26.1 This chapter examines:
26.2 On this basis of the material referred to in this chapter, I find:
26.3 I have already examined in Chapter 18 the manner in which inland transportation fees were paid by AWB in the period from November 1999 until July 2000.
26.4 Between August 2000 and the incursion in March 2003, inland transportation fees were paid by AWB in respect of all of its shipments to Iraq. This included shipments made under contracts AWB concluded with IGB directly and AWB's contracts with the grain traders, Savas Grain & Commodities Limited[540] and Commodity Specialists Company.[541]
26.5 The payment of inland transportation fees was marked by five features:
26.6 Figure 23.1 in Appendix 23 contains a time line recording the dates of the key changes to the method of payment of inland transportation fees by AWB from the time they were first introduced in July 1999 until the incursion into Iraq in March 2003.
26.7 Table 23.1 in Appendix 23 contains a list of the inland transportation fees paid by AWB from its first payment in November 1999 until March 2003.
26.8 From November 1999 until July 2000, AWB paid these fees in two ways. They were either paid to Alia directly or paid indirectly through a number of shipowners (in particular Ronly and its nominee Tse Yu Hong Metal Limited). These different methods were identified and examined in Chapter 18. The reasons for AWB's use of shipowners as intermediaries for these payments were discussed in Chapter 13.
26.9 In July 2000, Mr Stott put an end to the use of Ronly and other shipowners as a conduit for the payment of fees to Alia and directed that the fees be henceforth paid to Alia directly.[543] This direction commenced with effect from 7 August 2000.
26.10 At the time this change was implemented, Mr Stott instructed that inland transportation fees continue to be paid by AWB Chartering.[544] AWB Chartering in turn recovered the cost of the inland transportation fee paid from the AWB Pool. This arrangement continued until early May 2001, when responsibility for payment was transferred to International Sales and Marketing.[545]
26.11 From November 2000 there was a significant increase in the inland transportation fees payable by AWB.[546]
26.12 Prior to November 2000, the fees were between US$12 and US$15 per tonne under phases VI, VII and VIII.[547] In November 2000 the total amount of inland transportation fees payable rose to US$44.50 per tonne. This represented a 217 per cent increase in the inland transportation fees from US$14 per tonne. This increased inland transportation fee was the equivalent to approximately 26 per cent of the equivalent CIF free out price.[548] This is to be contrasted with the inland transportation fees under AWB's earlier contracts which ranged between 8 and 10 per cent of the CIF free out price.[549]
26.13 The fees payable under the contracts concluded for phases IX to XIII inclusive were of the same order ranging from US$45.80 per tonne to US$51.15 per tonne.[550]
26.14 Table 13.1 in Appendix 13 lists the inland transportation fees paid by AWB in respect of each of its contracts during phases VI and following.
26.15 There were two reasons for this significant increase in the amount of the fees.
26.16 From November 1999 until early May 2001, all inland transportation fees paid by AWB were paid in US dollars. During that period, most of those fees were paid by AWB Chartering from a US dollar bank account maintained in New York with the Bank of New York in the name of AWB (Australia) Limited.[554]
26.17 In 2001, there was a change in the currencies in which fees were paid. This was initially to Deutschmarks in May 2001. These were paid into Alia's Deutschmark account with Jordan National Bank in Amman.[555] From November 2001 until March 2003, inland transportation fees were paid by AWB in euros. These were paid into Alia's euro account with the Jordan National Bank in Amman. Both payments were made through its correspondent bank in Frankfurt, Germany.[556]
26.18 These changes in the currency coincided with the change in both the currency of the price for which wheat was sold and the currency in which AWB received the proceeds of those sales from the United Nations escrow account.[557]
26.19 From May 2001 and the time inland transportation fees were paid in these other currencies, the US Embargo was no longer a bar to payment.
26.20 Payments in Deutschmarks commenced with the first shipment under contract A0430 in early May 2001. Fees thereafter continued to be paid in Deutschmarks until November 2001. During that time, fees were paid in Deutschmarks in respect of:
26.21 Between May and November 2001 AWB paid a total of DM108,216,527.84 in fees or the equivalent of approximately US$50.24 million.[559]
26.22 The payments of fees in Deutschmarks were made in two ways.
First, the fees payable in respect of particular shipments were paid from Deutschmarks that AWB obtained through a foreign currency swap, under which US dollars were exchanged for Deutschmarks, which AWB arranged with the Commonwealth Bank of Australia through its offices in Australia.[560]
26.23 There were two stages to this method. The first was the exchange of US dollars for Deutschmarks. The second stage was a forward exchange of Deutschmarks back into US dollars at a predetermined future point of time. The Deutschmarks intended to be exchanged at this second stage were from the proceeds of the sale of the shipment that AWB expected to receive from the United Nations escrow account. This second stage was entered into by AWB as a hedge against any fluctuation in the US dollar/Deutschmark exchange rate during the period between when the inland transportation fees were paid and when AWB recovered the cost of those fees as part of the proceeds of sale, in Deutschmarks from the United Nations escrow account.
26.24 The elements of this foreign currency swap were:
26.25 Under this method not all of the Deutschmarks that AWB expected to receive from the proceeds of each shipment would necessarily be converted back into US dollars. Some of the Deutschmarks may be retained, in order for AWB to pay the inland transportation fees for later shipments.
26.26 Under the second method, the amount of the inland transportation fees was paid from a Deutschmark account in the name of AWB Limited maintained by AWB with the Commonwealth Bank of Australia in Sydney.[561] Those payments would be met from either an existing credit balance in the Deutschmark account or from Deutschmarks deposited into that account.
26.27 Inland transportation fees were paid by AWB in euros from mid November 2001 until March 2003. This was in respect of:
26.28 Between November 2001 and March 2003 AWB paid a total of €145,064,239 or approximately US$126.24 million in transportation fees.[562]
26.29 Payment of inland transportation fees in euros were made from a euro currency account in the name of AWB Limited maintained by AWB with the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, in Sydney.[563]
26.30 Payments from this account were made from funds deposited into the account either following the conversion of US dollars into euros[564] or from an existing credit balance in AWB's euro account.
26.31 In November 2000 AWB negotiated an agreement with IGB for payment of fees in two instalments.[565]
26.32 Notably, this agreement was concluded by AWB with IGB and not Alia, to whom the inland transportation fees were payable. This was consistent with an understanding within AWB that these inland transportation fees were, in truth, payments to the Iraqis.
