C. Typhoon armoured vehicles
35. On 1 June 2015, the Panel identified what was almost certainly a Typhoon 4 x 4-type armoured vehicle in Nyala. The Panel has investigated the supply chain and is certain that Streit Armoured Protection Cars FZE of the United Arab Emirates manufactured the armoured vehicles. Streit supplied them to a broker, Kamaz International Trading FZE [PO Box 54609, Ra’s al-Khaymah, United Arab Emirates (
www.kamazexport.com).], under an invoice dated 9 July 2012 (see annex 15, appendices 1 and 2). The commercial invoice from Kamaz for customs purposes of 4 July 2012 (see annex 15, appendix 3) was, unusually, also for the same sum of 6 million dirhams that it had paid Streit. The Panel has not seen the final invoice from Kamaz to the Government, notwithstanding its requests to Kamaz to be supplied with full documentation concerning the transfer.
36. The Executive Office of the United Arab Emirates Committee for Goods and Materials Subjected to Export and Import Control initially granted export authority to Streit on 8 April 2012 (see annex 15, appendix 4), which was superseded by authority granted to Kamaz on 3 July 2012 (see annex 15, appendix 5).
37. The end-use certification for the shipment is not transparent. The Panel has repeatedly requested the Government of the United Arab Emirates, Streit, Kamaz and the Wadi Al-Neel Clearing and Forwarding Company to supply the end-use certificate.
38. In a letter dated 16 October 2014 (see annex 15, appendix 6), Kamaz clearly stated that it had not issued an end-user certificate for the vehicles in question. This is, however, contrary to the evidence in the possession of the Panel, supplied by Streit, which clearly shows a certificate, signed by Kamaz, stating that the armoured vehicles were for the sole use of Kamaz (see annex 15, appendix 7).
39. The armoured vehicles were shipped to Port Sudan from the Hamriah port in Dubai on 20 July 2012 on board the Shaker 1 (International Maritime Organization number 7929102). The shipping was arranged by Wadi Al-Neel.
40. The Panel finds:
(a) That Streit supplied the armoured vehicles to Kamaz on the basis of an end-user certificate that it would almost certainly have known did not reflect the true end user of the vehicles;
(b) That the armoured vehicles were highly probably supplied to the Government of the Sudan by Kamaz without the Government of the United Arab Emirates having ensured that appropriate end-use certification was in place stating that the vehicles would not be used in Darfur, thus contravening paragraph 10 of resolution 1945 (2010);
(c) That the Government of the United Arab Emirates, Kamaz and Wadi Al-Neel certainly obstructed the work of the Panel by consistently and deliberately failing to provide the specific information at their disposal, as requested by the Panel, and thus failed to comply with paragraph 22 of resolution 2200 (2015);
(d) That the Government has submitted no exemption requests to the Committee for the deployment to Darfur of Typhoon armoured vehicles, thereby certainly violating the arms embargo imposed by the Security Council in paragraph 7 of its resolution 1556 (2004), read with paragraph 7 of resolution 1591 (2005).