Amendments to mining law defended

Amendments to mining law defended

Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs Director-General Sandile Nogxina has defended amendments to the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act, saying the amendment Bill ‘creates, rather than removes, regulatory obstacles for the mining industry’. The Financial Mail says the DG was responding to criticism of the proposed legislation from Webber Wentzel Bowens partner Peter Leon. Nogxina admits that a number of clauses have been materially changed in the amendment, but he maintains the changes are justified to meet the aims of the Act. ‘They bring the regulations in line with the intention of the legislation,’ he says, and they come partly in response to problems encountered by the DME. He singles out the issue of ‘fronting’ by parties claiming to meet BEE requirements. Chamber of Mines CE Mzolisi Diliza says his organisation was looking for more clarity in the legislation. ‘For example, what the Bill means by a ‘concentration of mineral resources’'. We are in discussions with the DME over this.’

NOTE: For the average landowner, and by this I mean "land" not your little house in Sandton, these amendments are hideous in nature. They seek to bypass the National Environmental Management Act NEMA, they seek to bypass the EIA process completely, they seek to bypass any sort of public comment or public participation. These amendments place decisions on mining totally in the hands of the minister of the Department of Minerals and Energy DME.

The DME has proven their inability to police and monitor the mining community effectively as can be seen in cases such as the contamination of the Wonderfonteinspruit Catchment which is contaminated with radioactive Uranium due to years of mining activities that have violated environmental laws.

These amendments allow the government and minister to take any minerals on any land, simply because the government owns all mineral rights of course.