26.33 Under this agreement, a first instalment of US$14 per tonne[566] was to be paid prior to the arrival of the shipment at Umm Qasr. The balance of the fees payable was to be transferred to Alia's account within one week of AWB receiving the proceeds of the sale from the United Nations escrow account.[567]
26.34 This manner of payment of fees was employed for each shipment under contracts A0430[568], A0552[569] and A0553.[570]
26.35 From June 2001, the whole of the inland transportation fees were payable in advance of discharge of the cargo.[571]
This was the manner of payment for each of contracts A0784, A0785, A1111, A1112 and those shipments made under contract A1441 prior to the commencement of hostilities in March 2003.
26.36 This change in the manner of payment coincided with the change in the currency of the contract from Deutschmarks to euros.
26.37 The effect of this change was that AWB paid to Alia fees of between US$2.5 million and US$2.75 million per shipment in advance.[572]
26.38 On 23 February 2001, Mr Jones, General Manager of AWB Chartering, sent an email to Mr Hogan regarding the Iraq trucking fee.[573] He wrote:
With regard to the Iraq trucking fee we would like to change the internal payment arrangements.
It is my understanding that Chartering has facilitated the payment in the past.
However there is no real reason to do it this way, so we would like to explore other options.
Can we discuss early next week. [574]
26.39 On 23 February 2001, Mr Jones sent an email within AWB Chartering setting out those items that needed to be attended to following a meeting held earlier that week.[575] Included amongst the items was:
Iraq: Chartering are currently managing the trucking fee payments in Iraq. This is impacting on ROFE and margin outcomes and is not a chartering component.
Action item: Peter Jones to approach Dom H to get this fee paid directly from the pool rather that Chartering [576]
26.40 Mr Hogan subsequently met with Mr Jones to discuss the inland transport payments. At that meeting, it was agreed that International Sales and Marketing would manage the payments. A system was established whereby Mr Edmonds-Wilson would draw up a payment request, which Mr Hogan would check and initial. Mr Hogan would then have the General Manager of International Sales and Marketing sign. The payment request was then handed to the AWB Pool for signing, and then taken to Treasury for payment. This was done for each vessel just prior to berthing at Umm Qasr.[577]
26.41 Thus from May 2001 until the incursion into Iraq in March 2003, inland transportation fees were paid by the AWB Pool directly.[578] Responsibility for the authorisation of the payment of these fees was with the International Sales and Marketing Division and no longer with AWB Chartering.
26.42 AWB and the IGB negotiated a price for the sale of the wheat which included the cost of the IGB designated transportation fee. The fee was added to the CIF free out[579] price to give a CIF Free in Truck (FIT) price.[580]
26.43 From November 2000 an additional 10 per cent after-sales-service fee was payable.
26.44 This was added to the transportation fee designated by the IGB to give the total inland transportation fee payable. From the time the additional 10 per cent after-sales-service fee was first imposed until March 2003, neither AWB nor the AWB Pool differentiated between the fees paid that represented the IGB designated transportation fee and the additional 10 per cent after-sales-service fee for the purposes of recording the amount paid in its books and records.[581] Accordingly, the AWB Pool was reimbursed the total cost of the inland transportation fees paid by it from proceeds of sale from the escrow account.
26.45 Between November 1999 and March 2003 IGB fees were also paid by AWB, under contracts with the grain traders Savas Grain and Commodities Limited and Commodity Specialists Company. Under its contracts with these grain traders, AWB expressly contracted to assume responsibility for the payment of the inland transportation fee.
26.46 The cost of the transportation fees was included in the contract price payable by the grain traders to AWB. That cost was also included in the price that the IGB paid to the grain traders and was thereby recovered by those traders as part of the proceeds of the sale from funds drawn out of the United Nations escrow account. Thus the cost of the transportation fees paid was met from the funds in the United Nations escrow account.
26.47 On 26 September 2005, the Independent Inquiry Committee wrote to AWB advising of its proposed finding that:
Between October 1999 and March 2003, AWB paid to Alia approximately $212 million in fees, and these payments were in turn transferred by Alia to the Iraqi State Company for Water Transportation ('ISCWT'), a state-owned agency within the Iraqi Ministry of Transport and Communications. [582]
26.48 Accompanying the IIC's letter was a schedule listing 19 of AWB's contracts and the amount of the fees which the IIC contended had been paid by AWB.[583] This schedule listed separately for each contract the 'two fee components' of the amounts described in the IIC's letter as:
what the former government of Iraq determined to be a portion for 10% 'after sales service fees' ('ASSF') and a portion for inland transportation fees.[584]
According to this schedule, AWB had paid US$82.6 million in after-sales-service fees and US$129.6 million in inland transportation fees in respect of the 19 listed contracts, making a total of US$212.2 million paid.[585]
26.49 As part of AWB's Project Rose and its response to the IIC investigation, AWB employed Ferrier Hodgson Forensics ('Ferrier Hodgson') to:
review AWB's transactional records relating to the shipment of wheat under the Oil-for-Food Program … in order to analyse inland transportation fees paid by AWB.[586]
Ferrier Hodgson were instructed to review and verify the accuracy of the information contained within the schedule prepared by the IIC.[587]
26.50 On 26 October 2005 Ferrier Hodgson provided AWB with a report on their findings.[588] These included findings that:
26.51 In relation to the amount of the fees paid, Ferrier Hodgson found:
(f) The IIC schedule shows total payments made for all the contracts, excluding contracts number A1441/1200083 and A1680/1300016, of $205,169,753. Our analysis reveals a variance in total payments for those contracts of approximately 1%. (Note: we excluded contracts numbered A1441/1200083 and A1680/1300016 from this comparison because the IIC schedule showed incomplete information).
(g) Whilst the total variance is approximately 1%, our analysis on a contract by contract basis shows larger offsetting variances which are explained by the following reasons:
(i) The IIC used different quantities in their calculations to those which AWB utilised when calculating amounts to be paid in respect of inland transport fees.
(ii) The IIC used incorrect rates per metric tonne in estimating the payments made by AWB in respect of inland transport fees.
(iii) A number of payments were not identified in the IIC analysis.[591]
26.52 In its final report, the IIC found:
In total, AWB paid a total of over $221.7 million in side payments for what it termed inland transportation fees. This corresponds to more than fourteen percent of the illicit funds collected by the Iraqi regime under its kickback schemes.[592]
This represented an increase in the amount of the fees that the IIC had earlier foreshadowed[593] its inquiries revealed had been paid by AWB.
