Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
23 September 2020 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Supplied
Zama Sithole

Zama Sithole, a master’s student in Environmental Managementat the University of the Free State (UFS), would one day like to assist communal artisanal small-scale miners (ASM) to legalise their work. Although the ASMs are not involved in turf wars or criminality as in the case of zama-zamas, they are deemed illegal workers.

The prime mining legislation, the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, makes no provision for subsistence or communal ASM activities. Such miners are therefore considered illegal miners.

“ASM employs more than 20 million people globally and a country such as South Africa, with an unemployment rate of 30,1%, should assimilate this type of mining as a legal form of employment,” says Zama.

“Their only client base is the surrounding communities. Mining, besides government grants, is their only source of income.”

Zama aspires to assist the illegal miners to become legal and reap the benefits of skills and funding to increase their income.

“And guidance from the regulatory authorities will ensure that the communal ASM miners become more aware of environmental management,” she adds.

Zama recently presented her research, titled: Shortcomings of the South African Legislative Framework in Addressing Communal Artisanal Small-scale Mining: A Blaauwbosch Case Studyat the 2020 Environmental Law Association (ELA) Annual Student Conference.

She also received the award for Best Speaker at the conference.

In her research, Zama focuses on Blaauwbosch, a rural township area located south-east of Newcastle in northern KwaZulu-Natal, where subsistence coal and clay opencast mining by community members has been going on for more than four decades.

Environmental degradation

According to the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, mining is only deemed legal if there is a mining permit, mining right, production right or preferent mining right authorised by the Department of Mineral Resources. Since communal ASMs are unregulated, environmental degradation is rife.

According to her investigation, environmental hazards such as traces of acid mine drainage and poor air quality (due to spontaneous combustion), are localised in the area. This is a deterrent to the surrounding community that has minimal health and safety awareness.

Owing to the fact that communal ASM miners are not assimilated into the legislation, the competent authorities such as the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy and the Department of Water and Sanitation cannot offer mineral regulation and environmental guidance support.

Losing revenue

Zama says government is also losing revenue by not legalising this unique sector. She believes it is important to differentiate between communal ASMs and the ‘zama-zama’ type of mining.
 
She also found that according to the Mining and Minerals Policy (1998), “regulations in respect of mining should be relevant, understandable and affordable to the small-scale miner and should be enforced in a site-specific manner.” ... “Tax and royalty rates, levies, and financial guarantees for rehabilitation should not constrain the development of small-scale operations.”

“However, to date, this has not been realised,” Zama states.

Communal ASM miners thus cannot benefit from government-funded initiatives to upskill them in terms of mining and environmental management.

Making a difference

Zama plans to conduct more research to understand the dynamics of how other countries have legalised this sector and draw learnings from this to determine how it can be applied in the South African context.

“In our country, there is very limited data and hence understanding on communal ASM. This could be one of the reasons why the government cannot make an informed decision on how to legalise this sector,” she says.

News Archive

The failure of the law
2004-06-04

 

Written by Lacea Loader

- Call for the protection of consumers’ and tax payers rights against corporate companies

An expert in commercial law has called for reforms to the Companies Act to protect the rights of consumers and investors.

“Consumers and tax payers are lulled into thinking the law protects them when it definitely does not,” said Prof Dines Gihwala this week during his inaugural lecture at the University of the Free State’s (UFS).

Prof Gihwala, vice-chairperson of the UFS Council, was inaugurated as extraordinary professor in commercial law at the UFS’s Faculty of Law.

He said that consumers, tax payers and shareholders think they can look to the law for an effective curb on the enormous power for ill that big business wields.

“Once the public is involved, the activities of big business must be controlled and regulated. It is the responsibility of the law to oversee and supervise such control and regulation,” said Prof Gihwala.

He said that, when undesirable consequences occur despite laws enacted specifically to prevent such results, it must be fair to suggest that the law has failed.

“The actual perpetrators of the undesirable behaviour seldom pay for it in any sense, not even when criminal conduct is involved. If directors of companies are criminally charged and convicted, the penalty is invariably a fine imposed on the company. So, ironically, it is the money of tax payers that is spent on investigating criminal conduct, formulating charges and ultimately prosecuting the culprits involved in corporate malpractice,” said Prof Gihwala.

According to Prof Gihwala the law continuously fails to hold companies meaningfully accountable to good and honest business values.

“Insider trading is a crime and, although legislation was introduced in 1998 to curb it, not a single successful criminal prosecution has taken place. While the law appears to be offering the public protection against unacceptable business behaviour, it does no such thing – the law cannot act as a deterrent if it is inadequate or not being enforced,” he said.

The government believed it was important to facilitate access to the country’s economic resources by those who had been denied it in the past. The Broad Based Economic Empowerment Act of 2003 (BBEE), is legislation to do just that. “We should be asking ourselves whether it is really possible for an individual, handicapped by the inequities of the past, to compete in the real business world even though the BBEE Act is now part of the law?,” said Prof Gihwala.

Prof Gihwala said that judges prefer to follow precedent instead of taking bold initiative. “Following precedent is safe at a personal level. To do so will elicit no outcry of disapproval and one’s professional reputation is protected. The law needs to evolve and it is the responsibility of the judiciary to see that it happens in an orderly fashion. Courts often take the easy way out, and when the opportunity to be bold and creative presents itself, it is ignored,” he said.

“Perhaps we are expecting too much from the courts. If changes are to be made to the level of protection to the investing public by the law, Parliament must play its proper role. It is desirable for Parliament to be proactive. Those tasked with the responsibility of rewriting our Companies Act should be bold and imaginative. They should remove once and for all those parts of our common law which frustrate the ideals of our Constitution, and in particular those which conflict with the principles of the BBEE Act,” said Prof Gihwala.

According to Prof Gihwala, the following reforms are necessary:

• establishing a unit that is part of the office of the Registrar of Companies to bolster a whole inspectorate in regard to companies’ affairs;
• companies who are liable to pay a fine or fines, should have the right to take action to recover that fine from those responsible for the conduct;
• and serious transgression of the law should allow for imprisonment only – there should be no room for the payment of fines.
 

Prof Gihwala ended the lecture by saying: “If the opportunity to re-work the Companies Act is not grabbed with both hands, we will witness yet another failure in the law. Even more people will come to believe that the law is stupid and that it has made fools of them. And that would be the worst possible news in our developing democracy, where we are struggling to ensure that the Rule of Law prevails and that every one of us has respect for the law”.

 

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept