•A step towards sanitising the sector

The Bauchi State Government has been reported to have banned individuals, groups and traditional heads from issuing mining consent letters to any investor without obtaining clearance from the Ministry of Natural Resources.

It raises again an ongoing question on mining and federalism.

The ban would seem in order if only to address mining-related environmental degradation and insecurity, as well as enhanced revenue to the stakeholders. But the state has no right within the law to dictate the way mining is conducted. It is the exclusive preserve of the federal government, even if we want it otherwise.

The order also shows how the absence of federal authorities has fomented an anarchy of greedy adventurers in mining across the country.

It is about law as well as it is about a sense of purpose by government at the federal leve. Obviously cooperation between states and the centre is required to make it work.

Section 1(1) of the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act, 2007 states that “The entire property in and control of all mineral resources in, under or upon any land in Nigeria, its contiguous continental shelf and all rivers, streams and water courses throughout Nigeria, any area covered by its territorial waters or constituency and the exclusive economic zone is and shall be vested in the Government of the Federation for and on behalf of the people of Nigeria.”

Within this broader control, states, local government areas, community heads and title holders or users of a piece of land where mining is to be undertaken are given roles. In this regard, Section 61(1)(c) states as follows: “Every holder of an exploration licence shall … if intending to explore on land occupied subject to a right of occupancy, give notice to the chairman of the affected local government area concerned and to the holder of the right of occupancy or the user or occupier of the land before exploration activities on the land; and where the mineral title area is within more than one local government area, the mineral title holder shall give notice to the respective chairmen of the local government areas concerned and the holders of rights of occupancy or the users and occupiers of land affected accordingly.”

Section 71(1)(c-d) of the Act further states: “The holder of a mining lease shall not commence any development work or extraction of mineral resources on the mining lease area until after … the conclusion of a community development agreement approved by the Mines Environmental Compliance Department; and the holder has duly notified, compensated, or offered compensation to all users of land within the mining lease areas as provided for under this Act.”

Moreover, as specified on page 181 of the Mining Regulations 2011, one of the prerequisites for the processing of applications for mineral titles is that the Mining Cadastre Office would notify the community leader or individual land owner(s)/occupier(s) of the application and seek the consent of such community leaders, groups or individuals. Where the paramount ruler/district head/community leader is not a direct owner/occupier of the land, they would serve as witness to the letter of consent issued by the land owner(s)/occupiers.

In the light of the foregoing, the issuing of letters of consent by the individuals, groups or community leaders, without approval from the state government, may be illegal, and the Bauchi State Government’s ban appears to be an attempt to sanitise the chaotic mineral resources mining regime in the state. In order words, the state government’s ban may be referred to as a well-intentioned illegality. But it is an illegality all the same. It could, for example, have been motivated by the desire to facilitate systematic and fair compensation, as envisioned by Section 108 of the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act 2007, and Sections 11-13 of the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Regulations 2011.

To ensure that state governments as a whole are able to contribute more significantly to mining quality assurance, it is important for both the act and regulations to be reviewed and for a derivation formula to be established by the Federal Government, to guarantee that state governments benefit more systematically from the mining activities within their borders. This would motivate them to engage more, with the due authorisation and effective monitoring of mineral resources exploitation within such borders. This would in turn ensure increased protection of the nation’s mineral resources and enhance the benefits to the citizenry. But the law is the law. State governments can do the federal work.

Update news