26.53 Details of the AWB contracts in respect of which the IIC found these payments totalling US$221.7 million were set out in the schedule appearing at page 53 of Table 8 in Appendix A to its final report. A copy of that schedule has been reproduced as Figure 12.1 in Appendix 12. This schedule is in substantially similar terms to the schedule that had accompanied the IIC's letter of 26 September 2005.[594] The only differences are that some of the amounts for some of the contracts listed have changed.[595] It is these changes to some of the figures in the schedule that account for the increase to US$221.7 million from the amount foreshadowed in its letter of 26 September 2005, namely US$212 million.
26.54 According to the IIC's schedule, AWB had paid US$82.482 million in after-sales-service fees and US$139.274 million in inland transportation fees in respect of the 19 contracts listed in Table 8, making a total of US$221.756 million.[596]
26.55 In addition to their report dated 26 October 2005, Ferrier Hodgson also prepared a series of spreadsheets which recorded the inland transportation fees (including 10 per cent after-sales-service fee) paid by AWB and the AWB Pool on a contract by contract and shipment by shipment basis.[597]
26.56 A summary of the total amount of the inland transportation fees (including 10 per cent after-sales-service fee) paid under each of the contracts for which Ferrier Hodgson had prepared a spreadsheet was prepared by Counsel assisting this Inquiry and tendered as Exhibit 950 in this Inquiry. A copy of that summary is reproduced in Figure 13.4 in Appendix 13.
26.57 There are some differences between the IIC's schedule in its final report and the results revealed by the final version of the Ferrier Hodgson spreadsheets as summarised in Exhibit 950. The principal difference was that the Ferrier Hodgson spreadsheets list 26 contracts in respect of which inland transportation fees were paid.[598] These include the six contracts concluded with the grain traders Savas Grain and CSC and contract A1670, which were not listed in the IIC's schedule.[599]
Contracts A1670 and A1680 have not been included in the summary in Exhibit 950. This is because the inland transportation fees paid by AWB in respect of these two contracts were fees paid after the incursion in March 2003 and after AWB had entered into the Agency and Transport Services Agreement with Alia dated 21 October 2003.[600] They were paid at a time when AWB was being required by the Coalition Provisional Authority/World Food Programme to deliver the wheat it was shipping to Iraq to silos in all of the governorates within Iraq, consistent with the terms of AWB's then subsisting written contracts with IGB and which had been adopted by the CPA/WFP.[601]
The inland transportation fees paid by AWB under contracts A1670 and A1680 after March 2003 were therefore genuinely payments to Alia for transport services that Alia provided to AWB. They were not payments to Alia by way of 'kickbacks' to Iraq in the sense used by the IIC final report. For these reasons the amounts paid under these two contracts have been omitted from the summary in Exhibit 950.
26.58 The final versions of the spreadsheets prepared by Ferrier Hodgson record that AWB paid approximately US$223.5 million in inland transportation fees in respect of the 26 contracts identified in Exhibit 950.[602] This figure was made up of:
26.59 In addition, AWB Chartering paid a further US$565,541.76 on 3 April 2000 in relation to a shipment of wheat to the IGB under AWB contracts A4821 and A4334.[603] This was notwithstanding that no inland transportation fees were payable under either of those contracts.[604] This payment was not included in the final version of the Ferrier Hodgson spreadsheets.[605] When added to the amounts disclosed in the final version of the spreadsheets prepared by Ferrier Hodgson, the total amount of inland transportation fees paid was approximately US$224.13 million.
26.60 Between November 1999 and March 2003, a total of US$224,128,189.98 was paid by AWB in inland transportation fees and after-sales-service fees to Iraq under phases VI to XIII of the Oil-for-Food Programme.[606]
These fees were paid in respect of 161 shipments under 28 contracts.[607]
26.61 Of these 28 contracts:
26.62 Almost all of the inland transportation and after-sales-service fees paid in respect of these contracts (approximately US$223.318 million) was funded by a commensurate increase in the price of the wheat and thus recovered from the United Nations escrow account.[610]
26.63 The fees paid that were not so recovered were borne by the AWB Pool.
26.64 AWB did not differentiate in its records between the transportation fee and the 10 per cent after-sales-service fee. Both fees were treated within the books of the AWB Group as 'inland transportation fees'. It is therefore not possible to discern a breakdown between the two components from AWB's own records.
26.65 The evidence before the Inquiry reveals that of the total amount of inland transportation fees paid between November 1999 and March 2003:
26.66 All of the inland transportation fees, including the additional 10 per cent, paid by AWB were paid directly or indirectly to Alia as described in Chapter 18.
26.67 In its final report, the IIC found that Alia was one of two Jordanian 'front companies' that:
posed as legitimate providers of transportation services from the port of Umm Qasr, but in practice provided only limited services at port and otherwise functioned as little more than conduits for the payment of transportation fees to ISCWT. In exchange, the companies received a small percentage of the fees they channelled to the regime. [611]
26.68 The IIC also concluded:
All money paid by front companies or suppliers into ISCWT's account at the Amman branch of Rafidain Bank was transferred promptly into the company's account at the Baghdad branch of the same bank. Upon receipt of these funds, Rafidain Bank Baghdad would notify ISCWT. In addition, the front companies themselves would inform ISCWT that a supplier had fulfilled its obligations.[612]
26.69 On 13 November 1999, Alia entered into an agreement with the Iraqi State Company for Water Transport ('ISCWT') to collect inland transportation fees on ISCWT's behalf.[613]
26.70 This agreement was recorded in a document dated 13 November 1999 entitled 'Meeting Minutes', the Arabic version of which was signed by Mr Al Absi as General Manager of Alia and by Mr Ibrahim Ismaeel as General Manager of the ISCWT.[614] The Minutes, as translated into English[615], recorded:
The undersigned persons were met to set up the business mechanism as follows:
1. In case the Marine Carrier logins Alia For Transportation & General Trade Co directly, in this case Alia shall provide Iraq State Company for Water Transport (Basra Branch) with the following data before the vessel's arrival into Umm Qaser, meanwhile ISCWT shall provide Alia with any new further data upon receiving them such as:
a. Vessel's Name.
b. Vessel's Nationality.
c. Supplier's Name.
d. Beneficiary.
e. Carrier's Name.
f. Tonnage's quantity & kind.
g. Total Transportation Fees.
2. ISCWT shall provide Alia with the following data upon the vessel's arrival at Iraqi Ports:
a. Arrival Date & Berth Date.
b. Completion of Discharging date & Departure Date.
c. Kind of Tonnage.
d. Discharging Port.
e. Discharged Quantity.
3. After informing Marine Agencies of receipt the remittance from Alia, ISCWT obliges the rest commitments with the concerned parties.
