Hon. Steven Blaney

As an investor in the Canadian markets, most notably the TSX-V, I have experienced many problems with the current complex system of rules, Acts and policies, and the compliance and enforcement of such. Most times I have experienced very confusing and sometimes contradictory laws that appear non enforceable and also have witnessed enforceable rules, not enforced. When clear evidence of non enforcement enters the public domain, the ripple effect jeopardizes the whole integrity of the markets. Its at this point that it becomes a National Security threat to our economic stability. I need not explain that not only are Canadians affected by the blatant non enforcement, but any foriegn person or entity wishing to participate in our markets also becomes affected and the liability under International Financial Law may quite easily come into play, that may further compromise the security of the Canadian people as a whole. Every Canadian has at least some of their Pensions and retirement invested in this very market. Under several regulator statements, the "uphold integrity in the markets and protect investor interest" is a common public statement depicted by regulators of our markets, in which many investors accept and trust. These statements, not only in SLI investors circumstance, leaves an investor with a false presumption that his interests are securely protected in these markets, when we experience the non protection.This false sense of security has entrapped and inticed many Canadians in these markets, to be taken advantage of by the unethical that seem to have an immunity and perhaps aid from non enforcing regulators. In St Elias Mines Ltd investors case, we have been well proactive in alerting authorities, so an excuse of ignorance will not be accepted nor can be justified.

At this moment, investors of St Elias Mines Ltd (SLI-V) are in a very precarious position with their investment because of the lack of impartiality by the TSX Exchange and the regulators. Not only SLI investors interest are at risk here, but the public interests as well, when a governance system of the markets may be compromised that puts the publics interest in the form of pensions, at risk. Putting the ridiculous dynamic structure of the governing principles of our financial markets aside , the morals and ethics of our situation alone suffices the regulators to take action. Its another total embarrassment that a court, comprised of an individual judge, can decide the fate for 1000,s that leave ethical and moral standards out of the equation, how can a system be of integrity by excluding these constituents? For a B.C. Judge to rule on a technicality in favour of management in our case and ignore a 91% dissident position, not utilizing any arbitration vehicles nor other remedies at his disposal, leaves one with many questions about a judicial system that is supposed to be fair and operating in the publics interest. I fail to see how a court as mentioned above, upholds integrity in the markets when the investors interests are ignored, and perhaps becomes another threat to security of our democratic and economical structure as a country. To briefly touch on another court proceeding in our case, preceding the one above, a justice of the B.C. Court ,ruled on an advance notice policy as being effective in making a decision, when in all actuality, the advance notice policy could possibly not be a legal instrument, whereas it never received shareholder ratification. Again, absurd. I will annex here, the denial of shareholders rights.

One readily available conflict between our current and past circumstance arises as a result of the CEO of our company assuming the role as Chair at an AGM in Dec 2012 and the most recent AGM in Mar 2014. Whereas SLI is a reporting issuer in Alberta and British Columbia, National Policy 58-201 is recognized as to apply to all reporting issuers of the TSX and the Venture Exchange. Section 3.2 of the policy exclusively dealing with the conflict of interest that may arise when an acting CEO assumes position of the Chair, is clearly evident in our case and perhaps supports entrenchment or self endulgence with our CEO. I will further these apparent acts into a biased position taken by the Chair which may display an abuse of power as well, in such a way that shareholders concerns were suppressed at the AGM. The company most definitely had a choice, as well as the other directors of the company to appoint an independent director as Chair, instead of the conflicting position of the CEO as that representation.This non action was successful in allowing a biased situation occur between the shareholders and the CEO of this company, whereas the CEO has been questioned in the past for the extensive travel expenditures which has caused much concern with investors.In the opening part of the NP 58-201 , it is suggested that this accepted National Policy 58-201 is non prescriptive, but a few paragraphs below, states that it "applies" to all reporting issuers, which to my understanding may be perceived as enforceable , so, which is it in this confusing document that seems to offer reassurance to investors that their interests are protected? To further, where there has been no seperation of Chair, shareholders would have to proceed with court, which would further burden and cause further entrenchment and risk as time went on, and as depicted earlier in this submission, shareholders experience with the judicial system in these matters is non protective.


SLI shareholders case is exceptionally lengthy and to fully appreciate the case in one letter would compare as to reading a full length novel. Neither do I wish to explain in full detail the content, nor do I expect that you need to be informed of the full detail at this time, because of possible time constraints that leave SLI shareholders at considerable risk. Time is of the essence for SLI shareholders and action from regulators or regulators governance must be realized promptly to assure stability and security in their investment.

