Disputed Grounds

Nestled in the northwest of Türkiye, Mount Ida, known locally as Kazdağı, stands as a testament to nature’s grandeur and the depths of human history. This majestic mountain range, with its lush forests and ancient ruins, holds a special place in the imagination of the Turkish people.

Mount Ida’s peaks and valleys are steeped in mythology, resonating with tales from Greek legend. It was here, according to ancient lore, that the Trojan War’s seeds were sown when Paris, a prince of the nearby legendary city of Troy, judged Aphrodite the fairest goddess, sparking a chain of events that would lead to one of history’s most famous conflicts.

Ecologically, Mount Ida is a sanctuary of biodiversity. Its dense forests, a vibrant tapestry of oak, chestnut and pine, are called the lungs of Türkiye’s Marmara region. These forests provide a haven for wildlife and host hundreds of plant species, many of which are endemic. Local communities have lived in harmony with the land for generations. Agricultural practices and pastoral lifestyles continue to thrive, reflecting a deep connection to the mountains’ resources. Only a small part of this ecological richness is protected within the bounds of Kazdağı National Park on the southern slopes of the mountains.

In 2019, this iconic symbol of Türkiye’s natural and cultural heritage became the epicentre of an escalating conflict between a Canadian mining company planning to construct a gold mine and local communities resisting the encroachment of their lands and livelihoods. Although the region has a long history of resistance against extractivism, this particular case stood out as unique. During the summer months, tens of thousands of people from all over the country came to protest, turning local resistance into nationwide opposition that ultimately forced the Turkish government to stop supporting the project and not renew its permits.

Even though the cancellation of the mining project was celebrated widely, the ensuing international arbitration filed by the company created new uncertainties for the local communities. As the arbitral proceedings are taking place in Washington and behind closed doors, local communities remain left in the dark. What will be decided there? How, if at all, will their rights and interests be considered? And what will happen to the abandoned mining site?

This content is available after accepting the cookies.

Change cookie-settings View on Youtube. Opens in a new window

Mining and environmental struggle in Mount Ida

The town of Çanakkale lies on the shores of the scenic Dardanelles Strait, close to the historic World War I site of Gallipoli, with breathtaking views of the shimmering waters and distant hills. Colourful Ottoman-era buildings and quaint cafes line the cobblestone streets. Locals leisurely sip traditional Turkish tea or coffee at outdoor tables, while the scent of freshly baked pastries wafts from local bakeries. The sound of seagulls overhead adds to the coastal ambience, making Çanakkale a favourite destination for those looking to escape the hustle and bustle of larger cities.

On the second floor of an old building overlooking the peaceful waterfront, Ekrem Akgül, a retired teacher and President of the Ida Solidarity Association, talks about his years of struggle against mining and energy companies. “We have been involved in this struggle since the first thermal power plant in Çanakkale was designed in 1998. Our region has been exploited a lot in a material sense. We only have our living spaces left. Çanakkale has always been an important area of struggle because we live in a very valuable geography.”

Since the 1980s, Turkey has been liberalising and restructuring its economy to attract foreign investment and create job growth. The Mount Ida region began facing intensified commercial pressures after the Justice and Development Party (AKP), led by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, assumed power in 2002, implementing a political project(opens in new window) of neoliberal developmentalism, authoritarian populism, and extractivism. Over the past two decades, Türkiye’s mining legal landscape has drastically changed due to numerous revisions of the Mining Law, starting in 2004.

The subsequent loosening of environmental regulations has opened up much of the country’s previously protected forests to mining, drawing a surge of foreign companies, attracted by low taxes and financial incentives. At the moment, up to 79 per cent of the Mount Ida region is licensed(opens in new window) for mining projects, of which 41 per cent is currently active.

Gold production in Türkiye has surged in recent decades, driven by high gold prices and liberalised mining regulations. In 2022, Türkiye produced 30.9 tonnes of gold, a modest amount by global standards, but the country’s gold mining industry aims to increase annual output to 100 tonnes in the coming years, with many new exploration projects in the pipeline, fast-tracked by the government. In the Mount Ida region alone, 29 gold mining projects(opens in new window) have been licensed. Türkiye is estimated to hold up to 6,500 tonnes of gold.

Ekrem Akgül has observed that it has become increasingly difficult for local stakeholders to challenge mining projects through legal means: “In the past twenty years, we have started losing cases because of changes in the legal system. Objective standards have given way to political influences, affecting the courts. The most recent legal costs were also particularly high.”

