"The story of our environment may well be the most important story of the coming century." Eric Newton |
Vietnam
Articles on Illicit Wildlife Trading in Southeast Asia
A Trans-border Wildlife Trade Network Unmasked
Author: Quoc Dung
Part II: Hunting Down (see Part I)
Unofficial translation by Nguyen Thu Trang (PanNature)
With the help of Internews’ Earth Journalism Network, we contacted a representative of the CITES Secretariat after researching the website of this well-known wildlife trade monitoring organization.
All of the government agencies we met insisted that Trung Viet legally imported long-tailed macaques from Laos. Vietnam's CITES Management Authority, the highest authority concerning trade in endangered species, assured us that companies in Tran Quy’s network are the only ones importing macaques from Laos. “Statistics found on the CITES website refer to the import data for Trung Viet and Tan Hoi Dong companies,” explained Ms Ha Tuyet Nga, the Program Officer for Vietnam’s CITES Authority, in charge of investigation, policy, and foreign affairs.
There were suspicious discrepancies between the data provided by the Vietnam FPD and the data published on the CITES website. CITES data is usually double checked carefully down to the smallest details. According to an official of CITES, comparing data is also a useful way to discover wildlife trade or violations of CITES regulations in a country.
In an email letter responding to a reporter from Tien Phong, Mr John M. Sellar of the CITES Secretariat explained that one way to compare data is through checking annual reports on the export, import, and transit of wildlife from the 172 member countries. Data from these reports can be compared with that from wildlife importing countries.
“The information in the trade database comes from the statistics that CITES parties submit in their annual reports. This usually includes details of exports, imports and re-exports. Consequently, one can usually compare what has been reported by an exporting country against what has been reported by an importing country,” Mr. Sellar stated in his email of 10th September, 2007.
If there is any difference, the investigation team of CITES will study the case and the two countries will have to justify the discrepancies with CITES.
Another reason for tight data control within CITES is that they do not allow importing and exporting over quota. “A trader can export less specimens than is authorized on a permit but never more” Mr. Sellar explains.
According to an official from the FPD, CITES gave a certain number of labels to Vietnam's CITES Management Authority to attach to each permit as a type of quota, like the ones on permits issued to Trung Viet. Every year, Vietnam’s CITES Management Authority has to report the number of labels used to the CITES Secretariat. Based on that report, CITES should know the situation of macaque importing and exporting in Vietnam.
However, the process works only if Vietnam’s FPD follows the CITES regulations. Because it is trust-based, CITES has no power or mechanism to monitor whether its members follow its regulations or not. “Since the annual reports are received from CITES management authorities, which are usually government departments or certainly designated by governments, the CITES Secretariat has no reason to question their authenticity,” Mr. Sellar wrote.
With regard to macaque import and export from Laos, Mr. Sellar said “As you have noted, LPDR [the Lao People's Democratic Republic] only joined CITES in 2004. Consequently, it is only obliged to start submitting annual trade reports from 2005.”
However, Mr. Sellar noted that, “As yet LPDR has not submitted an annual report. My colleagues will have reminded it to do so. If it continues to fail to submit reports, the Secretariat will take the appropriate action.”
“Consequently, it appears that the only trade data that will be available at present will be that originating from annual reports submitted by Viet Nam. I note that the most recent annual report submitted by Viet Nam relates to 2005,” he added.
In other words, CITES has not received any reports from Laos, contradicting statements from Vietnam’s FPD that the data concerning macaque imports and exports was submitted to CITES by both countries, Laos and Vietnam.
Data Cooking?
Vietnam’s FPD also gives different data from that collected elsewhere. When comparing the data from the FPD with data declared at the Cau Treo and Ka Tum border gates by Tran Quy’s network of companies, we found a big difference.
In theory, each macaque allegedly smuggled from Cambodia and then re-exported to China can bring a profit of as much as $500, even before it is exported to the United States. (The problems with these profits will be covered in detail in another feature). Thus, a small difference between the reported and real exports, just 100 macaques for example, would bring an importer a chance to dodge income tax on $50,000 which could amount to hundreds of millions of Vietnamese Dong.(VND), much higher than the savings from salary of a high-ranking official in Viet Nam.
Comparing the two figures of macaques exported from Laos to Vietnam from CITES’ website and the FPD, we found the statistics on CITES’s website (at the end of October, 2007) showed 2,000 individuals were exported from Laos to Viet Nam in 2005. On the other hand, data provided by the FPD showed that 2,200 macaques were imported/exported during that time, according to Mr. Do Quang Tung, Manager of Vietnam’s CITES Office, on 28 August, 2007.
I don’t know whether the figure of 2,200 imported macaques provided by the FPD representative was also submitted to CITES or not. But bearing in mind John Sellar’s note that statistics from the year 2005 on the CITES website came from the FPD, it is worth emphasizing that the date on the CITES website and from the Vietnam FPD are not the same.
“I do not know why the data submitted to the Trade Database by the Forest Protection Department of Viet Nam should be any different from what it has supplied to journalists,” wrote Mr. Sellar. “This is a matter that should be raised with the Department.”
The investigation by the team from the Vietnam Forum for Environmental Journalists (VFEJ) found even more discrepancies with Customs Department data. According to the Ka Tum Customs Department, Trung Viet and Phat Thinh, a company also said to be among Tran Quy’s network, imported 6,200 macaques through Ka Tum Border Gate in 2005. Mr. Tran Van Trong, Vice Director of the Ka Tum Customs Department, reports that all of the imported macaques had permits from Vietnam's CITES Management Authority.