4. Alia For Transportation & General Trade Co shall deposit the full amount into ISCWT's account in Alrafideen Bank-Amman during five days, otherwise a percentage of (1%) demurrage will be counted monthly according to days.
5. Alia For Transportation & General Trade takes (1%) of total incoming remittances as commission against the services it provides to ISCWT (which is restricted to receiving amounts and depositing them into ISCWT's account).
6. As per the coordination between ISCWT and Alia according to official letters, bank's name and account's No & Beneficiary's Name will be specified.
7. This Business Minutes will be valid after the signature of the Transportation Minister.
8. The Mechanism performance shall be reconsidered after three months and according to the circumstances.[616]
It makes plain in paragraph 5 that the function of Alia was restricted to the receipt and passing of money, not provision of transportation.
26.71 In October 2005, Mr Long travelled to Jordan to speak with Alia about the proposed findings of the IIC and in the course of his discussions with Mr Al Absi obtained a copy of this agreement.[617]
26.72 After the conclusion of the Oil-for-Food Programme, ISCWT confirmed that Alia had acted as a conduit for the receipt of funds to be paid to the ISCWT. In a letter dated 17 October 2004 addressed to Al-Own Public Transport Co. Ltd, Alia stated:
Subject: Goods transportation in accordance with the memorandum of understanding signed between the United Nation and Iraq (for the Australian Wheat Council).
…
This is to confirm that Alia Company for Trading and Transportation was one of the companies receiving internal transport charges and transferred to the account of this company, and in its turn pay the public and private carrier in addition to insurance and ports for internal land transportation of goods in accordance with the memorandum of understating signed between the United Nations and Iraq and not for any of the previous regime personnel.[618] [emphasis in original]
26.73 The General Manager of Alia, Mr Al Absi, said that he received a copy of this letter in October 2004.[619] According to Mr Al Absi, Al-Own Public Transport Co. is an Iraqi company owned by a relative of the Chairman of Alia.[620]
26.74 According to evidence given to this Inquiry by Mr Al Absi, from late 1999 until the commencement of hostilities in Iraq and the end of the Oil-for-Food Programme in mid to late 2003 Alia collected inland transportation fees pursuant to its agreement with the ISCWT dated 13 November 1999.[621]
26.75 Mr Al Absi's evidence was that all payments of inland transportation fees and after-sales-service fees by AWB to Alia were remitted, less a commission retained by Alia, to ISCWT in accordance with this agreement.[622] Effective 16 December 2000, the commission payable to Alia for this service was reduced from 1 per cent (as recorded in paragraph 5 of the agreement of 13 November 1999) to 0.25 per cent.[623]
He also said that during the period Alia was collecting fees on ISCWT's behalf, it did not provide transportation services from the port of Umm Qasr to inland destinations in Iraq for AWB. Nor did it arrange for the provision of any such services.[624]
26.76 Mr Al Absi was aware from information that he received from the Iraqi Ministry of Transport, including from the Ministry of Transport representatives on the board of Alia, and from Alia's employees or agents in Iraq, that AWB wheat that arrived in Umm Qasr was transported from the port by trucks organised by the Iraqi Grain Board (IGB) and the Ministry of Transport or companies that it owned or controlled. The companies owned or controlled by the Ministry of Transport were The General Company for Overland Transport and Al-Thalal. Those companies and the IGB catered for about 40 per cent of all trucking. The balance of the trucking was supplied by private companies that were contracted by the Ministry of Transport companies or the IGB. The private companies included Dolemi, Affan and Al-Aoun. Alia did not use Al-Aoun as a sub-contractor for transport services in respect of AWB's shipments of wheat to Umm Qasr in the period 1999 to 2003.[625]
26.77 The position changed in 2003 when Alia started providing transport services from Umm Qasr for AWB after Alia had entered into an agreement with AWB Services in late 2003 for this purpose.[626]
26.78 Mr Al Absi explained the method by which the transportation fees were collected by Alia and passed on to the ISCWT pursuant to the agreement of 13 November 1999:
6. Alia's collection of the fees on behalf of ISCWT operated in the following way. Alia and ISCWT exchanged information about a particular supplier and vessel that was to arrive at an Iraqi port, including the total transportation fee to be collected. ISCWT would then issue to Alia an official Authorisation Letter that requested Alia to collect the transportation fees in relation to a particular shipment of goods and a particular supplier. … A copy of the Authorisation Letter was also sent to the supplier either direct by ISCWT or sometimes through Alia because of communication problems. The supplier would then pay the transportation fees into Alia's bank account at the Arab Land Bank or the Jordan National Bank in Jordan.
7. After the fees had been received into Alia's bank account, Alia would notify ISCWT of the receipt of the funds and would then deduct its commission from the payment and remit the balance to the ISCWT's bank account at the Raffadin Bank in Jordan. Alia's commission was originally 1% and then reduced to 0.25% because ISCWT considered the amount of 1% too high. Alia was required to remit the funds to ISCWT within a short period of time or it would be penalised. The penalty was a monetary penalty calculated as a percentage of the fee.[627]
26.79 After the Iraqi government imposed the additional 10 per cent service fee, Alia commenced to collect this fee on ISCWT's behalf in addition to the trucking fees. It remitted such fees to ISCWT in exactly the same manner as it remitted trucking fees.[628]
26.80 According to Mr Al Absi, during the period between 1999 and 2003:
… Alia received many large payments from AWB Limited representing inland transportation fees and after sales service fees. The funds received from AWB, less Alia's commission, were all remitted to ISCWT in accordance with the agreement and procedures discussed above. Fees were also collected from other suppliers under the Oil-for-Food Programme, including Vinafood, Vinamilk, Vietnam National Tea Corporation, Thai Rice Co and Russian grain companies such as Savas Grain.[629]
26.81 Documents produced to this Inquiry by the United Nations confirm Mr Al Absi's evidence.
26.82 Between November 1999 and March 2003, inland transportation fees, including the additional 10 per cent after-sales-service fee were paid to Alia via a number of different bank accounts, which Alia were maintained with two banks in Jordan, the Arab Land Bank and the Jordan National Bank.
