African Mining July - August 2019 | Page 34

Risk Management the mining company applying for a mining right. This might seem manageable on paper but can be daunting to put into practice. For example, when the new law was passed, one mining company found itself needing to obtain the go-ahead to mine from over 200 000 individual land owners. Such consent was only required under the old law at the point the mining company planned to enter onto the landowner’s land (i.e., post-issuance of the original mining right). This could potentially undercut the viability of the project, considering the resources needed to undertake such wide-scale consultation. are required to consult extensively with ministers, local authorities and communities. Such consultation can be challenging at the best of times but is more challenging in the current climate of tensions between the authorities and certain international mining companies, some of which are in standoffs with government over matters such as alleged violation of environmental regulations and tax disputes. Compounding the challenges of consulting communities is that once a decision on a mining right has been reached, it no longer means that such right is secure. An example is the power given to the Tanzanian parliament to direct that existing agreements with international investors be reviewed and renegotiated if the terms are considered ‘unconscionable’ (such as when an agreement requires Tanzanian parties to submit to foreign laws and foreign dispute resolution forums). Tanzania’s current stance on such matters could be seen as a resurgence of nationalism, which can also be considered to be a form of populism. Pres. Uhuru Kenyatta of Kenya. Populism has resulted in the mobilisation of communities against mining companies. The new law also requires large-scale mining projects to enter into community development agreements as a condition for issuance of a mining licence. Meanwhile, in South Africa, where the debate over land ownership has escalated dramatically in the past few years, there are indications that populism is on the rise in a number of spheres. We have seen this in certain recent court decisions, which are in turn challenging established economic and legal orthodoxies. On the populist bandwagon An added complication regarding community consultation in Kenya is the vastness of the country. Substantial portions of land are tribal land and potential areas for mining might easily cross through land belonging to more than one tribe. Protecting local interest in Tanzania. The situation is slightly different – but perhaps even more challenging – in neighbouring Tanzania, which has recently passed various new laws designed to ensure that the country and its citizens benefit from Tanzania’s mineral wealth through, among other things, local content requirements. When wishing to mine on land owned or occupied by holders of other rights in respect of that land, mining companies in Tanzania South African Minister of Mineral Resources Gwede Mantashe has been placed under pressure by community demands. Rhetoric by Tanzanian president John Magufuli has resulted in a strained relationship between government and international mining companies. 32 AFRICAN MINING JULY - AUGUST 2019 A court judgment that has undoubtedly evoked concern among international mining investors in South Africa is the Xolobeni ruling of November 2018. Here, the High Court in Pretoria ruled that the minister for mineral resources had no lawful authority to grant a mining right to an Australian company to mine on communal land without the ‘full and informed’ consent from the community concerned, the Umgungundlovu community in South Africa’s Wild Coast area. www.africanmining.co.za