De Beers slugs it out with department over closure of Limpopo mine
Diamond producer objects to demand that it backfill an abandoned open-pit mine
11 September 2023 - 18:50
byKabelo Khumalo
Support our award-winning journalism. The Premium package (digital only) is R30 for the first month and thereafter you pay R129 p/m now ad-free for all subscribers.
Diamond miner De Beers and the department of mineral resources & energy are at loggerheads over the “responsible” closure of its former mine in Limpopo, which it last mined nearly 15 years ago.
De Beers, the world’s leading diamond producer, contends the department’s demand that it backfills the open-pit Oaks Mine is unreasonable as it would cost it more than R200m when the location of the mine is far-flung and does not present any danger to surrounding areas.
The mine was in operation from 1999 to 2009 and the licence has since lapsed.
The department said the open pit will pose a high risk to scavengers and encourage illegal mining. However, De Beers said this contention is misplaced as there has been no safety or illegal mining incidents reported since mining operations ceased there.
In response to emailed questions, De Beers told Business Day: “The Oaks Mine is surrounded by a game farm, with an electric perimeter fence and regular security patrols. There is a 2.4m fence erected around the pit and the bottom benches and ramps have been blasted, in mitigation of the risk of illegal mining.”
The company, part of the Anglo American group, raised several reasons why backfilling the open pit is not feasible, while also saying that it never agreed to the backfill when the mining licence was granted.
It said it “planned and conducted its mining operations on the basis that the pit would not be backfilled”.
The company also says filling the mine will result in an excessive carbon footprint due to the fuel consumption of all the machinery and equipment that will be required.
In addition, it argues that there is a possibility there will not be sufficient backfill material. De Beers further contends that risk to animals and humans could be managed through access control.
One of the sticking points from the department’s side is that De Beers had to consult broadly on its mine closure plans.
De Beers said consultations with the affected parties took place in 2008 and that due to delays of more than a decade in obtaining a closure certificate “any new closure plan will not be effective”.
It said this is because the parties previously consulted may not be the same or be available as the mine has not operated for more than a decade, while the land on which it operated has since been sold to a game farmer.
After much back and forth between the company and the department over the closure certificate, De Beers finally approached the courts for recourse and the matter was heard by the high court in Pretoria.
De Beers asked the court to rule that it is not under any obligation to backfill and that the department’s decision to decline its closure application in 2009 was illegal.
The department in its defence said De Beers was granted ample opportunity since July 2011 and was also sent a reminder in February 2016 to amend and submit a revised closure plan. The department also took umbrage that De Beers did not inform it of the sale of the Oak mine to a game farmer.
The department said it was also not favoured with the record of notification and consultation with the interested or affected parties on post-closure land use. It said it also did not have sight of the rezoning application of the Oaks Mine from a mining to an agricultural-game farming land use zone.
The department further argued it had to have sight of an application for transfer of environmental liabilities from De Beers to the game farmer.
Judge Nomsa Victoria Khumalo last week dismissed De Beers’ application for exemption from the department’s internal remedies and returned the matter to mineral resources & energy minister Gwede Mantashe to make a decision on an appeal lodged by the company.
“I am of the view that the failure to have exhausted internal remedies is a structural impediment to the determination of the substantive questions posed by the review. This being constructed with a recognition that a court faced with a failure to take a decision will not be in a position to assess the merits on the basis of rationality or reasonableness, because no decision exists which can be subjected to scrutiny and review on those grounds,” reads the judgment.
Support our award-winning journalism. The Premium package (digital only) is R30 for the first month and thereafter you pay R129 p/m now ad-free for all subscribers.
De Beers slugs it out with department over closure of Limpopo mine
Diamond producer objects to demand that it backfill an abandoned open-pit mine
Diamond miner De Beers and the department of mineral resources & energy are at loggerheads over the “responsible” closure of its former mine in Limpopo, which it last mined nearly 15 years ago.
De Beers, the world’s leading diamond producer, contends the department’s demand that it backfills the open-pit Oaks Mine is unreasonable as it would cost it more than R200m when the location of the mine is far-flung and does not present any danger to surrounding areas.
The mine was in operation from 1999 to 2009 and the licence has since lapsed.
The department said the open pit will pose a high risk to scavengers and encourage illegal mining. However, De Beers said this contention is misplaced as there has been no safety or illegal mining incidents reported since mining operations ceased there.
In response to emailed questions, De Beers told Business Day: “The Oaks Mine is surrounded by a game farm, with an electric perimeter fence and regular security patrols. There is a 2.4m fence erected around the pit and the bottom benches and ramps have been blasted, in mitigation of the risk of illegal mining.”
The company, part of the Anglo American group, raised several reasons why backfilling the open pit is not feasible, while also saying that it never agreed to the backfill when the mining licence was granted.
It said it “planned and conducted its mining operations on the basis that the pit would not be backfilled”.
The company also says filling the mine will result in an excessive carbon footprint due to the fuel consumption of all the machinery and equipment that will be required.
In addition, it argues that there is a possibility there will not be sufficient backfill material. De Beers further contends that risk to animals and humans could be managed through access control.
One of the sticking points from the department’s side is that De Beers had to consult broadly on its mine closure plans.
De Beers said consultations with the affected parties took place in 2008 and that due to delays of more than a decade in obtaining a closure certificate “any new closure plan will not be effective”.
It said this is because the parties previously consulted may not be the same or be available as the mine has not operated for more than a decade, while the land on which it operated has since been sold to a game farmer.
After much back and forth between the company and the department over the closure certificate, De Beers finally approached the courts for recourse and the matter was heard by the high court in Pretoria.
De Beers asked the court to rule that it is not under any obligation to backfill and that the department’s decision to decline its closure application in 2009 was illegal.
The department in its defence said De Beers was granted ample opportunity since July 2011 and was also sent a reminder in February 2016 to amend and submit a revised closure plan. The department also took umbrage that De Beers did not inform it of the sale of the Oak mine to a game farmer.
The department said it was also not favoured with the record of notification and consultation with the interested or affected parties on post-closure land use. It said it also did not have sight of the rezoning application of the Oaks Mine from a mining to an agricultural-game farming land use zone.
The department further argued it had to have sight of an application for transfer of environmental liabilities from De Beers to the game farmer.
Judge Nomsa Victoria Khumalo last week dismissed De Beers’ application for exemption from the department’s internal remedies and returned the matter to mineral resources & energy minister Gwede Mantashe to make a decision on an appeal lodged by the company.
“I am of the view that the failure to have exhausted internal remedies is a structural impediment to the determination of the substantive questions posed by the review. This being constructed with a recognition that a court faced with a failure to take a decision will not be in a position to assess the merits on the basis of rationality or reasonableness, because no decision exists which can be subjected to scrutiny and review on those grounds,” reads the judgment.
khumalok@businesslive.co.za
De Beers upbeat talks with union will avert strike at Venetia
BOBBY GODSELL: Ogilvie-Thompson was central to mining industry for three decades
Former Anglo and De Beers chair Julian Ogilvie Thompson dies
Diamond sales slump at Botswana’s Debswana mine
New De Beers CEO is oil and energy man Al Cook
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Most Read
Published by Arena Holdings and distributed with the Financial Mail on the last Thursday of every month except December and January.