This raises some intriguing questions: Why there is no information about these 6,200 imported macaques in the FPD’s documents that were sent to Tien Phong Newpaper? And why is there no mention of such imported macaques on the CITES website?
It should be made clear if this figure includes the 5,000 macaques that Trung Viet was permitted to import from Laos through the Cau Treo Border Gate in central Ha Tinh province under the MARD permits issued in 2003, signed by two deputy ministers of MARD. MARD’s Correspondence Letter No. 3322/ dated 9 October 2003 signed by Vice Minister Bui Ba Bong and sent to NAFOVANNY mentioned the permission for Trung Viet to import 5,000 long-tailed macaques.
Puzzling data from the FPD was also found in a recent letter to Tien Phong.1 It reported the total number of macaques imported by Trung Viet and Tan Hoi Dong from the year 2000 to the present as 16,182 individuals. However, the next correspondence letter dated 30th July, 2007 received by Tien Phong (No. 853), signed by the same official, showed a lower number: 14,985 individuals.
To clarify that difference, the later correspondence letter explained, “It is hard to correctly sum up data because those companies asked to amend their permits so many times.”
Adding more confusion to the picture, Mr Tran Van Trong, the Ka Tum Customs Department’s Vice Director, stated to the media that during 2005-2006, Tran Quy’s network imported 15,850 macaques through Ka Tum Border Gate.
If we include 5,985 individuals imported in 2004 that the FPD reported to CITES and can be found on the CITES website, between 2004 and 2006, the number of macaques imported would reach 21,853 individuals.
In short, there’s a significant difference between the macaque data provided to Tien Phong by the FPD and the macaque data provided by the Ka Tum Customs Department or displayed on the CITES website.
Why do these differences exit? Is there any illicit manipulation of data, and what is the purpose of that change? Only the FPD can answer these complicated questions.
Finding clues from Laos
The biggest obstacles in our investigation came from the two Vietnamese agencies, the CITES Management Authority and the FPD, who we once regarded as potential strong supporters. In the first meeting with CITES officials, on July 23rd 2007, Mr. Do Quang Tung, Manager of Vietnam's CITES Authority, told us not to make any fuss and suggested he would help if we told him what we thought was the actual story.
The meeting also included Ms Nga from Vietnam’s CITES authority, and Mr. Tran Dinh Hien, in charge of issuing permits and handling papers. We were not provided any materials, except a memorandum to Tien Phong with very general contents.
The second meeting with the FPD, on July 30th 2007, included Mr. Nguyen Huu Dung, the Vice Director of the FPD, officials of Vietnam's CITES Authority, as well as Mr. Nguyen Phi Truyen, Head of the FPD’s, whose presence there was not explained.
The FPD officials said again that they were willing to cooperate. We asked the FPD to provide us with copies of permits from the Lao CITES Authority, as well as help connect us with contacts in Laos. To date, these two requests have been ignored without explanation .
After substantial and difficult research, we finally contacted Dr Sourioudong Sundara, General Director of the Lao Scientific Authority, via email. He reported that he had only approved permits to one Chinese company to export 200 macaques, and that he had never heard of the Vietnamese companies who we had been informed had received Lao permits.2
In principle, the Lao CITES Authority can not give permits to companies without the approval of the Lao Scientific Authority, said Mr. Thongphath Vongmany, the Vice Director of the Forestry Department in the Lao Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, in a talk with Tien Phong Newspaper.
Tran Quy shared with us his list of the names and addresses of Lao partners specializing in exporting macaques to Trung Viet and its associates. To confirm this information, we asked the Vietnam National FPD for help. Unfortunately, the addresses of Lao and Chinese partners in the documents we received from FPD were intentionally redacted.
Mr. Do Quang Tung, Manager of Vietnam's CITES Authority, explained in the aforementioned email letter, dated 28 August 2007, that “all of the permits above have no information about import-export partners (boxes No. 03 and 04) in order to protect the business secrets of these companies.” He didn’t explain why or what state laws required or authorized him to withhold such information.
The real business of Tran Quy’s network inside Viet Nam is a secret. Since 2004, we have failed to find any legal irregularities in his network’s activities. Many people believe the illicit wildlife trade network could not be unmasked until the investigation evidence from foreing sources, including the identity of Tran Quy’s partners that were redacted from documents provided by the manager of Vietmam’s CITES Office.
Accessing files from the other sources, we acquired some Lao addresses, which include the Xay Savang Import-Export Company (in Bolikhamxay province), the Xayasa Import-Export Trading Company (174 Una Sonxay village, Pakxan District, Bolikhamxay province), and the Champasak SLIE Import-Export Company (B. Keosamphanh in Pakse, Champasak province).
(Part III: Troubles and Unknotting)
1 Correspondence Letter No. 824 dated 20/07/2007 signed by Mr. Nguyen Huu Dung (Vice Director of FPD)
2 The actual e-mail from Dr. Sundara, received on July 23rd, 2007, stated: “As Scienctific Authorrity we have had justifed only one company to export 200 monkeys[ Appendix 2 of CITES ] to China PD,and the name of companies that youinformed me in attached file I nerver done a scientific justification for CITES permit for Lao Management Authority to sign the official CITES document.”