Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
08BRIDGETOWN357
2008-06-03 15:10:00
UNCLASSIFIED
Embassy Bridgetown
Cable title:  

2008 EXPROPRIATION REPORT: ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA

Tags:  CASC EINV KIDE OPIC PGOV AC XL 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0001
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHWN #0357/01 1551510
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 031510Z JUN 08
FM AMEMBASSY BRIDGETOWN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 6522
INFO RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC
UNCLAS BRIDGETOWN 000357 

SIPDIS

STATE FOR WHA/CAR AND EB/IFD/OIA

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: CASC EINV KIDE OPIC PGOV AC XL
SUBJECT: 2008 EXPROPRIATION REPORT: ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA

REF: STATE 43784

-------------------
Antigua and Barbuda
-------------------

The United States Government is aware of one (1) claim of a United
States person that may be outstanding against the Government of
Antigua and Barbuda (GOAB).

UNCLAS BRIDGETOWN 000357

SIPDIS

STATE FOR WHA/CAR AND EB/IFD/OIA

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: CASC EINV KIDE OPIC PGOV AC XL
SUBJECT: 2008 EXPROPRIATION REPORT: ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA

REF: STATE 43784

--------------
Antigua and Barbuda
--------------

The United States Government is aware of one (1) claim of a United
States person that may be outstanding against the Government of
Antigua and Barbuda (GOAB).


1. a. Claimant A

b. 2002

c. In December 2001, Claimant A (a holding company comprised of 98
percent U.S. and 2 per cent Canadian shareholders) requested that
Embassy Bridgetown intervene with the GOAB to halt the expropriation
of a 110-acre beachfront property. Despite Post interventions with
the GOAB Prime Minister (PM),the Permanent Secretary, and the
Minister of Tourism, the expropriation was approved by Parliament on
January 11, 2002.

According to the GOAB, the owner's failure to re-open the resort
property, which had been severely damaged by Hurricane Luis in 1995,
was depriving Antiguans of badly needed tourism revenue. The GOAB
also alleged that Claimant A owed back taxes to the GOAB, and
severance pay to 150 workers when the hotel was closed in 1995.
Claimant A acknowledged liabilities, totaling less than $200,000 on
a property estimated by Claimant A to be worth over $32 million, but
alleged that the GOAB obstructed its repeated efforts to finance the
restoration of the property since 1995, and refused to meet with
lenders since 1999. Claimant A alleged that its prospective lenders
required a letter from the GOAB confirming that the government did
not intend to expropriate the property.

Claimant A filed an injunction in January 2002 alleging abuse of
power on the part of the GOAB. Although the courts denied the
GOAB's application to strike out the judicial review, the GOAB
appealed this decision. The GOAB also stated on the record that
Claimant A would not be evicted from the property until the court
proceedings were finalized. The Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal
upheld a lower court's decision that refused to bar the GOAB from
expropriating the resort. Claimant A subsequently requested and was
granted leave to appeal to the Privy Council (the final court of
appeal) on May 26, 2003. On June 5, 2007, the Privy Council

rejected Claimant A's challenge and upheld the taking. The GOAB has
assured Claimant A, as well as Assistant Secretary Shannon, that it
intends to provide prompt, adequate, and effective compensation to
Claimant.

State Department officials at Post and in Washington have been
actively engaged in assisting Claimant A throughout the duration of
this dispute. In 2006, Claimant A's attorney met several times with
State Department officials in Washington to discuss a proposed
settlement agreement based on a proposal previously made by the
GOAB. Claimant A's attorney met with Attorney General Simon, along
with officials from Post, in September 2006 to discuss the proposed
agreement. Negotiations broke down, however, after another law firm
claiming to represent Claimant A began negotiating different terms
with the GOAB. In January 2007, Claimant A's attorney confirmed to
the GOAB his reresentation of Claimant A, but n further progress
toward a settlement was made.
On December 6, 2006, Claimant A's attorney wrote letter to U.S.
Ambassador Mary Ourisman, Assistnt Secretary Shannon and the
Department of Commerce, describing alleged acts of harassment
against Claimant A and requesting USG intervention.

On January 22, 2007, an Embassy Bridgetown Officer traveled to
Antigua and Barbuda to meet with Claimant A and obtain an update
regarding the situation faced by Claimant A. Claimant A alleged
that the majority shareholder recently was subject to incidents of
harassment and threats, which Claimant A believes were the GOAB's
retaliatory measures for the lawsuits against the government.
Claimant A described the incidents as damaged property, illegal
break-ins, denied access to the Internet, and excessive charges for
electricity usage by the GOAB utility company.

On February 6, 2007, Claimant A's attorney contacted the State
Department's Office of the Legal Adviser to convey his frustration
over several unsuccessful attempts to communicate with GOAB Attorney
General Simon. On April 2, Claimant A's attorney sent a letter
requesting that the State Department intervene to help Claimant A
obtain the return of the property at issue. Claimant A's attorney
described in his letter what he believed to be the GOAB's failure to
negotiate in good faith with Claimant A, Claimant A's supposed
inability to obtain justice in Antiguan courts because of alleged
interference by the GOAB in judicial proceedings, and the need for
the USG to take action against the GOAB. Claimant A's attorney also
informed the Embassy that a hearing on a related issue concerning a
change in the identification of the owner of the property in the
Land Register had been scheduled to be held in Antigua on March 6,
but that GOAB Attorney General Simon allegedly prevented Claimant
A's U.K. counsel from appearing on its behalf.

Now that the Privy Council has ruled against Claimant A's challenge
to the taking itself, Claimant A's attorney has requested that the
Department of State ensure that the GOAB meet its obligation to
provide prompt, adequate, and effective compensation. In July,
2007, the Privy Council proposed to the GOAB that the parties submit
the issue of compensation to an arbitral tribunal under the auspices
of the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment
Disputes (ICSID). Both the Embassy and Washington will continue to
follow this matter closely.

Embassy officials contacted Claimant A on May 12, 2008, and were
informed that no action had been taken yet to provide compensation.
Claimant A also stated that the GOAB has made no attempt to inform
her of any its plans or actions up to the present or plans to
compensate her in the future.

On May 14, the court of first instance issued an Order of mandaemus,
compelling the Government of Antigua to follow the process laid out
by law -- and confirmed by the Privy Council -- and deal with the
matter of compensation for Claimant A. The Governor General was
given two weeks to take the steps necessary for convening an
Assessment Board, which will then proceed to establish the value of
the property.

d. Claimant A: Natalia Querard. Querard is an American citizen,
and has signed a Privacy Act Waiver.

OURISMAN