26.83 Initially, the fees were paid in US dollars into a US dollar account in the name of Alia with the Arab Land Bank in Jordan[630] (also known as the Egyptian Arab Land Bank). Most fees paid in US dollars thereafter were paid into that account. But for six payments made between 7 August 2000 and 2 October 2000, all US dollar payments continued to be made into Alia's US dollar account with the Arab Land Bank, up until early May 2001 when AWB commenced to make payments of fees in Deutschmark. Between 7 August and 2 October 2000, six payments totalling US$4,431,698.70 were paid in US dollars into a US dollar account in the name of Alia with the Jordan National Bank.[631]
26.84 From May 2001 until November 2001 inland transportation fees, including the additional 10 per cent, were paid in Deutschmarks.[632] These payments were made into a Deutschmark account in the name of Alia with the National Bank of Jordan.[633]
26.85 From November 2001 until March 2003, inland transportation fees, including the additional 10 per cent, were paid in euros.[634] These payments were made into a euro account in the name of Alia with the National Bank of Jordan.[635]
26.86 In the course of the IIC's investigations, Alia produced to the IIC bank statements for a number of different accounts (in a number of different currencies) maintained in the name of Alia. These bank statements were amongst the documents produced to this Inquiry by the United Nations. These documents did not include any bank statements for the US dollar account with the Arab Land Bank. However, they did include a number of bank statements produced for accounts with the Jordan National Bank in a number of different currencies, including US dollars, Deutschmarks and euro.
A sample of these bank statements was translated and copies of the original bank statements from that sample together with their translations were tendered as Exhibit 948.
26.87 The translations of Alia's bank statements included in Exhibit 948 record both:
26.88 Appendix 24 contains an analysis of the entries appearing on page 7417 of a Deutschmark account with the National Bank of Jordan in the name of Alia[636], covering the period from 9 May to 21 June 2001.
26.89 This analysis reveals:
26.90 Appendix 24 identifies five further pages taken from Exhibit 948 where the bank statements produced for Alia's euro account with the National Bank of Jordan record:
26.91 Although the bank statements referred to in Appendix 24 also include entries recording the transfer of monies from this euro account to the credit of account of the General Maritime Transportation Company with the Rafidain Bank and although many of these entries state that this transfer is in relation to a particular vessel or vessels, the vessels are not named in these entries or otherwise identified in the bank statements. It is therefore not possible to link directly the deposit of inland transportation fees into this account in relation to particular shipments with the payment(s) out associated with that shipment. What these bank statements do record, however, is that Alia was transferring from the account into which at that time Alia was banking inland transportation fees paid to it in euros (including by AWB) the bulk of those deposits from that account to the credit of account of the General Maritime Transportation Company with the Rafidain Bank.
26.92 In its final report, the IIC reported that Iraqi officials had explained that the transportation fees were unusually high and included a generous margin of profit that was transferred to accounts held by the Iraqi Ministry of Finance or Central Bank of Iraq (CBI).[639] It was also reported by the IIC that the Minister of Oil Rashid had noted that the inland transportation fees were introduced to generate supplemental cash and did not relate to internal costs.[640] Further, a senior official of Alia was reported as having stated that the actual inland transportation costs were minimal and that the fee essentially 'was a payment to the Government of Iraq'.[641]
26.93 The IIC also found in its final report that internal Iraq documents note that with each successive phase of the Oil-for-Food Programme, the Iraqi regime successfully diverted additional funds accrued for inland transportation charges to Iraqi ministries and government organs unconnected to transportation services.[642]
26.94 Also included in the IIC final report was a table headed 'MOU Transport Tariff'[643] identifying the inland transport fees paid for wheat during phases VI to VIII and how the proceeds of those fees were to be distributed within the various Iraqi government entities[644]:
Figure 26.1 Extract: Volcker report, p. 274
Source: Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0281; Volcker report, p. 274.
26.95 The IIC found that although fees increased slightly between phases VI and VII and substantially between phases VII and VIII, the funds earmarked to entities involved in port and transportation services remained constant. For example, the amount allocated to land transport remained at US$9 per tonne through out and the amount allocated to ports varied between US$1 and US$3 a tonne. The schedule also provided for other ministries and departments such as the IGB, Ministry of Trade and National Insurance Company to receive only small percentages of the total fees.[645]
26.96 The IIC's final report noted that the only entity's share of the inland transportation fees which increased significantly between phases was that of the Ministry of Finance.[646] This Ministry did not receive any portion of fees collected on bulk goods such as wheat in phases VI and VII. However it was afforded as much as US$10 per tonne (higher than any other beneficiary) in phase VIII.[647] Moreover the IIC found that these remittances to the Ministry of Finance did not reflect any assistance by the ministry in the handling or transport of goods and may have included a portion of the after-sales-service fees.[648] Rather they denoted a cash surplus that would be retained at the Central Bank of Iraq to be spent at the Iraqi's regime's discretion.[649]
26.97 Following its discussion of the introduction of the 10 per cent after-sales-service fee[650] and the expansion of the scheme[651], the IIC in its final report gave an example from June 2002 of the dissemination of inland transportation fees collected by Alia in connection with a contract between AWB and the IGB[652]:
26.98 The fees referred to as having been collected and distributed in this document were received by Alia from AWB in relation to wheat shipped by AWB on the vessel Bei Hai under AWB contract A1112. This was a shipment in respect of which AWB was paid €11.09 million from the United Nations escrow account[653] or approximately US$10.76 million.[654] Documents produced by AWB to this Inquiry confirm that AWB paid inland transportation fees of €2,326,800 in respect of this shipment.[655] These fees amounted to almost 21 per cent of the contract price.[656]
Figure 26.2 Extract: Volcker report, p. 283
Source: Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0290; Volcker Report, p. 283.
26.99 In relation to this shipment and the fees collected by Alia, the IIC concluded in its final report:
The record indicates that AWB paid approximately $2.3 million in nominal transportation fees for the trucking of 41,579 metric tons of bulk wheat shipped on the vessel Bei Hai-a rate of approximately $54 pmt. Of these funds, ISCWT earmarked $0.98 million for the Ministry of Finance as an after-sales-service fee. This sum equates to a markup of approximately ten percent of the value of the wheat (inclusive of transportation charges) discharged from the Bei Hai. The remaining $1.3 million in transportation fee revenues were disseminated as follows: (1) $0.53 million, or $12.61 pmt for the Ministry of Finance (termed as 'additional'); (2) $0.41 million, or $9.75 pmt, for Land Transport; (3) $0.09 million, or $2.17 pmt for ports; and (4) between $0.01 and $0.07 million or roughly $0.13 pmt to $1.71 pmt, for other service providers such as ISCWT and National Insurance Company.[657]
26.100 This document and shipment are considered in more detail in Appendix 25.
26.101 In its final report, the IIC represented the distribution of inland transportation fees in the document depicted in Figure 26.3.[658]
Figure 26.3 Extract: Volcker report, p. 284
Source: Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0291; Volcker report, p. 284.
