Connect with us

News & Analysis

The Regulations and Guidelines Relevant to Mining Activities in Kenya

Published

on

By Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD (Leading Environmental Law Scholar, Natural Resources Lawyer and Dispute Resolution Expert in Kenya)*

The Mining Act, No. 12 of 2016, mandates the Cabinet Secretary responsible for Mining and Minerals Sector to make Regulations necessary or convenient for the proper administration and implementation of the law. The following Regulations have so far been passed under the Act: Mining (Dealings in Minerals) Regulations, 2017; Mining (Licence and Permit) Regulations, 2017; Mining (Work Programmes and Exploration Reports) Guidelines, 2017; Mining (State Participation) Regulations, 20I7; Mining (Use of Local Goods and Services) Regulations, 2017; Mining (Employment and Training) Regulations, 2017; and Mining (Use of Assets) Regulations, 2017. However, the following five (5) regulations are the key ones in regulating the core mining activities from licensing to dealing, state participation, exploration and use of mineral assets.

a) Mining (Dealings in Minerals) Regulations, 2017

The Mining (Dealings in Minerals) Regulations, 2017 were enacted by the Cabinet Secretary for Mining in exercise of the powers conferred by sections 100 and 223 (l) of the Mining Act, 2016. Section 100 of the Act deals with the sale of minerals won by an artisanal miner. These Regulations are to apply to the export of a mineral by a holder of a mining right; the removal of minerals by a holder of a mineral right for the purposes of sampling, assay or analysis; the holder of a mineral dealer’s licence or dealer’s permit; and the import of any mineral. However, these Regulations do not to apply to the export and import of rough diamonds.

There have been numerous reported and unreported cases of illegal dealings in extraction and/or sale of minerals in the country. These Regulations were meant to curb this illegal business and specifically spells out the duties of the holder of a mineral dealer’s licence which include to: commence or engage in the trading of a mineral in accordance with the terms and conditions of the licence within thirty days after the date of the issue of the licence; not trade in any mineral other than the mineral or minerals specified in the licence; not trade in minerals except in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in the licence; not knowingly engage in trading of a mineral with a person who has not acquired the minerals lawfully or is otherwise not lawfully entitled to deal in minerals; pay all taxes, charges or levies that are required under the terms and conditions of the licence, and keep complete and accurate records.

The Regulations, alongside the Mining Act 2016, were expected to provide more transparency and credibility for investors in solving issues affecting the mining sector in the country. These Regulations have, however, achieved little, if anything, in curbing illegal trading in minerals. This is exemplified by the continued reports of smuggling of gold and other precious stones in and out of the country It is therefore unlikely that these Regulations alone, without the support of other security institutions across the region, will curb the illegal dealings in trade. There is a need to ensure that the taxation and royalties regime is regularized and that the same is friendly not only to the multinationals but also the artisanal miners in the country as an incentive to discourage them from dealing with illegal traders in and outside the country.

b) Mining (Licence and Permit) Regulations, 2017

The Mining (Licence and Permit) Regulations, 2017 were enacted by the Cabinet Secretary for Mining in exercise of the powers conferred by sections 12 (3), 153 (3) and 223 (2), (c), (d), (g), (j), (k) and (1) of the Mining Act, 2016. These Regulations apply to all mineral rights. The Mining (license and permit) Regulations 2017 (Clause 4) provides that all applications for mineral rights shall be made through the On Line Mining Cadastre (OMC) in order for them to be considered for grant. It is a commendable step that these Regulations seek to regulate, inter alia, small-scale mining or artisanal mining operations in line with the Mining Act 2016, by granting permits. However, there is a need to ensure that the same are not used as a political tool in awarding permits for corrupt dealings in artisanal mining activities.

In addition, while the artisanal miners may smoothly get licences and permits (which will cost money to apply), there may be a funding challenge. It has been observed that acute cash shortage caused by poor linkages with the financial sectors of the economy is one of the biggest impediments to the growth of the artisanal and small-scale mining sector. This is mainly attributed to the fact that being a nascent, capital intense and high-risk sector, it is difficult for local banks to finance it. However, government intervention can go a long way in addressing the funding challenge. It is therefore not enough to regulate licensing and permits relating to mining activities in the country, there is a need to create a level playing ground for the artisanal miners by creating a funding kitty to help them competitively carry out these mining activities. Such a kitty would be similar to those in other African countries whose artisanal and small scale mining sectors are doing well such as 2017 Nigeria’s Ministry of Solid Minerals and Steel Development and the Bank of Industry of Nigeria’s N5 billion fund to provide loans and bring the sector under a structured system; and Zimbabwe’s gold fund introduced in 2016 through the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe.

c) Mining (Work Programmes and Exploration Reports) Guidelines, 2017

The Mining (Work Programmes and Exploration Reports) Guidelines, 2017 were enacted by the Cabinet Secretary in exercise of the powers conferred by section 221 (1) of the Mining Act, 2016. These Guidelines provide guidance to applicants for, and holders of, reconnaissance licences, prospecting licences, prospecting permits and retention licences on how to prepare work programmes and exploration reports; and are to assist the Director of Geological Surveys to review work programmes and exploration reports that shall be submitted by applicants for or holders of mineral rights.

