name company/village position contact nr balama graphite mine eng cb2908… · appendix 13:...

Final Resettlement Action Plan of the Balama Graphite Mine – September 2014

143

Attendance register

Name Company/Village Position Contact nr

Ms Carina Saranga CES Social Scientist (meeting chairperson) 824136038

Mr Anton Hough CES Social Scientist 079 514 76 11

Ms Laura Rodolfo Syrah Community Relations Officer (Syrah representative) 826901653

Levi Montepuez CES recruited survey fieldworker 824393926/862278762

Ramadane Balama CES recruited survey fieldworker 866256225/829979442

Adamo Montepuez CES recruited survey fieldworker 863126400

Bambarmudi Balama CES recruited survey fieldworker 868203347

Constantino Arlindo Ntete Group member(chairperson) 866092848

Bachir Euse‟bio Pirira Group member 867108403

Chabane Maputo Group member 860035812

Useno Buana João Nquide Group member 866805530

Lowrenço Gimo Nquide Group member Non provided

Jarifo Raimundo Ntete Group member 869447738

Jorge Chiquira Pirira Group member Non provided

Draft Resettlement Action Plan of the Balama Graphite Mine – August 2014

144

EOH Coastal & Environmental Services

General

A site visit closure meeting was convened by Mr Jan Anton Hough (CES) with the Technical Working Group (TWG) in Ntete Village on 23 August 2013. Although two district-level representatives from the Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Planning and Infrastructure were invited, they unfortunately could not attend. The meeting was chaired by Mr Hough, whilst those present included seven of the eight TWG members, Ms Laura Rodolfo (acting as a representative of the mine), as well as Ms Carina Saranga (CES). Ms Saranga translated the meeting from English to Portuguese. The aim of the meeting was to provide closure on the RAP team‟s site visit (5-23 August 2013), which entailed household and farmer assessments in the mining area. In addition, the meeting was also called to establish an appropriate procedure for any villager/farmer in the study area who claim not to have been surveyed, or who has loss land/structures to the mine, to lodge such claims with the TWG members.

Discussions

Mr Hough commenced the meeting by expressing gratitude to all those part of the household and farmland assessments, in particular the TWG members who provided their support and assistance during the past three weeks. He noted that the assessments should be completed by this coming Sunday (25 August 2013).

A procedure was established to manage any further claims. Mr Hough explained that some farmland might have been overlooked by the assessments, and that such farmers, as well as farmers who have already loss land to the mine, have the right to make claims to the TWG. The procedure agreed upon is for any villager to lodge such a claim with a TWG member who shall be assigned with the responsibility of assessing the claim and whether the farmland in question is within the mining area. Should the claim be legitimate, the TWG member shall lodge the claim with Laura from the mine. As settled, the mine shall then ensure to consider the claim further by obtaining a GPS reading of the land parcel, which shall be emailed to Mr Hough for further contemplation.

Mr Hough continued to elaborate upon the RAP team‟s next site visit in November 2013, and that all the TWG members will be informed about the visit and first meeting at least two weeks in advance. The objectives of the next visit were clarified, which are to assess all the claims lodged during September, to discuss compensation packages with those affected, as well as to, with the supervision of the Ministry of Agriculture, assist the affected farmers to find alternative land. He stressed that it is CES‟ intention to assist the ministry and affected farmers to find suitable alternative land, as those affected should have a direct input in this process. In the interim, members were requested to start to think about alternative areas for farmland.

Lastly, Mr Hough noted that more clarity regarding the mine‟s implementation schedule and the project‟s time frame should hopefully be provided during the RAP team‟s next visit. As this is still largely unknown, Mr Hough encouraged the group to inform their villagers to continue farming.

