Hope for mining communities
ELTON Thobejane and his neighbours gave up their land for the construction of a road for a platinum mine, hoping it would bring benefits to their impoverished community.
But that hasn’t been the case for their community in Burgersfort, Limpopo, says Thobejane, the deputy-president of the Mining and Environmental Justice Network of South Africa (MEJCON-SA), a network of communities, community-based organisations and community members whose environmental and socio-economic rights are affected by mining activities.
“We’re been trying to get the company to the table for our local communities to push their own agenda so that mining can ultimately benefit them, but unfortunately we haven’t won that battle,” Thobejane.
“The water we depend on is no longer healthy for us to drink and the end result is that the pollution is having an impact on people downstream, affecting their food and livestock... We need projects that benefit communities.”
This week, in what was hailed as a victory for mining community networks, the Pretoria High Court ruled that MEJCON-SA, Mining Affected Communities United in Action and Women Affected by Mining United in Action, be granted leave to intervene in the review of the Mining Charter, brought by the Chamber of Mines against the Minister of Mineral Resources.
The verdict, says the Centre for Applied Legal Studies, which together with Lawyers for Human Rights represented the three organisations, “gives mining-affected communities a voice” in the Mining Charter review.
“We wanted to intervene in this Mining Charter battle because we want to address the gaps within the charter. We’ve got very serious challenges and it’s not clear to us how we benefit from the charter,” says Thobejane.
The court further ordered that the Chamber of Mines pay legal costs for opposing the community networks’ intervention in the case, which is “gratifying that the court recognised there was no basis for the Chamber of Mines opposing the communities’ intervention”, explains Wandisa Phama, an attorney at Cals.
For the past 15 years, negotiations on the three versions of the Mining Charter have involved the government, mining companies and trade unions, but left mining affected communities out, says Phama.
“The development around mining development and the direction it should take has always happened between government and mining communities and has had the effect of not seeing communities as stakeholders, which is very misplaced, because these are the host communities of the labour force.
“We were not surprised that the Chamber of Mines opposed this matter as they don’t see communities as important stakeholders, but I’m hoping the government considers communities as important stakeholders to be engaged with.
“Living in a mine-affected area, you feel the impact with your water resources, your livelihood and your environment – all these are impacts felt by communities.”
The Centre for Environmental Rights says mining-affected communities are also excluded from processes that purport to benefit them, such as development of social and labour plans and the Mining Charter.
“The Mining Charter has at its core the transformation of the mining industry to benefit historically disadvantaged South Africans ... The majority of South Africa’s mining-affected communities are historically disadvantaged and many were forcibly relocated to those areas by the apartheid government. It is therefore paramount that mining affected community voices are heard in this court case.”
In a statement, the Chamber of Mines noted the judgment: “The court further ordered all parties to strictly adhere to the time lines previously laid down by the Deputy Judge President of the Gauteng High Court for the serving and filing of pleadings and heads of argument.”