While these reports would go a long way in enhancing the right of access to information for the local people as far as the activities of the mining companies are concerned, there is no evidence of any such reports being made public since 2017 or even any being filed with the government agencies at all. As such, there is a need to ensure that these Regulations are not only enforced but also such reports should be made available to the public in light of the right of access to information as guaranteed under Article 35 of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 and Access to Information Act, 2016.

d) Mining (State Participation) Regulations, 20I7

The Mining (State Participation) Regulations, 20I7 were enacted by the Cabinet Secretary in exercise of Section 48(4) of the Mining Act, 2016. The purpose of these Regulations is to provide for State participation in prospecting or mining operations carried out by a holder of a mineral right. These Regulations apply to all applicants and holders of any mineral right by entitling the State to a ten percent free carried interest; where the State acquires any additional interest that may be agreed with the holder of a mining licence; and where the State enters into an agreement to participate in prospecting operations or activities under a prospecting licence held by a holder other than the National Mining Corporation.

In line with the Mining Act 2016, the Regulations reiterate that the National Mining Corporation shall on behalf of the State, be the investment arm of the National Government in respect of all prospecting or mining operations. In this regard, the National Mining Corporation is to hold the State’s ten percent free equity participation or free carried interest in all mining operations; is responsible for engaging in any operations relating to any additional interest that the State may acquire and which may be agreed with the holder of a mining licence at a fair market value. The Corporation may also acquire any interest in or enter into a joint venture, farm-in agreement or any other arrangement with a holder of a prospecting licence for the purpose of conducting prospecting operations.

e) Mining (Use of Assets) Regulations, 2017

The Mining (Use of Assets) Regulations, 2017 were enacted by the Cabinet Secretary in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 149(6) of the Mining Act, 2016. These Regulations shall apply to holders of mining licences requiring them to maintain a complete, up to date and accurate register of all its immovable and movable assets. These regulations, if fully enforced, can be a useful tool in fighting corruption and tax evasion by the mining companies as they seek to promote accountability and transparency on the income and expenses incurred by these companies. These Regulations, alongside other transparency and accountability measures and practices are useful for developing countries such as Kenya, where non-declaration or under declaration of profits by the multinationals has been happening. They can however work well where the authorities involved work with different stakeholders such as the revenue colleting agencies to get the actual figures.

f) Mining (Use of Local Goods and Services) Regulations, 2017

The Mining (Use of Local Goods and Services) Regulations, 2017 were enacted by the Cabinet Secretary in exercise of the powers conferred by section 223(l) of the Mining Act, 2016. The purpose of these Regulations is to promote job creation through the use of local expertise, goods and services, businesses and financing in the mining industry value chain and their retention in the country; achieve the minimum local level and in-country spend for the provision of the goods and services in the mining industry value chain; increase the capability and international competitiveness of domestic businesses; create mining and mineral related support industries that will provide jobs and sustain economic development; achieve and maintain a degree of participation for Kenyans or companies incorporated in Kenya for the supply of goods and the provision of services; and provide for a robust, transparent monitoring and reporting system in relation to the use of goods and services.

g) Mining (Employment and Training) Regulations, 2017

The Mining (Employment and Training) Regulations, 2017 were enacted by the Cabinet Secretary in exercise of powers conferred by sections 46(3) and 223(l) of the Mining Act, 2016. The purpose of these Regulations is to promote job creation through the use of local expertise in the mining industry, the entire mining value chain and to retain the requisite skills within the country; develop local capacities in the mining industry value chain through education, skills and technology transfer, research and development; and achieve the minimum local employment level and in-country spend across the entire mining industry value chain. An application for any licence shall not be granted by the Cabinet Secretary-unless the applicant has submitted a plan outlining the proposals for the employment and training of Kenyans.

 

*This is article is an extract from an article by Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD Muigua, K., “Regulating Mining: A New Vision for Kenya? http://kmco.co.ke/wpcontent/uploads/ 2019/07/Regulating-Mining-A-New-Vision-Kariuki-Muigua-12th-July-2019.pdf.  Dr. Kariuki Muigua is Kenya’s foremost Environmental Law and Natural Resources Lawyer and Scholar, Sustainable Development Advocate and Conflict Management Expert. Dr. Kariuki Muigua is a Senior Lecturer of Environmental Law and Dispute resolution at the University of Nairobi School of Law and The Center for Advanced Studies in Environmental Law and Policy (CASELAP). He has published numerous books and articles on Environmental Law, Environmental Justice Conflict Management, Alternative Dispute Resolution and Sustainable Development. Dr. Muigua is also a Chartered Arbitrator, an Accredited Mediator, the Africa Trustee of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and the Managing Partner of Kariuki Muigua & Co. Advocates. Dr. Muigua is recognized as one of the leading lawyers and dispute resolution experts by the Chambers Global Guide 2021 and nominated as ADR Practitioner of the Year (Nairobi Legal Awards) 2021. 