Issues and/or concerns raised

Issue/concern raise Response

General: Inquired whether village members are

allowed to make any alterations to their existing houses/structures, and whether such alternations will be compensated

Mr Hough: Explained that villagers are not in any way

discouraged from continuing with their livelihoods, which include making alterations to their structures and building new ones. As clarified, small alterations to structures (such as new roofs etc.) should not affect the beneficiary‟s entitled compensation package, as the latter will be a discussion between the mine and


145

Issue/concern raise Response

the respective beneficiary. As made clear, this discussion will take into account a beneficiary‟s compensation preference and support needed. Mr Hough clearly explained that only brand new structures - such as an entire new house - will not be compensated after this survey.

Mr Hough continued to explicate that villagers should not only see compensation in terms of money. As clearly explained and reiterated, money is not a sustainable way to compensate for what a farmer has lost. “Money cannot replace what you have lost”. Therefore, Mr Hough briefly elaborated upon the mine‟s intentions to assist the villagers with an agricultural programme which is being developed.

It was clarified that the only area where physical resettlement is likely is in Pirira Village. However, Mr Hough stressed that it is, in fact, not the intention of the mine to replace any household. It will mostly be machambas that will be affected.

General: Expressed concern over the reasons for why

the mine will not compensate any new structures or crops on new farmland

Mr Hough: Explained that the purpose of this RAP is

to ensure that compensation provided to those affected is fair and just. This was explained by making an example of an opportunist from Montepeuz who comes to establish a new machamba in the area in the anticipation of getting compensation. As illustrated, such a claim would be unfair to those who already have farms in the area and who are rightfully entitled to the land and the value of its loss. A second example was drawn upon of someone who, subsequent to these surveys and moratoriums, constructs more structures on his/her land, whilst his/her old neighbour is physically too sick to do the same. This would mean that an opportunist would benefit at the expense of someone who could not manipulate the system. In this way, the reason for these moratoriums on the establishment of any new farmland or structures was rationalised on the basis of providing fair and equitable compensation to all affected, and that it is in the best interest of the villagers.

All group members were requested to disseminate the meeting‟s discussions with their villages, reiterating their role to act as village representatives. The members were asked to make village claims (as explained) directly to Laura after they have assessed such claims themselves. In conclusion, members were informed to communicate directly with Laura should there be any further concerns.

The meeting was adjournedat 15:16.


146


APPENDIX 13: TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP MEETING 4

Technical Working Group Meeting 4 Balama Graphite Mine, Mozambique

MEETING MINUTES

29 November 2013

MINUTES PREPARED FOR:

MINUTES PREPARED BY:

Carina Saranga

Coastal & Environmental Services GRAHAMSTOWN

P.O. Box 934 Grahamstown, 6140

046 622 2364 With offices also in East London and Port Elizabeth (South Africa) and

Maputo (Mozambique) www.cesnet.co.za

Date Meeting Venue Time Meeting objective

29/11/2013 Ntete Village 10:15-11:20

To show the mine‟s current mine layout plan and where farms and/or households might be loss/affected and the changes made to the layout;

To introduce the four CES recruited fieldworkers;

To reiterate the functioning of the Grievance Mechanism; and

To explain the farmland assessment process and site visit work schedule.

http://www.cesnet.co.za/


147

Balama Graphite Mine

Date: 29/11/2013 Venue: Ntete Village Time: 10:15-11:20

Attendance Register

Name Company/ village Position Contact nr

Carina Saranga CES Social Scientist (meeting chairperson) 824136038

Lungisa Bosman CES Social Scientist 079 514 76 11

Laura Rodolfo Syrah Community Liaison Officer (Syrah representative) 826901653

Zacarias Ntete Ntete Chief Non provided

Lúcio Domingos Nazareo Balama District Administration Representative Non provided

