime. All had already served over 15 years in prison. They had been released in 2004 and 2005 and since then, they have been working tirelessly to bring about democratic changes in the country by peaceful means. The effective laws and judicial system do not facilitate the emergence and strengthening of the civil society in Burma. The 1988 Association Law enacted by the regime prohibits formation and function of independent organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • Bullets in the Alms Bowl
    BULLETS IN THE ALMS BOWL An Analysis of the Brutal SPDC Suppression of the September 2007 Saffron Revolution March 2008 This report is dedicated to the memory of all those who lost their lives for their part in the September 2007 pro-democracy protests in the struggle for justice and democracy in Burma. May that memory not fade May your death not be in vain May our voices never be silenced Bullets in the Alms Bowl An Analysis of the Brutal SPDC Suppression of the September 2007 Saffron Revolution Written, edited and published by the Human Rights Documentation Unit March 2008 © Copyright March 2008 by the Human Rights Documentation Unit The Human Rights Documentation Unit (HRDU) is indebted to all those who had the courage to not only participate in the September protests, but also to share their stories with us and in doing so made this report possible. The HRDU would like to thank those individuals and organizations who provided us with information and helped to confirm many of the reports that we received. Though we cannot mention many of you by name, we are grateful for your support. The HRDU would also like to thank the Irish Government who funded the publication of this report through its Department of Foreign Affairs. Front Cover: A procession of Buddhist monks marching through downtown Rangoon on 27 September 2007. Despite the peaceful nature of the demonstrations, the SPDC cracked down on protestors with disproportionate lethal force [© EPA]. Rear Cover (clockwise from top): An assembly of Buddhist monks stage a peaceful protest before a police barricade near Shwedagon Pagoda in Rangoon on 26 September 2007 [© Reuters]; Security personnel stepped up security at key locations around Rangoon on 28 September 2007 in preparation for further protests [© Reuters]; A Buddhist monk holding a placard which carried the message on the minds of all protestors, Sangha and civilian alike.
    [Show full text]
  • EIA-Report-State-Of-Corruption.Pdf
    State of Corruption The top-level conspiracy behind the global trade in Myanmar’s stolen teak February 2019 ©EIAimage Forests ©EIAimage WeACKNOWLEDGEMENTS would like to thank ABOUT EIA EIA UK Above: Forests in Myanmar CONTENTS 62-63 Upper Street, Ximporae.This report Ut was aut written fugitis restiand editedut atia We investigate and campaign against Front cover: Logs rotting in an London N1 0NY UK Introduction 4 nobitby the ium Environmental alici bla cone Investigation consequam environmental crime and abuse. MTE logyard in East Dagon, T: +44 (0) 20 7354 7960 Yangon, March 2013 cusAgency. aci oditaquates This document dolorem has volla Our undercover investigations E: [email protected] Myanmar’s Forests 5 vendam,been produced consequo with molor the financial sin net expose transnational wildlife crime, eia-international.org fugitatur,assistance qui of int UKaid, que nihicthe Norwegian tem with a focus on elephants,elephants andpangolins Myanmar’s Forest Governance Failures 8 aspedAgency quei for oditaquatesDevelopment dolorem tigers,and tigers, and forestand forest crimes crimes such such as vollaCooperation vendam, (NORAD) conseqci and oditaquates the EIA US JMG Foundation. The contents illegalas illegal logging logging and and deforestation deforestation for Case Study: dolorem volla vendam, consequo PO Box 53343 of this publication are the sole cashfor cash crops crops like like palm palm oil. oil.We Wework to molor sin net fugitatur, qui int que Washington DC 20009 USA The Shadow President – King of Burma Teak 14 responsibility
    [Show full text]
  • Vi. the Myanmar Prison System
    TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................1 II. BACKGROUND......................................................................................................4 Subsequent developments..........................................................................................4 Human rights and the National Convention...............................................................6 Summary of recent arrests and releases .....................................................................8 III. UPDATE ON THE ARREST AND PRE-TRIAL DETENTION PROCESS.......10 Arbitrary arrests and detention without judicial oversight ......................................11 Torture and ill-treatment during pre-trial detention.................................................15 IV. UPDATE ON POLITICAL TRIALS AND SENTENCES...................................17 Sentencing................................................................................................................19 The death penalty.....................................................................................................20 V. UPDATE ON PROBLEMATIC LAWS................................................................25 VI. THE MYANMAR PRISON SYSTEM .................................................................30 Continuing humanitarian concerns ..........................................................................31 VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................34
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Students in the 8888 Peoples Uprising in Burma
    P.O Box 93, Mae Sot, Tak Province 63110, Thailand e.mail: [email protected] website: www.aappb.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Twenty three years ago today, on 8 August 1988, hundreds of thousands of people flooded the streets of Burma demanding an end to the suffocating military rule which had isolated and bankrupted the country since 1962. Their united cries for a transition to democracy shook the core of the country, bringing Burma to a crippling halt. Hope radiated throughout the country. Teashop owners replaced their store signs with signs of protest, dock workers left behind jobs to join the swelling crowds, and even some soldiers were reported to have been so moved by the demonstrations to lay down their arms and join the protestors. There was so much promise. Background The decision of over hundreds of thousands of Burmese to take to the streets on 8 August 1988 did not happen overnight, but grew out of a growing sense of political discontent and frustration with the regime’s mismanagement of the country’s financial policies that led to deepening poverty. In 1962 General Ne Win, Burma’s ruthless dictator for over twenty years, assumed power through a bloody coup. When students protested, Ne Win responded by abolishing student unions and dynamiting the student union building at Rangoon University, resulting in the death of over 100 university students. All unions were immediately outlawed, heavily restricting the basic civil rights of millions of people. This was the beginning of a consolidation of power by a military regime which would systematically wipe out all opposition groups, starting with student unions, using Ne Win’s spreading network of informers and military intelligence officers.
    [Show full text]
  • BASELINE STUDY 4, MYANMAR: Overview of Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade
    BASELINE STUDY 4, MYANMAR: Overview of Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade August 2011 Regional Support Programme for the EU FLEGT Action Plan in Asia Background The European Commission (EC) published a Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) Action Plan in 2003. FLEGT aims not simply to reduce illegal deforestation, but in promoting good forest governance, aims to contribute to poverty eradication and sustainable management of natural resources. The European Forest Institute (EFI), an international research organisation with its headquarters in Finland, conducts, advocates and facilitates forest research networking at the pan-European level. Under its Policy & Governance programme, the EFI assists in the EU’s implementation of the FLEGT Action Plan. In 2007, the EU FLEGT Facility was established, hosted and managed by the EFI. The Facility (i) supports the bilateral process between the EU and tropical producing countries towards signing and implementing “Voluntary Partnership Agreements” (VPAs) under the FLEGT Action Plan, and (ii) executes the regional support programme for the EU FLEGT Action Plan in Asia. The FLEGT Asia Regional Office (FLEGT Asia) of the EFI’s EU FLEGT Facility was formally established in October 2009. FLEGT Asia seeks to collaborate and build synergies with existing regional initiatives and partners in Asia. The EU FLEGT Facility is managed and implemented by the EFI in close collaboration with the EU. Goal of FLEGT Asia The goal of the FLEGT Asia Regional Programme is the promotion of good forest governance, contributing to poverty eradication and sustainable management of natural resources in Asia, through direct support of the implementation of the EU’s FLEGT Action Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Provenance in Special Teak Plantations Particularly in Bago Yoma