The IIC found that the ISCWT applied this distribution framework to all of the funds that it received from contractors after phase VIII of the Oil-for-Food Programme.[659]
26.102 This Inquiry also obtained from the United Nations:
26.103 Those documents reveal that monies paid to Alia by way of inland transportation fees and the 10 per cent after-sales-service fees were paid by Alia to the ISCWT and then distributed to various departments of the Iraqi government. This distribution was presumably in accordance with the directives issued by the Iraqi Vice President and Deputy Prime Minister.
26.104 A minimal proportion of the funds received from Alia and distributed was allocated on account of the transportation and discharge of goods. The majority-in the documented cases approximately two thirds-of the funds collected were allocated to the Iraqi Ministry of Finance.[662] There is no material before this Inquiry to show how or for what purposes the Ministry of Finance applied those funds.
26.105 Included amongst the documents produced by the United Nations were five documents, each entitled 'MOU goods transport form'. The documents were in Arabic. Translations were also provided by the United Nations. The translations were tendered as part of the evidence of this Inquiry. They became Exhibits 80 and 81.[663] Exhibit 80 was the translation of one of these documents.[664] It was the same document that was the subject of the comments of the IIC in its final report at pages 283-284 and is reproduced in Figure 26.2. Exhibit 81 comprised the translations of the other four documents.[665]
26.106 Exhibits 80 and 81 record, on five separate occasions between June and December 2002:
26.107 For example, Exhibit 80 refers to the receipt from Alia of US$2,247,211.26 in respect of a shipment of Australian wheat discharged at Umm Qasr from the vessel Bei Hai in May 2002.[666] This shipment was under AWB's contract A1112 with the IGB.
Documents produced by AWB to the Inquiry confirm that AWB paid inland transportation fees of €2,326,800 to Alia in respect of this shipment. Of these funds, Alia remitted €2,320,976 to the ISCWT.[667] This was after deduction of Alia's 0.25 per cent commission. The amount remitted was converted to US$2,251,346 from which service fees of US$4,138.39 were deducted.
The balance amounting to approximately US$2,247,211.26 was then distributed between various Iraqi authorities and departments in the amounts set out in Exhibit 80. This information is repeated in Table 26.1.
Table 26.1 Distribution of amount received from Alia in relation to the shipment on the Bei Hai (Exhibit 80)
|
Recipient |
Amount |
Proportion of fees paid for this shipment (%) |
|
Amount paid to ports |
90,455.16 |
04.03 |
|
Amount paid to water |
26,250.01 |
01.17 |
|
Amount paid to water: 25% marine agencies |
5,492.42 |
00.24 |
|
Amount paid to land |
40,7048.22 |
18.11 |
|
Amount paid to railroad |
Nil |
- |
|
Illegible |
47,607.97 |
02.12 |
|
Amount paid to grains Co. |
71,411.97 |
03.18 |
|
Services and Correspondence |
47,607.98 |
02.12 |
|
Shortage amount/Packaged |
Nil |
- |
|
Amount paid to the Ministry of Finance-additional |
526,715.01 |
23.44 |
|
Amount paid to the Ministry of Finance-service |
976,816.93 |
43.47 |
|
Amount paid to al-wataniya insurance |
23,803.66 |
01.06 |
|
Total |
US$2,247,210.93 |
100.00 |
It is apparent from Exhibit 80 that just over US$1.5 million or approximately two thirds of the monies that the Iraqi government received from Alia[668] in respect of the inland transportation fees including the 10 per cent after-sales-service fee paid by AWB for its shipment on the Bei Hai was allocated to the Iraqi Ministry of Finance. The purposes to which the Ministry of Finance applied these funds is not known.
26.108 A mere 18 per cent of the total amount received from Alia was distributed to 'land', presumably in respect of land transport. Just over 4 per cent of that total amount was allocated to the ports company and approximately 2.3 per cent to 'water'. Finally, a little over 3 per cent of the total amount distributed was paid to the 'grains Co.'-that is, the IGB.
A more detailed discussion of Exhibit 80 and the information it contains is in Appendix 25.
26.109 Similar conclusions can be drawn from each of the four similar documents comprising Exhibit 81. Appendix 25 contains a detailed discussion of each of those documents and the information that they contain.
26.110 Appendix 25 reveals in respect of each of these documents and the shipments to which they relate that in the period between June and December 2002:
[538] In this chapter, a reference to inland transportation fees paid by AWB or the AWB Pool after April 2001 includes the additional 10 per cent (after-sales-service) fee that was first imposed in relation to shipments of wheat under contract A0430 and that applied to all shipments under contracts between AWB and the IGB thereafter. To avoid confusion that component of the inland transportation fees paid in respect of contracts A0430 and following specified as the transportation charge or cost of transportation of the wheat may also be described as a trucking fee.
[539] This is the total of the payments made in US dollars and the US dollar equivalent of the payments made by AWB in Deutschmarks and euros.
[540] Namely AWB contract A4993 and contract A0062, in respect of which shipments were made in August and September 2000.
[541] Namely contract A0101 in respect of which shipments were made in September and October 2000.
[542] This is examined in some detail in Chapter 18.
[543] This is discussed in some detail in Chapter 18.
[544] See the exchange between Mr Stott and Mr Watson at Ex 288, AWB.0138.0378_R; Ex 335, WST.0009.0356.
[545] See below in relation to May 2001.
[546] This increase and its imposition is examined more closely in Chapter 21.
[547] See Table 13.1 in Appendix 13.
[548] That is, the contract price less the inland transportation fee payable by AWB and recouped as part of the contract price.
[549] Being the contract price less the inland transportation fee payable by AWB and recouped as part of the contract price.
[550] Over this period this range of inland transportation fees represented approximately 26 per cent to 22 per cent of the CIF free out price that would have otherwise been payable. Although the fee charged increased during this period, the percentage of the CIF free out price that that fee represented fell slightly as the price of the wheat rose by a proportionately greater amount.
[551] Ex 1376, AWB.5004.0175; See also Chapter 21.
[552] Namely for AWB contracts A0552, A0553, A0784, A0785, A1111, A1112 and A1441.
[553] Namely for AWB contracts A1670 and A1680.
[554] The inland transportation fees were paid from this bank account as prior to September 2000 all trading activities of the AWB Group including AWB Chartering were conducted through AWB (Australia) Limited; See Chapter 9.
[555] Ex 1462, AWB.0090.0294_R.
[556] Also Deutsche Bank (Frankfurt); Ex 1463, AWB.0079.0008.
[557] For contracts A0784 and A0785 concluded 2 June 2001, contracts A1111 and A1112 concluded 20 December 2001, contract A1441 concluded 23 June 2002 and contracts A1670 and A1680 concluded 11 December 2002.
[558] The request for payment of the inland transportation fees was initially made on 26 April 2001, however the payment was in fact not made until 2 May 2001.
[559] Ex 950, INQ.0017.0062.
[560] An example of this first method is to be found in the payment of DM9,265,955.10 made on 19 June 2001 (Ex 1463, AWB.0079.0106, AWB.0079.0107). That payment represented the first instalment of the inland transportation fees payable in respect of two shipments under AWB contract A0552 and the second payment of the instalment due for two other shipments under AWB contract A0430 (Ex 1463, AWB.0079.0107). The payment was requested by the International Marketing Division-Middle East Desk, in particular Mr Hogan. It was authorised by Mr Ingleby and Ms Scales. The Commonwealth Bank of Australia is incorrectly referred to as the Commercial Bank of Australia in endnotes 110, 131, 142, 157 and 177 to Appendix 24.
[561] It was for example from this account that the payment of 2 May 2001 (being the first instalment of the inland transportation charges applicable to each of the shipments under contract A0430) was made.
[562] Ex 950, INQ.0017.0062.
[563] The Commonwealth Bank of Australia is incorrectly referred to as the Commercial Bank of Australia in endnotes 110, 131, 142, 157 and 177 to Appendix 24.
[564] For example inland transportation fees of €4,480,596.52 were paid by AWB on 16 November 2001. This payment was made pursuant to a request dated 13 November 2001 and represented payment of a portion of the inland transportation fees for two shipments, one under contract A0784 and the other under contract A0552 (Ex 1463, AWB.0079.0007). The funds were paid out of AWB's euro account with the Commonwealth Bank on 16 November 2001 (Ex 1463, AWB.0162.0106). The payment was met from the deposit of an identical amount the previous day (Ex 1463, AWB.0162.0106). That deposit was described as a 'FX payment' or foreign exchange payment and was presumably the result of a foreign currency exchange, in particular an exchange of US dollars into euros.
[565] Ex 160, AWB.0144.0220. See also Chapter 21.
[566] Being the total inland transportation fee that had been payable under the immediately preceding Phase VIII contracts.
[567] Ex 160, AWB.0144.0220.
[568] Ex 160, AWB.0144.0220.
[569] Ex 1463, AWB.0061.0192, AWB.5049.0318.
[570] Ex 1464, AWB.0090.0068_R, AWB.5049.0318.
[571] Ex 1465, AWB.0062.0558_R.
[572] This is to be contrasted with the ocean freight for the voyage from Australia to Iraq that AWB was also required to pay in full in respect of these shipments prior to its receipt of the proceeds of sale, which was between US$750,000 and US$1 million per shipment.
[573] Ex 1376, AWB.5067.0371_R.
[574] Ex 1376, AWB.5067.0371_R.
[575] Ex 403, AWB.5094.0313.
[576] Ex 403, AWB.5094.0313.
[577] Ex 142, WST.0005.0001 at 0034-0035, para. 122.
[578] Ex 335, WST.0009.0001 at 0034, para. 148(c)(iii).
[579] That is the CIF price, with no allowance for the cost of any carriage (other than the ocean carriage) or the cost of the discharge of the cargo.
[580] Or Free on Truck (FOT) price.
[581] That is except for some of Mr Lister's file covers which did record the transportation fee component and the additional 10 per cent fee separately.
[582] Ex 502, AWB.0338.0129_R.
[583] Ex 502, AWB.0338.0132.
[584] Ex 502, AWB.0338.0129_R at 0130_R.
[585] Ex 502, AWB.0338.0132.
[586] Ex 951, DFT.0001.0487_R; See also T 625.43-44, T 631.33-37.
[587] Ex 951, DFT.0001.0487_R. A copy of the schedule is Ex 502, AWB.0338.0132. This was the schedule that accompanied the IIC's letter dated 26 September 2005.
[588] Ex 951, DFT.0001.0487_R-0488_R.
[589] Ex 951, DFT.0001.0487_R.
[590] Ex 951, DFT.0001.0487_R at 0488_R.
[591] Ex 951, DFT.0001.0487_R at 0488_R.
[592] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0321 (Volcker report, p. 314) and 0332 (Volcker report p. 325).
[593] In its letter of 26 September 2005; Ex 502, AWB.0338.0129_R-0131_R.
[594] Ex 502, AWB.0338.0132.
[595] There were some slight differences in some of the amounts listed in Table 8 as after-sales-service fees from the corresponding figures in the earlier schedule. The schedule in Table 8 also included inland transportation fees of US$9,668,626 in respect of contract 1200083 which had not been included in the earlier schedule.
[596] The breakdown between inland transportation fees and after-sales-service fee found on the evidence before this Inquiry is set out later in this chapter.
[597] A separate spreadsheet was prepared for each contract during these phases. Each of these spreadsheets identified each of the shipments made under that contract and listed for each of those shipments the amount of the inland transportation fees paid. The final version of these spreadsheets were tendered as a confidential exhibit before this Inquiry (Ex 368C; see also Ex 1377, AWB.0130.0001_R-0046_R).
[598] The IIC's schedule lists 19 contracts.
[599] The six contracts with the grain traders were presumably not listed against AWB by the IIC in its final report because it was not AWB who contracted directly with the IGB and it was therefore not the Australian Mission to the United Nations who obtained United Nations approval for these contracts under the Oil-for-Food Programme.
[600] Ex 954, AWB.0211.0001-0012; See Chapter 25.
[601] In particular consistent with the manner in which the price of the wheat had been expressed.
[602] This is excluding any payments made under contracts A1670 and A1680, which payments were made after the commencement of hostilities in Iraq in March 2003 and were paid to Alia under an agreement between AWB and Alia under which Alia was to arrange for the carriage of wheat to all silos in all governorates on behalf of AWB and where the inland transportation fees paid were not transmitted or to be transmitted to Iraq.
[603] This was in respect of two shipments of wheat shipped by AWB under these contracts on the Pretty Lady. The inland transportation fees paid in respect of these two shipments are part of the US$1,140,953.76 of inland transportation fees paid to Tse Yu Hong Metal Limited for payment on to Alia referred to in Ex 1450, AWB.0045.0013_R, AWB.0163.0170.
