brought under the dominican republic - central america - ita

tionality. For example, there are references to earlier events “in late 2005” (§ 18),
“(i)n March 2004 (§ 19), “in September 2004‟ (§ 19), “on August 2004” (§ 20), “(i)n
December 2004 (§ 20), “(b)etween March 2004 and December 2006” (§ 22), “in
December 2006” (§ 22), “in December 2006” (§ 23), “(i)n September 2005” (§ 25),
“on November 9, 2006 (§ 27), “(s)ince the end of 2006 (§ 29), “in or about January
2007” (§ 29), “in 2007” (§ 30), “in 2007” (§ 33), and “other industries … have received
environmental permits during the same time-frame that the Enterprises‟ applications
have been pending.” (§ 35). The factual narrative pleaded in the Claimant‟s
Notice of Arbitration concerning the El Dorado concession 63 also focuses primarily
on events before December 2007, whilst also expressing strong criticism of
President Saca‟s speech in 2008. Although the Tribunal accepts the Claimant‟s subsequent
explanation of these events as not being relevant measures, these remain alleged
facts pre-dating the Claimant‟s change of nationality.
2.81. Was the Claimant therefore aware from these facts of an actual or impending dispute
with the Respondent before its change of nationality on 13 December 2007, as the
Respondent contends? Again, it is necessary to turn to several passages in the
Claimant‟s own pleading in the Notice of Intent:
―Since the end of 2006, when indications arose that MARN was intent on delaying
the Enterprises‘ activities, it has become increasingly apparent that these delay tactics
were designed and implemented by the Government with the unlawfu1, discriminatory,
and politically motivated aim of preventing their operations altogether.
In addition to articulate the foregoing position, MARN also informed the Enterprises
in 2007 that, prior to the Ministry granting any environmental permits, MARN
would need to conduct a ―country-wide strategic environmental study …‖ 64
―… representatives of the companies participated in both public and private
meetings with various members of the Government throughout the year [this is a
reference to the year 2007], during which they objected to the Government‘s
newfound positions …‖ 65
―The Government‘s nascent opposition to the Enterprises‘ operations was first
manifested by MARN in late 2005, when it began delaying its responses to their applications
for environmental permits without explanation. Soon thereafter, it began
63
64
65
A similar analysis can be made for the Exploration Licenses for Pueblos, Guaco, and Huacuco.
Notice of Intent, § 29.
Notice of Intent, § 31.
Part 2 – Page 25