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

Letter to students from Prof Jonathan Jansen about student protest action at the UFS
2015-10-21

Dear Students

Student protest action at the University of the Free State

I wish to make clear that the senior leadership of the University of the Free State understands and supports the demands from students and their leaders that higher education be accessible to all students, especially the poor. For the past six years we have done everything in our power to meet that commitment to students who are academically talented, but simply cannot afford to pay; that is why our tuition fees remain among the lowest in the country. Our efforts to raise private funding have enabled thousands more students to study at the UFS than would have been possible on the government subsidy only. Whether it is the Staff Fund contributions (yes, our staff empty their pockets to support student fees) or the No Student Hungry (NSH) bursary programme (yes, we raise funds for food bursaries), we will continue our drive to fund students who cannot afford higher education. Let me repeat, no student with a solid academic record will be denied access to studies simply because they cannot pay.

Now, to the matter at hand. There is a national demand from students for a 0% fee increment for 2016. The Minister’s response, after consultation with stakeholders, was that universities should cap their 2016 fee increases at 6%. Despite this initiative from government, the protests continue on virtually all campuses across South Africa for the ‘no fee’ increase.

Our response, as the UFS leadership, is to continue engaging the SRC as the chosen leadership of our students in trying to negotiate a settlement on the matter. We have worked around the clock to be available to student leaders to find some resolution on 2016 fees. While we understand the demands of students, as university leaders, we can only work with the government subsidy we receive. Any agreement reached, cannot and must not place the university at academic and financial risk in its ability to deliver public higher education to the country - if that happens, everybody loses. Still, no matter what happens in terms of the response from government, the leadership door at the UFS remains open to finding a mutually acceptable solution to all parties in these deliberations.

Students, we are deeply concerned by the violence, intimidation and threats from the small group of protesting students. These dangerous and demeaning behaviours, like disrupting classes and verbally abusing students and staff, undermine the legitimate quest of students for relief concerning tuition fees. Such behaviour is completely unacceptable and the university will take action where required. We must also remember that we have an obligation to all 30 000 students whose right to learn without fear of violence and intimidation must be respected.

In conclusion, over the past few years we have worked hard to build a culture of mutual respect and embrace as we worked through some very difficult challenges on campus. You would have noticed that the university leadership responded quickly and sympathetically to reason and respect in difficult situations of rage and demonstration. A minority of students, with some outsiders, have come onto the campus to break down that culture in which, while we might disagree, we continue to work on the basis of mutual respect. I urge all students that, as we engage of this important problem of enabling greater access to higher education, we continue to remain true to the core values of our Human Project.

Best Regards

Prof Jonathan Jansen
Vice-Chancellor and Rector
University of the Free State


Letter to students from Prof Jonathan Jansen about student protest actions at the UFS (Pdf format)

 

 

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