[604] Both of those contracts were concluded on 'CIF free out' terms (rather than CIF Free in Truck to silo to all Governates of Iraq) under which no inland transportation fees were payable. Because of the terms on which these shipments were sold, the AWB Pool was not directly reimbursed the cost of the inland transportation fees paid in respect of these two shipments by a commensurate increase in the price paid for the wheat shipped (as was the case with those shipments made under contracts where inland transportation fees were payable). Accordingly the cost of the inland transportation fees paid by AWB (and through it the AWB Pool) in respect of this shipment under these two contracts was borne by the AWB Pool from the profit it otherwise derived from the sale of this wheat.
[605] Or for that reason Ex 950, INQ.0017.0062 (as to contract A4821 see note 1 in Ex 950, INQ.0017.0062).
[606] Ex 950, INQ.0017.0062, together with the further US$565,541.76 paid in respect of contracts A4821 and A4334 not listed in that exhibit.
[607] Including the three contracts (A4821, A4334 and A4907) in respect of which no inland transportation fees were in fact payable under the terms of the contract but inland transportation fees were in fact paid in respect of wheat shipped under those contracts.
[608] In addition, inland transportation fees were also paid in respect of a shipment under contract A4334, which was a contract under Phase V of the Oil-for-Food Programme concluded prior to July 1999 (on 24 December 1998).
[609] The last shipment.
[610] A total of US$811,625.76 of inland transportation fees was paid by AWB in relation to shipments made under the three contracts in respect of which no inland transportation fees were payable (namely contracts A4821, A4334 and A4907) and which were not thereby funded by an increase in price and thereby funds drawn upon the United escrow account.
[611] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0277-0278; Volcker Report, pp. 270-271.
[612] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0278; Volcker report, p. 271 and footnotes 435 and 437.
[613] Ex 141, WST.0007.0001, para. 4.
[614] Ex 141, WST.0007.0006-0007.
[615] Ex 141, WST.0007.0008-0009; Ex 82, AWB.0213.0013.
[616] Ex 141, WST.0007.0008-0009.
[617] Ex 82, AWB.0213.0033-0034.
[618] Ex 141, WST.0007.0011(Arabic original), WST.0007.0012 (translation); See also Ex 949, UNO.0006.0024 (translation), UNO.0006.0025 (Arabic original).
[619] Ex 141, WST.0007.0001 at 0003, para. 10.
[620] Ex 141, WST.0007.0001 at 0003-0004, para. 12; See also Ex 82, AWB.0213.0046 at 0047.
[621] Ex 141, WST.0007.0001 at 0002, para. 5.
[622] Ex 141, WST.0007.0001 at 0003, para. 9.
[623] Ex 949, UNO.0001.0066, para. 2, UNO.0001.0068 (Arabic original); See also Ex 141, WST.0007.0001 at 0002, para. 7.
[624] Ex 141, WST.0007.0001 at 0003, para. 11.
[625] Ex 141, WST.0007.0001 at 0003, para. 12.
[626] Ex 141, WST.0007.0001 at 0004, para. 13; See also Chapter 25.
[627] Ex 141, WST.0007.0001 at 0002, paras 6-7.
[628] Ex 141, WST.0007.0001 at 0002, para. 8.
[629] Ex 141, WST.0007.0001 at 0003, para. 9.
[630] Ex 118, MAE.0002.0069; Ex 1447, AWB.0071.0225_R, AWB.0042.0009_R, AWB.0163.0003_R, AWB.0042.0007_R, AWB.0063.0029_R.
[631] See for example Ex 1456, AWB.0053.0046_R, AWB.0064.0035_R, AWB.0053.0094_R, AWB.0164.0046_R.
[632] See above.
[633] See for example Ex 1462, AWB.0164.0212_R, AWB.0079.0106_R.
[634] See above.
[635] See for example Ex 1463, AWB.0079.0006_R, AWB.0079.0040_R.
[636] Ex 948, UNO.0020.0025 at 0040 (Arabic original), UNO.0020.0084-0086 (Translation).
[637] Including the additional 10 per cent (after-sales-service) fee first imposed in relation to contract A0430.
[638] Ex 141, WST.0007.0001 at 0002, para.7.
[639] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0280; Volcker Report, p. 273.
[640] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0280; Volcker Report, p. 273.
[641] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0280; Volcker Report, p. 273.
[642] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0280; Volcker Report, p. 273.
[643] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0281; Volcker Report, p. 274.
[644] A copy of this document also appears in Ex 997, UNO.0001.0070.
[645] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0281; Volcker Report, p. 274.
[646] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0282; Volcker Report, p. 275.
[647] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0282; Volcker Report, p. 275.
[648] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0282; Volcker Report, p. 275.
[649] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0282; Volcker Report, p. 275.
[650] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0283; Volcker Report, p. 276.
[651] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0287; Volcker Report, p. 280.
[652] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0289-0290; Volcker Report, pp 282-283.
[653] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0290; Volcker Report, p. 283, footnote 457; See also Ex 1211, UNO.1214.0467.
[654] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0290; Volcker Report, p. 283, footnote 457-the US$ figure was calculated applying the exchange rate used by the ISCWT in its calculations in relation to the amounts received.
[655] Ex 1468, AWB.0079.0022_R. See also Appendix 25.
[656] The inland transportation fee paid per tonne represented approximately 26 per cent of the CIF free out price for the wheat sold under this contract A1112.
[657] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0290; Volcker Report, p. 283.
[658] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0291.
[659] Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0291; Volcker Report, p. 284.
[660] Ex 997, AWB.0086.0172_R-0173_R, AWB.0086.0174-0175, AWB.0086.0178-0180, UNO.0001.0008-0009, UNO.0001.0016-0017, UNO.0001.0022-0023, UNO.0001.0026-0028, UNO.0001.0070, UNO.0001.0081, UNO.0001.0089-0090.
[661] Ex 1377, AWB.0295.0239.
[662] Consistent with the findings of the IIC in its final report.
[663] Ex 80, UNO.0003.4875; Ex 81, UNO.0001.0083, UNO.0003.4856, UNO.0003.4892, UNO.0003.4949.
[664] Ex 80, UNO.0003.4875.
[665] Ex 81, UNO.0001.0083, UNO.0003.4856, UNO.0003.4892, UNO.0003.4949.
[666] Although the vessel's name was covered over in the copy of the document that comprises Exhibit 80 for confidentiality reasons, it is clearly apparent on the copy of the document reproduced at Ex 13, UNO.0005.0001 at 0290; Volcker Report, p.283.
[667] Ex 80, UNO.0003.4875.
[668] Following deduction of its 0.25 per cent commission and the 'Service fees' referred to in Ex 80, UNO.0003.4875.
