Page 63 - Vol 28 Issue 29 2019

accountability mining

fund, its legal status and its mandate. Second, the way the local management Finally, the act doesn’t ensure
To address these issues, and to establish committee members are selected transparency beyond publishing the
a mining community development disenfranchises local people in the mining amount of disbursements and spending of
scheme, a new law, the Minerals communities as people are not allowed to mineral royalties by the fund in a national
Development Fund Act was passed three elect their own representatives. This can newspaper. There is no information
years ago. The scheme is to receive 20% lead to privileged people being appointed available for citizens to know how much
of the fund’s share (which equals 4% to the committees. It can mean that the their communities should receive through
of the total royalties paid by the mining voices of the community members are mineral royalty transfers and the new
companies to the state, or 0.2% of the not heard when the committees decide scheme, or how these revenues are
mining companies’ total revenue). The how royalties are spent. spent in their area. It’s therefore almost
scheme is to facilitate development in impossible to ensure accountability in
mining-affected communities. In each how the money is spent.
mining community, a local management Third, the act fails to The way forward
committee is to administer the scheme. sufficiently increase the To address these challenges and ensure
Despite its potential, the act has not been total amount of mineral rapid development in host communities,
able to address the multiple challenges royalties assigned to the the act should be amended in the
of mining communities. The reasons for development of mining following ways:
this are myriad. But enough time has • The mining community development
passed for the weaknesses in the system communities. Even with scheme should be assigned at least
to be identified. It’s time the government the new scheme, the royalty 20% of the total mineral royalties.
took steps to fix these once and for all. transfers to develop mining
Weaknesses communities are woefully • Local people should be mandated
to elect members to the local
inadequate.
According
to
There are five reasons why the act will the Ghana Chamber of Mines, committees.
not drive rapid development in mining • It should be clear what local authorities
communities. mining communities would
need to get at least 30% can spend mineral royalties on.
of total mineral royalties • The Ghana Revenue Authority should
to address the challenges be mandated to disburse mineral
First, it does not stipulate related to mining and ensure royalties directly to the fund.
how the share going to development. • Information on how much the
paramount chiefs and district fund, the office of stool lands and
assemblies should be spent. local authorities receive in mineral
This means that the act has Fourth, the act has no provisions to royalties, and how they spent them,
not been able to minimise force the government to transfer mineral should be made publicly available.
misappropriation of mineral royalties in a timely way to the fund. If these recommendations were
royalties at the local level. Unsurprisingly, there are still delays in the considered, they would promote
payment of mineral royalties. participatory development and
accountability in mining communities as
local people would have a greater say in
how mineral royalty transfers were spent
in their area.
In addition, there would be more funds
to promote alternative livelihoods and
sustainable development, address
environmental degradation and provide
social amenities in mining communities.
(Courtesy of the Conversation)

Päivi Lujala, Professor in Human
Geography, University of Oulu, Finland

AFRICAN POWER Mining & Oil Review Vol 28, Issue 29, 2019 | 63