Over the years, the AKP government has made major changes(opens in new window) to the country’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regulation to ease legal and environmental hurdles for mining companies. Ümran Aydın, an environmental lawyer from nearby Çan has been involved in numerous local lawsuits against mining projects: “Licenses and EIAs are issued at an incredible speed. We file lawsuits but rarely succeed. Even when we win, a new EIA is issued six months later. We cannot keep up with the lawsuits, and in recent years, expert witness fees have become exorbitant. I no longer believe the local judiciary is an effective way [to defend our rights].”

The Kirazlı gold mine project

Gold mining in the region dates back thousands of years, but the first modern permits were granted in the late 1980s. Initially, concession holders only conducted mapping, drilling, and sampling, with no significant development. These permits changed hands among various Canadian mining companies until Alamos Gold acquired them in 2009 through its Turkish subsidiary, Doğu Biga Madencilik A.Ş.

In addition to the Kirazlı project, the company has two more development projects in the Çanakkale province, nearby Ağı Dağı and Çamyurt, which it planned to finance with the revenues generated by the Kirazlı project.

The Kirazlı project, located 26 kilometres away from Çanakkale’s city centre and in the water catchment basin of Atikhisar Dam, was planned to extract 99,000 ounces of gold and 601,000 ounces of silver annually over a six-year mine life. The ore grades were estimated at 0.75 grams per ton for gold and 11.75 grams for silver. The project involved open-pit mining with heap leaching, using diluted alkaline cyanide. It was estimated that extracting one gram of gold would require four thousand litres of water, drawn from an artificial pond fed by a nearby stream.

Locals living near the mining site grew increasingly worried about possible cyanide pollution(opens in new window) affecting the Atikhisar Dam, which supplies drinking water to over 180,000 people and irrigates over 5,000 hectares of land. The mine was expected to use nearly 19 tonnes of cyanide solution in the heap leaching process, raising serious concerns about potential contamination of groundwater feeding the dam.

İrfan Mutluay, the Deputy Mayor of Çanakkale, explains that the municipality of Çanakkale became actively involved in opposing the mining project due to these concerns. “We want to protect the natural life, agricultural lands, water resources, and forests in the region. Our first step was to closely monitor the environmental slaughter caused by Alamos Gold’s activities in the Atikhisar Dam basin, a critical source of our drinking water.”

Heap leaching, a process that uses cyanide to extract gold from crushed ore, is notorious(opens in new window) for leaks and spills, causing significant environmental damage. Due to these risks, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Germany, Argentina, and various U.S. states, have either banned or significantly restricted the use of cyanide in mining.

Türkiye, which is vulnerable to deadly earthquakes and landslides, has experienced a series of mining accidents in recent decades. In February 2024, a major cyanide-laced landslide rolled over(opens in new window) an open pit gold mine near İliç, swallowing several mine workers and contaminating the Euphrates River that runs from Türkiye to Syria and Iraq.

Süheyla Doğan, co-founder of the Association for the Protection of Kazdaği Natural and Cultural Assets and living in the idyllic village of Nusratlı on Mount Ida’s southern slopes, warns: “Mining activities always impact ecosystems, even if EIA reports say risks are minimal. Cyanide heap leaching poses a serious threat. Waste leakage during the digging and blasting contaminates groundwater. A significant portion of forest land is destroyed – like in Kirazlı, where much of the license area was forested. When such a vast forest ecosystem disappears, everything vanishes with it – insects, mushrooms, birds, wild animals.”

The company’s EIA reports have been highly controversial and faced lengthy legal challenges before Çanakkale’s first-tier administrative court, with decisions also appealed to the Court of State. For years, there has been a legal tug-of-war(opens in new window) between the local municipality and local organisations on one side, and the company and the Ministry of Environment and Urbanisation on the other.

Onur Sinan Türkmen, President of the Chamber of Agricultural Engineers in Çanakkale, was involved in these legal actions: “The impact area stated in the EIA was incorrect. The mine would also affect the Atikhisar Dam, the region’s only source of drinking water. The EIA processes were very superficial. While they are now slightly more detailed, they are still insufficient. Local people were also not sufficiently consulted”.

Although Alamos Gold’s local subsidiary held regular stakeholder meetings with leaders from eight villages, they did not address the concerns of those directly affected by the project. Only a few village heads attended, with no representation from the local municipality or NGOs. Reports indicated that broader participation by locals and NGOs was hindered by the company’s private security guards.

Süheyla Doğan states that through the village headman (“muhtar”), the companies do very simple things that can be done by the public sector, such as installing garbage containers, paving village squares or distributing food packages during Ramadan and tablets for children’s online classes during the pandemic – practices she labels as “social bribes”.