    Leaflet No. 4/2000 Government of the Union of Myanmar Ministry of Forestry Forest Department Comparative Performance of Teak ( Tecona grandis ) Provenance in Special Teak Plantations Particularly in Bago Yoma U Thein Htwe B.Sc. (Forestry), Staff Officer Forest Research Institute April,2000 i Acknowledgements I'm greatful to U Khin Maung Oo, Deputy Director and U Win Maung, Assistant Director of Forest research institute for their encouragement and interest in this study. I'm also thankful to my close friend U Nyi Nyi Kyaw, and U Chit Hlaing Win for their proper guidance and technical inputs in this study. All people who have helped me in various ways and I thank them especially Saya U Saw C. Doo, Saya U Saw Kelvin Keh and Saya U Myo Kywe of Institute of Agriculture for sparing a considerable amount of their time and paying close attention to this paper. Special thanks are given to former co-ordinator of Teaknet, Saya U Mehm Ko Ko Gyi, for his encouraging us to conduct this research work. ii rll⇔a'otrsKdd;rsKdd;rSS uReff;opffrsddK;tm; txll;uReff;pddkkuffciff;pDDrHHuddeff;{&dd,m (yJJcll;&ddkk;r)wGGiff pddkkuffysKdd;í &SSiffoeffMuDD;xGGm;rSSKuddkk EddSSKiff;,SSOffavhhvmjciff;/ OD;odef;axG;? B.Sc. (For.) ? OD;pD;t&m&Sd opfawmokawoeXme? a&qif;/ pmwrff;tusOff;csKyff uRef;pdkufcif;rsm; wnfaxmif&mwGif? vufvSrf;rSD&m a'otrsKd;rsKd;rS &&Sdvmaom uRef;aph rsm;udk toHk;jyKrnfhtpm;? pdkufysKd;rnfha'oESifh oifhawmfaom rl&if;a'orsm;udk a&G;cs,f toHk;jyK jcif;tm;jzifh ydkrdkatmifjrifaom uRef;pdkufcif;rsm;jzpfvmEdkifygonf/ þpmwrf;wGif jrefrmEdkifiHtwGif; uRef;aygufa&mufaom a'o(10)ckrS uRef;rsKd;aphrsm;udk pD;yGm;a&;pdkufcif;rsm;\ A[dktcsuftcsm jzpfaom yJcl;&dk;ra'owGif ,SOfjydKifpdkufysKd; prf;oyfcJh&m yJcl; &kd;r\ ta&hShbufjcrf;wGif xl;jcm;rSK r&Sdaomfvnf; taemufbufjcrf;wGifrl jzL;ESifhrbdef; rl&if; a'orsm;onf MuD;xGm;rSK (tjrifh) taumif;qHk;jzpfaMumif; awGY&SdcJh&ygonf/ ii i Comparative Performance of Teak (Tectona grandis) Provenance in Special Teak Plantations Particularly in Bago Yoma U Thein Htwe, B.Sc (For.), Staff Officer Forest Research Institute, Yezin.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Corruption the Top-Level Conspiracy Behind the Global Trade in Myanmar’S Stolen Teak February 2019
    State of Corruption The top-level conspiracy behind the global trade in Myanmar’s stolen teak February 2019 ©EIAimage Forests ©EIAimage WeACKNOWLEDGEMENTS would like to thank ABOUT EIA EIA UK 62-63 Upper Street, Ximporae.This report Ut was aut written fugitis restiand editedut atia We investigate and campaign against London N1 0NY UK nobitby the ium Environmental alici bla cone Investigation consequam environmental crime and abuse. T: +44 (0) 20 7354 7960 cusAgency. aci oditaquates This document dolorem has volla Our undercover investigations E: [email protected] vendam,been produced consequo with molor the financial sin net expose transnational wildlife crime, eia-international.org fugitatur,assistance qui of int UKaid, que nihicthe Norwegian tem with a focus on elephants,elephants andpangolins aspedAgency quei for oditaquatesDevelopment dolorem tigers,and tigers, and forestand forest crimes crimes such such as vollaCooperation vendam, (NORAD) conseqci and oditaquates the EIA US JMG Foundation. The contents illegalas illegal logging logging and and deforestation deforestation for dolorem volla vendam, consequo PO Box 53343 of this publication are the sole cashfor cash crops crops like like palm palm oil. oil.We Wework to molor sin net fugitatur, qui int que Washington DC 20009 USA responsibility of EIA. safeguardwork to safeguard global marine global ecosystemsmarine nihic tem asped quei oditaquates T: +1 202 483 6621 byecosystems addressing by the addressing threats posed the dolorem volla vendam, consuo molor E: [email protected] EIA expresses its gratitude to the bythreats plastic posed pollution, by plastic bycatch pollution, sin net fugitatur, qui int que nihic eia-global.org individuals who have contributed andbycatch commercial and commercial exploitation of tem asped que n nes ape verrovid to this report and who for many whales,exploitation dolphins of whales, and porpoises.
    [Show full text]