Celso Nhumaio Government SDAE (Ministry of Agriculture) 822831840

Júlio Mabote Government SPDI (Ministry of Planning and Infrastructure) 821525903

Levi Montepuez CES recruited survey fieldworker 824393926/862278762

Ramadane Sauate Balama CES recruited survey fieldworker 866256225/829979442

Octavio Gildo Montepuez CES recruited survey fieldworker 863126400

Constantino Arlindo Ntete Ntete Chief 866092848

Bachir Eusébio Pirira Group member 867108403

Adelino Sadique Maputo Group member Non provided

Chabane Saualia Maputo Group member 860035812

Ussene Buana Nquide Group member 866805530

Lourenço Gimo Nquide Group member Non provided

Jarifo Raimundo Ntete Group member 869447738

Jorge Chiquira Pirira Group member Non provided


148


General

The District Administrator convened a meeting on 29 November 2013 with the eight elected Technical Working Group (TWG) members and district-level representatives of the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Planning and Infrastructure. A representative of the District Administrator attended the meeting on behalf of the Administrator.

The meeting was chaired in Portuguese by Ms Carina Saranga (CES). The primary objective of the meeting was to obtain permission from the affected villagers to commence with the farmland assessment and household socio-economic surveys for the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP). The meeting was very productive also in terms of planning the days‟ work schedule.

Discussions

Ms Saranga introduced the social team from CES and explained CES‟ involvement in the mine in assisting the mine to assess those farms and/or households that might be loss/affected. CES‟ independence as a consultancy firm was also reiterated. Ms Saranga continued to stress the fact that, as the proponent is investigating ways to minimise the social disturbance, not all the farms and households in the area would be affected.

She explained that, during the last survey period, some farmers could not be surveyed, and that an additional mine layout plan has since been provided by the client. Hence, some new farm areas and farmers would need to be surveyed. Using a poster, Carinaexplained the next few days‟ working procedure, illustrating the new mine layout plan. Indicating thison the map, she continued toidentify areaswhere farms andhouseswould be identified and evaluatedby the fieldworkersduring the coming week. She clarified that not all the families or farmers that are evaluated should expect to be affected (and thus compensated). The area that is be studied by the fieldworkers is only used to guide the fieldworkers in their assessment.

Ms Saranga made a distinction between the loss of land and the loss of crops (i.e. that only the loss of crops will be compensated by the mine). She explained that the District Services of Economic Activities (DSEA) will assist all the affected farmers to find alternative land.

Another priority of the meeting was to discuss the week‟s work schedule. Carina explained that each farmer to be surveyd would have an entitlement sheet that would act as a declaration of the study‟s cut-off-date; cautioning farmers that any new farm land crops or structures inside the mine‟s Area of Influence (AoI) would not be compensated by the mine. Adding to this, Ms Saranga reminded all those attending of the established Grievance Mechanismavailable for all to make complaints, intended for the mine to resolve such complains in consultation with those affected.

The issue of future alternative farmland was briefly discussed. The representative of the DSEA, Mr Celso Nhumaio, clarified that the District Services of Planning and Infrastructure (DSPI) would inspect new areas of land that might be suitable as alternative farmland (depending on the availability of the land). Thereafter, the DSPI would approve the use of this land which should then be allocated to the beneficiary farmers by the mine as part of the implementation of the RAP.

A discussion followed regarding theproposed mine layout plan. The government representatives and TWG members encouraged the mine to upgrade and use the existing road that runs past Pirira to the current mine camp. Thisrequest was based upon the logic that Pirira andNtete would benefit from such an upgrade in termsof economic opportunitiesandsocio-economic development. In response, Mr Bosman explained the reason behind constructing the main road outside a residential area; that such a road would carry largetrucks. As explained to all, trucksinresidential areaswouldbring socialproblems as communitiesare notused to having large vehicles around.


149

Mr Bosman continued to draw upon the new site location of the camp and labour residential area where around 200 labourers will be accommodated. The layout of this residential area was briefly elaborated upon, such as that four housing blocks will be constructed with water treatment systems.

Lastly, Mr Bosman briefly elaborated upon the mine‟s intention to design and implement several community projects such as the production and cultivation of chickens and fish, as well as an agricultural project. The idea would be for these projects to support the affected villagers after the life of the mine.

Conclusion

The meeting closed at 11:20.


150


APPENDIX 14: TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP MEETING 5

Meeting with the TWG Balama Graphite Mine, Mozambique

Minutes of Meeting

May 12, 2014

Minutes Prepared For:

Minutes Prepared By:

Carina Saranga Coastal & Environmental Services

GRAHAMSTOWN P.O. Box 934

Grahamstown, 6140 046 622 2364

With offices also in East London e Port Elizabeth (África do Sul) & Maputo (Mozambique)

www.cesnet.co.za

Date Venue Duration Purpose of Meeting

12/05/2014 Community Ntete

14:15-15:40

To explain the purpose of the site visit, which was to disclose the RAP report to the TWG members and obtain their input;

To assess the remaining machambas that might possibly be affected by the mine; and

To discuss compensation packages with the TWG members.



151

ATTENDANCE REGISTER


152


General The meeting was organised by the District Administrator and chaired by Ms Carina Saranga (CES). Those present included all the TWG members, as well as the CES social team (Ms Saranga and Mr Bosman). In terms of mine representation, Ms Redolfo (CLO) and Mr Célio Panquene attended the meeting. In terms of government representation, Octávio Sozinho (District Administrator Representative), Mr Júliop Mabote (DSPI) and Mr Laura António (DSEA) were present. Refer to the attendance register, attached as Appendix L. The main purpose of the meeting was to disclose the RAP report in accordance with Article 23 of the Mozambique Regulations on the Resettlement Process Resulting from Economic Activities (2012), whilst discussing the compensation packages with the TWG members. In addition, a number of machambas still had to be surveyed and assessed, for which purposes this meeting was also aimed at sensitising the community about this survey and to make planning arrangements for this process.

Presentation

The report was disclosed to the TWG members by MsCarina, whointroduced the social team and explained that CES is an environmental consulting firm, appointed by Syrah to undertake this work. Officials of the District Administrator, DSPI and DSEA were also introduced. Ms Laura Redolfo and Mr Célio Panquene from the mine were also introduced. Ms Saranga explained that around 208 farms and 2,076 fruit trees might be lost to the mining development, which are thus within the mining path. She further explained that some extra machambas needed to be surveyed and assessed, as these farmers were not recorded during the last site trip. She further clarified that most of the affected machambas are planted with Cassava, Peas, Corn, Beans and Sorghum, whereas the Cashew, Mango and Papaya trees are abundantly planted on most machambas. Ms Saranga continued to define the principles upon which the compensation packages (detailed in the RAP report) have been designed:

The mine will offer those affected farmers compensation for the loss of assets (crops, trees and structures) at full replacement cost (as established by the Government), as well as other assistance necessary to help farmers improve their standards of living or livelihoods;

Alternative machamba land of the same or better value will be offered by the government for each affected machamba lost (the mine shall assist with this process);

No land shall be taken by the mine before to new land has been provided; Those who will receive new land will be assisted by the mine to re-establish their

fields (this will form part of a Farmers‟ Development Programme); and No structure will be destroyed before compensation has been offered.

In terms of land replacement, Ms Saranga made reference to the following key compensation package principles:

Mozambique legislation states that it is the responsibility of the government to find and allocate alternative machambas, however the mine will assist with this task;


153

Cash will not be provided for land, since affected farmers will receive alterative land; Prior to the mine taking their land, affected farmers will be provided with enough

assisted at least for six months to prepare his/her new machamba up to a point where the first crops of the new field can be harvested for food security;

The mine will assist those affected with preparing their „new‟ land in order for those who received new land to be able to harvest their first crops before the mine has taken their current land;

The mine will make available resources to clear new land, and will also provide initial seeds;

The mine will assign local agricultural workers to assist and monitor the farmers with preparing their „new‟ fields;

The mine will only take land after the affected farmers have been assisted to establish their new fields, and after the first crops could be harvested. If this is not possible (and the mine has to take current land before „new‟ alternative land has been fully prepared), the mine will discuss with each affected farmer the option to provide food packages for the duration until their new land starts to produce harvests; and

If alternative land is not be available, the mine will initiate alternative options, such as to assist farmers with intensive training to farm more productively on smaller land parcels, for example.