These “social work” activities are ways for mining companies to gain local support, especially in remote areas where responsible state authorities are absent. Local headmen often viewed mining projects positively, citing employment opportunities and infrastructural improvements promised by the companies. Şahin Arslan, President of the Çanakkale Muhtars’ Association, notes that with declining agriculture and animal husbandry, villages are emptying as living conditions worsen and mining projects offer an avenue for them to have higher living standards.

The definition of “locals” in the consultation process became a major point of contention. While the company consulted the muhtars and residents of a few nearby villages, opponents argued for a broader interpretation. “The company only invites three nearby villages, but I also get my food from there. I also consume from the water source there. Then it is like I have no importance because I live in the city”, says Pınar Bilir, Chair of Çanakkale’s City Council Environmental Assembly.

This narrow definition led to an exclusionary, sometimes hostile, attitude from the company and authorities towards those outside the immediate vicinity. “They defame those who struggle for the environment through smear campaigns, slander and discrediting”, says Süheyla Doğan.

“We ran there to defend our lives”

Resistance against the Kirazlı project gained momentum after legal avenues were exhausted, with the final appeal rejected by the Court of State on 19 July 2019. A spontaneous gathering at İskele Square in Çanakkale drew thousands of people. Pınar Bilir led the rally: “We issued a statement urging the company to halt its operations, but we did not have a concrete plan. We just knew we had to act.” On the spot, the protesters decided to establish a vigil at the mining site, calling it the Water and Conscience Watch. On 26 July 2019, tents were set up near the mine’s gates, and calls for support were made on social media. The local municipality of Çanakkale backed the efforts.

Dramatic drone footage(opens in new window) , released the next day, revealed the devastating clear-cutting of 500 acres of ecologically rich forest by the mining project. This sparked major outrage on Turkish social media, with users rallying around the hashtag #KazdağınaDokunma (“Don’t touch Mount Ida”). Ferzan Aktaş, a graphic designer from Bayramiç, recalls: “Alamos Gold quickly moved into the Kirazlı site and began cutting trees. In just two and half months, they had cleared the trees and scraped the soil. When the drone footage hit the media, it caused an uproar. People from Bayramiç, Çanakkale, and all over Türkiye made calls. We ran there to defend our lives. We became activists out of necessity.”

Environmental activists from the Istanbul-based TEMA Foundation, analysing high-resolution satellite imagery, estimated that 195,000 trees were cut down – far exceeding the 45,000 permitted. The company, however, claimed that only 13,000 trees were cut, reportedly(opens in new window) excluding saplings under eight centimetres in diameter and downplaying the destruction of other plants and wildlife habitat. Alamos Gold also stated it had already planted 14,000 new trees.

The protests quickly gained national attention. In early August 2019, tens of thousands of activists from across the country marched(opens in new window) to the mining site. Politicians from various parties, including the main opposition party CHP, backed the protests. The world-renowned pianist Fazıl Say performed(opens in new window) a concert at the camp. The support even stretched beyond Türkiye, with different demonstrations and solidarity actions in Germany and Canada.

Derogatory statements from Alamos Gold’s CEO went viral, further fuelling public outrage. In a Bloomberg interview(opens in new window) , he said “One thing that Turks do extraordinarily well, in fact, they are among the best in the world at, is excavating and moving rock”, while boasting about how Türkiye’s currency crisis reduced the company’s capital spending for the Kirazlı project. With mine-site all-in sustaining costs at US$ 373 per ounce, Kirazlı was set to be one of the cheapest(opens in new window) gold projects in the world.

According to the company’s 2017 feasibility study(opens in new window) , they anticipated tax incentives that would lower the corporate tax rate on the Kirazlı project to 2 per cent, despite Türkiye’s statutory rate of 20 per cent. Additionally, with forecasted gold prices set at US$ 1,250 per ounce, the company would only pay 2 per cent in royalties to the Turkish state.

These revelations triggered nationalist and anti-imperialist sentiments in Türkiye. Ümran Aydın voices the frustration: “A foreign company comes, extracts the gold from our soil, and takes it back to its own country, using the most primitive methods that cause us the most harm. We are not a colony. We can never accept such a thing.” Protesters frequently chanted “Çanakkale geçilmez!” (They shall not pass Çanakkale), a slogan referencing the successful defence of the Dardanelles by the Ottoman Empire during the Battle of Gallipoli in World War I. “Çanakkale could not be occupied in 1915; we will not allow new occupations now”, adds İrfan Mutluay.

Ferzan Aktaş recalls the pressure from law enforcement during the protests at Kirazlı: “We were constantly harassed by drones during the vigil. The police frequently applied pressure with things like ID checks and restricting access. Intimidation was present from the start. During the last phase of the vigil, which coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic, we were fined 3,180 liras [approximately 400 euros] daily as a ‘pandemic fine’. Altogether, we were fined nearly 500 to 600 thousand liras [around 62,500 to 75,000 euros] just for staying in the forest and keeping watch. It was a very stressful and difficult time for us.”

Up until that point, the government consistently supported the project, arguing (opens in new window) that the mine was outside Mount Ida National Park, posed no threat to the dam or water resources, and that the number of trees cut was within the limits set by the EIA. The government also assured that the site would be restored after operations ended. Alamos Gold, in turn, claimed (opens in new window) that the protests were driven by a deep political agenda rather than genuine environmental concerns and that they were the target of a deliberate misinformation campaign.

However, facing mounting public and political pressure, the government backtracked and withdrew its initial support for the project prioritising local concerns. The company’s mining permit expired in October 2019.

According to Türkiye’s Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Alamos Gold was required (opens in new window) to renew its forestry permit with a fresh mining license by October 2020. Since the company allegedly failed to do so, the permit was eventually cancelled in March 2021. This was hailed as an important victory for the people of the Mount Ida region.

İrfan Mutluay reflects, “Everything seemed lost. We had lost the legal processes, and the operating licenses had been granted. Just when hope seemed gone, the license was cancelled thanks to the struggle of the public and concerned individuals.” Ferzan Aktaş adds, “There was great joy afterwards. It wasn’t just a victory for Çanakkale, it brought hope to everyone involved in ecological struggles across many parts of Türkiye.”

This turn of events inevitably had a direct impact on Alamos Gold, which was forced to immediately suspend the construction of the Kirazlı gold mine after the non-renewal of its mining permit in October 2019. What began as a complex mining conflict between the company, backed by the Turkish state, and local communities was now turning into a dispute between the company and the state itself, shifting power dynamics and legal relationships. Türkiye now faced the possibility of breaching its international treaty obligations to protect foreign investments.

Alamos Gold goes to arbitration

In April 2021, Alamos Gold announced (opens in new window) that it was going to file for arbitration against Türkiye “for expropriation and unfair and inequitable treatment” for its Kirazlı gold mining project. The company argued that its Turkish operations have met all legal and regulatory requirements, created hundreds of jobs, and developed trusting relationships with the local communities.

It claimed to have invested over US$ 250 million in Türkiye and contributed over US$ 20 million in royalties, taxes and forestry fees to the Turkish government. The company asserted that the government failed to provide the company with a reason for the non-renewal or a timeline for renewal of its licenses. Even though extraction never started, the company is seeking damages exceeding US$ 1 billion, representing the value of its Turkish assets.

Alamos Gold filed the claim under the Netherlands-Türkiye BIT, as its home state, Canada, does not have a bilateral investment treaty (BIT) with Türkiye. The company filed the claim through its wholly-owned Dutch subsidiaries Alamos Gold Coöperatief U.A. and Alamos Gold Holdings B.V. Both subsidiaries, registered at the same Amsterdam address since December 2017, have no employees and are managed by Intertrust (now CSC), a global firm based in Amsterdam specialising in corporate, legal, and tax services.

The practice of corporate structuring, often referred to as “treaty shopping”, has gained ground in investment arbitration over the years. The Netherlands, in particular, has emerged as a favoured conduit jurisdiction for foreign investors to route their investments, often by changing nationality or setting up special purpose entities, to secure protection under Dutch treaties. In international investment law, this form of corporate planning to access arbitration through BITs is generally permitted and considered legitimate, even though it can create additional and unforeseen liabilities for host state governments.

The arbitration is administered by the International Centre for the Settlement of Disputes (ICSID) in Washington, part of the World Bank Group. Despite the ongoing proceedings(opens in new window) , no documents have been made publicly available. In the three years since the dispute was filed, neither official bodies nor Alamos Gold has communicated with the general public or locals in Çanakkale. The fate of Kirazlı now rests in the hands of three private arbitrators, appointed by Alamos Gold and the Turkish state, who will base their decision on the evidence presented by both parties. Meanwhile, the local people who have fought to protect their livelihoods for nearly a decade are completely side-lined, as they have neither rights nor remedies under investment treaties.