SLI investors have conveyed extensive proof on silver platters , if you will, before the regulators over the past couple years, to apparently no avail, which is one of the main reason you are receiving this letter. To further, not only regulators have been in receipt of this extensive proof, also many politicians have, that neglect to act in supporting their constituents,perhaps another breach of national security when the people elects fail to act on their behalf, a full list of these politicians is in existence. We, SLI shareholders are disgusted also in the neglect of these politicians, especially MLA,s and Finance Ministers, in assisting SLI shareholders at some form of resolution and upholding any right we may have as Canadian citizens, as a whole or attached to the invested right in the corporate structure that Canadians enjoy.

It has recently come to my attention that an investigating officer of the ASC has been involved in at least one questionable act that suggests at the mininum, a conflict of interest on the investigators part. Apparently, this investigator has a personal relationship with a lawyer that is presently working on a fraudulent case that is being investigated by the ASC, that has offered $30,000 cash to a person to destroy what perhaps may be considered as incriminating evidence that may bring the public traded company under incontested prosecution.The lead investigator was asked by an informant to investigate the above incident, his reply was that he knew the lawyer personally and that the lawyer would not do such a thing.The lead investigator was asked by an informant to step away from the case and hand over the file to another investigator at the ASC. Upon a resumption in talks with the new investigative officer by the informant, it appeared that the file may have been altered in some way with perhaps omittances. This has become widespread knowledge, although not fully public, as a means of security for the individuals that are in receipt of this information as well as shining light on what appears as deceptive practices of a representation of a regulator. Understand that I at this time cannot readily confirm the above and without actual documentation, must consider it a rumour that may or maynot contain merit. But I will say that the informant that has shared this information with me is a friend, I have no reason to believe the information is incorrect and upon any contact by authorities on this matter, the informant has shared with me that he will fully cooperate with a detailed account. Again, if the above is indeed true, another breach to the security of the markets and many serious questions may immediately arise upon a consideration of any and all effect.

I understand that investigations may be ongoing at this time, however, investors witness of non enforcement suggests that perhaps there is no investigation.The non transparency of any regulatory investigative unit harms the investor. The inability to know when an investigation is over, leaves investors with the inability to make a reasonable and informed investment decision, especially in cases such as ours, where clear violations are present and we see no action nor reprimand, that has us asking, whats going on, is our investment safe or not? I must state, that investors in SLI believe that their investment may be very valuable, supported by not only many things said and written by management prior Jan 2012, but also by , and not limited to, other consultations which include professionals in the field. It is because of this very due dilligence, that shareholders have held onto their shares suffering huge losses on paper at this time and many will continue to hold onto their shares.

Here is but one instance of a clear contravention of several acts and the criminal code of Canada if the CEO is lying, if she is not lying, then why do the results following her quote, contradict her statement/s? The CEO states this at the Nov 2011 AGM in front of perhaps a 100 investors, "Every single step we have taken on this IS unreal and the results ARE going to be beyond our wildest dreams. So we are just out there telling people about that.". Not only did the CEO state this at the AGM in 2012, but Herb Haft of an associated PR firm mades a similar remark about "the results about to be released", constructed within the context of the full dialogue in such a manner that emphasis suggests very favourable results. The stock price at that time was around $2.20, continued to decline to perhaps around $1.70 upon initial results which were very poor. The regulators, TSX Venture Compliance, ASC and the BCSC has been in receipt of this information for almost two years, still no action.It is clear to see by anyone, let alone regulators that are professionals, that the comment made by the CEO is misleading. To see non action on a clear violation that more than one regulator can enforce, clearly suggests a huge problem within the regulatory regime. Must I point out once again how this jeopardizes the whole integrity of our financial markets? What exactly would the Canadian public think of this blatant non action by regulators of a financial system to which their savings and pension funds are invested in, would they feel that their money is safe? The answer is not only clear to you and I, but perhaps every Canadian and citizen of this world. This is a breach of National Security to our economic stability, I do not know how to make this any more concise. To be frank, this is totally absurd and not acceptable to the Canadian people and other foriegn interests invested in our markets.

I ask of you, Hon. Steven Blaney, to initiate immediately, an RCMP or perhaps even more sophisticated investigation, into the regulators of our financial markets. I also request an investigation into the CSA (Canadian Securities Administrators), whereas a letter a few days ago asking for an investigation into the regulators of the TSX Venture Exchange, had a simple reply of that the matter I requested investigated was the jurisdiction of the BCSC. The BCSC was the subject of the letter to be investigated, LOL.This reply is totally unacceptable and clearly demonstrates that the letter was either not read or readily ignored complemented by an atrocious buck passing once again., that has become a norm for SLI investors and perhaps other investors in these markets.

Attached below is a copy of a recent request of the OSC to initiate an investigation into the regulatory department/s of the TSX Exchange, of which you have already been sent a copy of a few days ago. I wish to inform you that to my present knowledge, a file has been opened on this matter by the OSC with expected future consideration.

I thank you very much for attending contemplation to this request and ask that you promptly acknowledge receipt of this serious request and concern, that affects many . This letter will be shared with many others.

Rick Jewers

This letter sent on April 19 2014.