All the TWG agreed with these principles. Most agreed, however, that there is not sufficient replacement land.

Ms Saranga continued to elaborate upon the crop compensation packages proposed in the RAP report. She explained that a standard Government crop compensation rate has been applied. A table was presented listing all the crops that have been planted by the affected farmers. Using this table, she explained that each farmer would receive a crop compensation offer that equates to the highest crop value of the land. She clarified this with an example: if one hectare of land is affected and the farmer agrees that cassava is the highest valued crop on this particular land, then the value of one hectare of cassava will be compensated to that farmer. In addition, she clarified that the mine would still offer the affected farmers seeds, and that each farmer would be assisted on his/her new field until their first crops prior to any land acquisition.

Ms Saranga continued to elaborate upon the compensation packages for structures, as proposed in the RAP report. It was made clear that there are no established compensation rates for structures in Mozambique. In consequence, the client proposes to provide affected farmers with a fixed sum of money for each lost structure. The meeting was open for discussions. Discussions points have been included in an Issues and Response Trail in Section 7.3 that deals with the compensation methodology.

The meeting concluded by providing each community representative with a list of those surveyed farmers in their respective villages whose machambas are currently inside the mine‟s Area of Influence. Each community representative was then tasked to contact those members to ensure that each affected farm owner is present at the RAP disclosure meetings in each village the following few days.

The meeting adjourned at 15:40.


154


APPENDIX 15: MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY DISCLOSURE MEETINGS OF THE RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN

Resettlement Action Plan Disclosure Meetings with the Communities of Ntete, Nquide, Pirira, Maputo and Balama

Balama Graphite Mine, Mozambique

Minutes of Meeting

May 14& 16, 2014

Minutes Prepared For:

Minutes Prepared By:

Carina Saranga Coastal & Environmental Services

GRAHAMSTOWN P.O. Box 934

Grahamstown, 6140 046 622 2364

With offices also in East London e Port Elizabeth (África do Sul) & Maputo (Mozambique)

www.cesnet.co.za

Date Venue Duration Purpose of Meeting

14/05/2014 Ntete 15:10-16:10 To explain the purpose of the site visit, which was to disclose the RAP report to the TWG members and affected farmers and obtain their input;

To assess the remaining machambas that might possibly be affected by the mine; and

To discuss compensation packages with the TWG members and affected farmers.

15/05/2014 Nquide 09:20-10:30

15/05/2014 Balama 14:30-16:00

16/05/2014 Maputo 14:00-15:30

16/05/2014 Pirira 09:10-10:30

Refer to the attendance registers attached as appendices O to T.



155

General Each of the RAP disclosure meetings were organised by the District Administrator and chaired by Ms Carina Saranga (CES). Those present in each meeting included foremost representatives of the mine (Mr Célio Panquene and Ms Laura Redolfo), as well as representatives of the District Administrator, DSPI and DSEA. Above these members, those farmers who are affected by the loss of machamba land in each village have been called by the TWG members and were also present. The main purpose of the meeting was to disclose the RAP report in accordance with Article 23 of the Mozambique Regulations on the Resettlement Process Resulting from Economic Activities (2012), whilst discussing the compensation packages with those farmers affected. In addition, a number of machambas still had to be surveyed and assessed, for which purposes this meeting was also aimed at sensitising the community about this survey and to make planning arrangements for this process.