“We honestly have no idea what is happening”, says Süheyla Doğan. “Türkiye is not releasing any information. All we know is from the press – that the company is taking the Republic of Türkiye to arbitration. Beyond that, we have no details about how the procedure is unfolding, what Türkiye’s stance is, or what arguments are being made. We are really curious.”

The arbitration could have significant financial repercussions for Türkiye. If the company wins, it will be the Turkish state – and ultimately Turkish taxpayers – who bear the cost. This would mean diverting funds away from essential public services and into the coffers of a company that has already felled thousands of trees in an ecologically vital region. Alamos Gold’s claim of US$ 1 billion is nearly equivalent(opens in new window) to Türkiye’s entire annual public spending on environmental protection.

“A billion dollars? For what exactly?”, asks Pınar Bilir. “They have not done anything there. What have they accomplished that they want this money? They claimed they were going to invest a certain amount and make a profit over eight years. Well, they couldn’t, they could have faced a loss. Are we expected to cover that loss for them?”

The Netherlands-Türkiye BIT, signed in 1986, is part of an older generation of investment treaties that are primarily constructed to protect the rights of foreign investors. This legal framework is focused on safeguarding investments from political and economic risks, often at the expense of other considerations like social, environmental, and human rights.

It is built on a legal imagination(opens in new window) that views investors as the primary drivers of economic development, deserving of special protections. In this view, international investment law purports to insulate economic relations from political influence and democratic oversight, while limiting alternative visions on development that prioritise public well-being or environmental sustainability. While the ISDS system is often presented as neutral, it frames (opens in new window) investment disputes in narrow legal terms that obscure underlying power dynamics and abstracts investment relationships from their broader social, political, and environmental contexts, thereby often side-lining local perspectives.

The Kirazlı-dispute is being adjudicated by two British arbitrators and one from Australia, operating within the boundaries of transnational legal spaces that legal scholar Anil Yilmaz Vastardis has referred (opens in new window) to as “justice bubbles for the privileged”. These arbitrators are unlikely to possess a deep understanding of the local realities and challenges faced by the people of Mount Ida.

Local community representatives are rarely invited to testify in arbitration, and when they are, they risk inadvertently aiding the state’s defence. This creates an uncomfortable alliance, as states often supported and facilitated the investment project until the dispute emerged, frequently disregarding the rights and interests of local communities in the process.

Süheyla Doğan says, “After all, it was a ministry of the Republic of Türkiye that issued this license, and that is why we are angry – for granting such a permit and enabling the great plunder and destruction that followed. Yet, if the state loses the case, we will feel regret again. The country’s resources will have been wasted, with the financial burden falling entirely on our taxes and earnings.”

Local communities could submit an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief to the tribunal to highlight public interest concerns, including human rights and environmental issues. However, significant barriers exist to their participation as amicus curiae in investment arbitration. Filing a petition requires substantial resources and expert legal knowledge, and the limited access to case documents – or even awareness of the case’s existence – further restricts the chances of success. Even when these hurdles are overcome, amicus submissions have rarely influenced tribunal decisions. Tribunals also have broad discretion to reject petitions that do not strictly adhere to the procedural rules on third-party interventions. All interviewees expressed a strong desire to participate in the proceedings, but the lack of publicly available information about the case has been a major barrier preventing them from doing so.

Tribunals often argue that local communities lack a “significant interest” in investor-state disputes that only deal with the issue of compensation rather than restitution. However, as one dissenting arbitrator(opens in new window) noted, this is an “extraordinarily narrow reading” because ISDS can significantly affect domestic regulatory frameworks, even when only compensation is awarded. A ruling against the government may prompt regulatory changes that directly impact local communities. If Alamos Gold wins the arbitration, it could shape how the Turkish government handles local resistance to other foreign extractive projects. Faced with costly arbitration, the government may prioritise foreign investor interests over environmental and human rights concerns, leading to “regulatory chill”.

Despite being at the heart of the events that led to the dispute and the primary group whose livelihoods were threatened by the mine, the exclusion of local residents from the arbitration process has caused deep resentment among the people of Çanakkale. This arbitration has already begun to affect the region. Following the cancellation of the Kirazlı project, local activists have worked tirelessly to rehabilitate the abandoned mining site. However, local authorities claim they are unable to proceed with restoration efforts due to the ongoing arbitration.

Acknowledgements: Lorenzo Cotula, Alejandro Gonzalez, Misa Norigami, Jenny Pannenbecker, Frans Schupp, Onur Temel, Stephanie Triefus, and Özlem Zıngıl

Photography by Onur Temel and Bekir Dindar