Excerpt: Marginalised and mining affected communities are desperate for agile and responsive regulatory frameworks as mining companies exploit communities’ desperation for employment and use this as a divisive tactic to demobilise communities from holding the entities accountable.
By Lebogang Lesenyeho
Mining companies have long been accused of exploiting vulnerable communities, and one of the most insidious ways they do this is by coopting community forums that deal specifically with employment issues. On the surface, the forums may seem like a positive development, providing a spacefor community members to discuss employment opportunities, but they often serve as a way for mining companies to avoid engaging directly with broader communities.
Instead of consulting with affected communities, mining companies will often only consult with a select few individuals from these forums, who may not necessarily represent the interests of the community.
This makes it difficult for communities to get accurate information about the Social and Labour Plans (SLPs) that mining companies are required to implement. SLPs are supposed to outline the steps that mining companies will take to benefit local communities, including providing employment opportunities, training, and other forms of support.
If communities are not properly informed about what is happening, they cannot
effectively monitor the implementation of SLPs or advocate for their rights. This creates a power imbalance, where mining companies can operate with impunity, while communities are left to bear the costs.
The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) of 2002 is supposed to regulate the mining industry and ensure that mining companies comply with certain standards. However, mining companies are finding ways to circumvent these regulations.
Harmony Gold Mine’s embeddedness in the corruption of Lejweleputswa CES
In the Free State, Harmony Gold Mine and one of the forums, the Lejweleputswa Community Engagement Structure (LCES), have seemingly entered a marriage of convenience. The forum initially intended to facilitate community engagement and oversight on compliance matters such as SLPs, environmental issues and meaningful consultations.
The LCES has instead become fixated on employment opportunities. This narrow focus has spawned a culture of corruption, with allegations of bribery for inclusion in the employment database and job placement.
In 2022, a fraud case was opened at Odendaalsrus police station after four employees of Harmony Gold Mine reportedly colluded with the forum to sell jobs to desperate job seekers at Tshepong Mine. One of the victims, a 28-year-old at the time, apparently paid R22 610 under the false hope that her employment would be fast-tracked.
These observed practices contradict Harmony Gold’s publicly stated anti-corruption policies, which commit to integrity, transparency, and prohibition of bribery, fraud, and abuse of authority as outlined in the company’s Code of Ethics.
Internal conflicts among LCES members have escalated into violence and verbal threats, further eroding trust.
In terms of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act 12 of 2004, bribery and corruption are serious offenses that can have severe consequences.
These corrupt practices not only undermine fair employment processes but also exacerbate inequality within mining communities, where access to jobs becomes contingent on financial resources rather than merit or need.
Operating in a grey area
The system also creates gatekeepers, as Harmony Gold Mine only recognises concerns raised through the LCES, excluding broader community voices and undermining transparency and accountability. This scenario reflects broader issues of corruption in South Africa’s mining sector, where promises of community upliftment often go unfulfilled.
The LCES operates in a legal grey area, lacking a formal Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) or defined Terms of Reference with Harmony Gold Mine. This absence of official documentation undermines the legitimacy of the LCES, yet Harmony Gold continues to recognise and work through this structure. By doing so, the mining company effectively sidesteps its broader responsibility to engage in meaningful consultation with the wider community.
This arrangement allows Harmony Gold to maintain a facade of community engagement while limiting its accountability. The lack of formal guidelines or agreements means that the LCES’s operations and decision-making processes remain opaque, potentially enabling selective engagement that favours the mine’s interests over those of the entire community.
By recognising an illegitimate structure, Harmony Gold may be attempting to control
the narrative of community engagement while avoiding the more challenging aspects
of comprehensive stakeholder consultation.
This approach contradicts best practices in community engagement, which emphasise transparent record-keeping, comprehensive stakeholder involvement, and the meaningful incorporation of community perspectives. It also contradicts Harmony Gold’s Whistleblowing Policy and Community Grievance Mechanism which are intended to empower employees and stakeholders to report unethical behaviour safely and confidentially.
In recognising an unregulated forum such as the LCES, Harmony Gold violates not only its internal policies but also undermines the principles of inclusive consultation required by MPRDA of 2002.
The need for robust regulatory framework
It is essential that communities are capacitated to advocate for their rights and to scrutinise the SLPs and their implementation. This requires a concerted effort to educate communities about their rights and to support them in their efforts to hold mining companies accountable. It also requires a commitment to transparency and accountability, and a willingness to challenge the power dynamics that currently favour mining companies.
It is crucial for civil society organisations (CSOs) and regulatory authorities such as Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources to work collectively to address these concerns.
One of the keyways is by ensuring that mining companies are transparent and accountable in their hiring practices. This includes ensuring that companies advertise job openings widely, use fair and transparent selection processes and provide training and support to local community members to help them access job opportunities.
Considering the despicable failure of the DMPR in protecting marginalised communities, CSOs have a critical role to play in preventing corruption and promoting accountability in the mining sector.
They must provide training and support to community members, helping them to understand their rights and advocate for themselves. However, CSOs often face significant challenges in their work, including limited resources, harassment, and intimidation.
To effectively prevent corruption and promote accountability in the mining sector, government and regulatory agencies must work closely with CSOs and community members. This includes providing support and resources to CSOs, as well as creating space for community members to participate in decision-making processes.
It also requires a commitment to transparency and accountability, including the regular disclosure of information about mining company activities and the implementation of effective mechanisms for reporting and addressing corruption and to benefit from the resources that are extracted from their land.
- Lebogang Lesenyeho is a paralegal officer at the MACUA-WAMUA Advice Office in the Free State province.