Presentation

The report was disclosed to the TWG members by Ms Carina, who introduced the social team and explained that CES is an environmental consulting firm, appointed by Syrah to undertake this work. Officials of the District Administrator, DSPI and DSEA were also introduced. Ms Laura Redolfo and Mr Célio Panquene from the mine were also introduced. Ms Saranga explained that around 208 farms and 2,076 fruit trees might be lost to the mining development, which are thus within the mining path. She further explained that some extra machambas needed to be surveyed and assessed, as these farmers were not recorded during the last site trip. She further clarified that most of the affected machambas are planted with Cassava, Peas, Corn, Beans and Sorghum, whereas the Cashew, Mango and Papaya trees are abundantly planted on most machambas. Ms Saranga continued to define the principles upon which the compensation packages (detailed in the RAP report) have been designed:

The mine will offer those affected farmers compensation for the loss of assets (crops, trees and structures) at full replacement cost (as established by the Government), as well as other assistance necessary to help farmers improve their standards of living or livelihoods;

Alternative machamba land of the same or better value will be offered by the government for each affected machamba lost (the mine shall assist with this process);

No land shall be taken by the mine before to new land has been provided; Those who will receive new land will be assisted by the mine to re-establish their

fields (this will form part of a Farmers‟ Development Programme); and No structure will be destroyed before compensation has been offered.

In terms of land replacement, Ms Saranga made reference to the following key compensation package principles:

Mozambique legislation states that it is the responsibility of the government to find and allocate alternative machambas, however the mine will assist with this task;

Cash will not be provided for land, since affected farmers will receive alterative land;


156


Prior to the mine taking their land, affected farmers will be provided with enough assisted at least for six months to prepare his/her new machamba up to a point where the first crops of the new field can be harvested for food security;

The mine will assist those affected with preparing their „new‟ land in order for those who received new land to be able to harvest their first crops before the mine has taken their current land;

The mine will make available resources to clear new land, and will also provide initial seeds;

The mine will assign local agricultural workers to assist and monitor the farmers with preparing their „new‟ fields;

The mine will only take land after the affected farmers have been assisted to establish their new fields, and after the first crops could be harvested. If this is not possible (and the mine has to take current land before „new‟ alternative land has been fully prepared), the mine will discuss with each affected farmer the option to provide food packages for the duration until their new land starts to produce harvests; and

If alternative land is not be available, the mine will initiate alternative options, such as to assist farmers with intensive training to farm more productively on smaller land parcels, for example.

Ms Saranga continued to elaborate upon the crop compensation packages proposed in the RAP report. She explained that a standard Government crop compensation rate has been applied. A table was presented listing all the crops that have been planted by the affected farmers. Using this table, she explained that each farmer would receive a crop compensation offer that equates to the highest crop value of the land. She clarified this with an example: if one hectare of land is affected and the farmer agrees that cassava is the highest valued crop on this particular land, then the value of one hectare of cassava will be compensated to that farmer. In addition, she clarified that the mine would still offer the affected farmers seeds, and that each farmer would be assisted on his/her new field until their first crops prior to any land acquisition.

Ms Saranga continued to elaborate upon the compensation packages for structures, as proposed in the RAP report. It was made clear that there are no established compensation rates for structures in Mozambique. In consequence, the client proposes to provide affected farmers with a fixed sum of money for each lost structure.

The meeting was open for discussions. The meeting was open for discussions. Discussions points have been included in an Issues and Response Trail in Section 7.3 that deals with the compensation methodology.

The meeting concluded with a promise from Ms Saranga to continue engaging with the communities, whilst all attending were reminded of the Grievance Mechanism and the procedures thereof.


157

APPENDIX 16: ATTENDANCE REGISTER OF THE RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN DISCLOSURE MEETING HELD IN NTETE ON 14 MAY 2014


158



159


160



161

APPENDIX 17: ATTENDANCE REGISTER OF THE RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN DISCLOSURE MEETING HELD IN NQUIDE ON 15 MAY 2014


162



163


164


name company/village position contact nr balama graphite mine eng cb2908… · appendix 13:...

Documents