News & Analysis

Former KCB Company Secretary Sues Over Unlawful Dismissal

Published

on

By

Former KCB Group Company Secretary Joseph Kamau Kania who has sued the Bank for Unlawful Dismissal

Former KCB Group Company Secretary Joseph Kamau Kania has sued the lender seeking reinstatement or be compensated for illegal sacking almost three years ago. Lawyer Kania was the KCB Group company secretary until restructuring of the lender in 2021 that saw some senior executives dropped.

Through the firm of Senior Counsel Wilfred Nderitu, Kamau wants the court to order KCB Group to unconditionally reinstate him to employment without altering any of the contractual terms until his retirement in December 2025.

In his court documents filed before Employment and Labour Relations Court, the career law banker seeks the court to declare the reorganization of the company structure a nullity and amounted to a violation of his fundamental right to fair labour practices as guaranteed in Article 41(1) of the Constitution. He further wants the court to declare that the position of Group Company Secretary did not at any time cease to exist within the KCB Group structure.

He further urged the Employment Court to declare that the recruitment and appointment of Bonnie Okumu, his former assistant, as the Group Company Secretary, in relation to the contemporaneous termination of his employment, was unprocedural, insufficient and inappropriate to infer a lawful termination of his employment.

“A declaration that the factual and legal circumstances of the Petitioner’s termination of employment were insufficient and inappropriate to infer a redundancy against him, and that any redundancy declared by the KCB Group in relation to him was therefore null, void and of no legal effect and amounted to a violation of his fundamental right to fair labour practices as guaranteed in Article 41(1) of the Constitution,” seeks lawyer Kamau.

Kamau says he was subjected to discriminatory practices by the KCB Bank Group in violation of his fundamental right to equality and freedom from discrimination as guaranteed in Article 27 of the Constitution and the termination of his employment was unfair, unjustified, illegal, null and void.

Lawyer Kamau further seeks the court to declare that the Non-Compete Clause in the 2016 Contract is unenforceable by the KCB Group as against him and is voidable by him as against the Bank ab initio, byreason of the termination of the Petitioner’s employment having been a violation of Articles 41(1) and 47(1) and (2) of the Constitution, and of the Employment Act.

He also wants the Employment Court to find that finding that KCB’s group legal representation by Messrs of Mohammed Muigai LLP Advocates law firm in respect of his claim for unlawful termination of employment resulted in a clear conflict of interest by reason of the fact that a Founding and Senior Partner at the said firm lawyer Mohammed Nyaoga is also the Chairman of the CBK’s Board of Directors.

“A Declaration that the circumstances of KCB’s legal representation by Messrs. Mohammed Muigai LLP Advocates resulted in a violation of the Petitioner’s fundamental right to have the employment dispute decided independently and impartially, as guaranteed in Article 50(1) of the Constitution,” seeks lawyer Kamau.

Kamau is seeking damages against both KCB Group and Central Bank of Kenya jointly and severally for the violation of his constitutional and fundamental right to fair labour practices.

He wants  further wants court to declare that CBK is liable to petitioner on account of its breach of statutory duty to effectively regulate KCB Group to ensure that KCB complied with the Central Bank of Kenya Prudential Guidelines and all other Laws, Rules, Codes and Standards, and that, as an issuer of securities, it complied with capital markets legislation.

Kamau through his lawyer Nderitu told the court that he was involved in Shareholder engagement in introducing the Group aide-mémoire that significantly improved the management of the Annual General Meetings, including obtaining approval without voting through the Memorandum and Articles of Association of Kenya Commercial Bank Limited among others.

He said that during his employment at KCB Bank Kenya and with the KCB Group, he initially worked well with former KCB CEO Joseph Oigara until 2016 when the CEO allegedly started sidelining him by removing the legal function from his reporting line.

He further claims he was transferred from the Group’s offices at Kencom House to its offices Upper Hill under the guise that the Petitioner was merely to support the KCB Group Board.

He adds that at that point his roles were given to Okumu for reasons that were not related to work demands.  He stated that Oigara at one time proposed that he should leave his role in the KCB Group and go and serve as the Company Secretary of the National Bank of Kenya Limited, a subsidiary of the Group, a suggestion which he disagreed with to Oigara’s utter annoyance.

Kamau stated that his work was thenceforth unfairly discredited, leading to his being taken through a disciplinary process whose intended outcome failed miserably, and the Petitioner was vindicated.

“More specifically, the Petitioner contends that the purported creation of a new organizational structure towards the end of 2020 was in fact Oigara’s orchestration targeted to remove certain individuals by requiring them to undergo interviews in the pretext that new roles were created, and amounted to a further violation of the Petitioner’s fundamental right to fair labour practices under Article 41(1) of the Constitution,” said in his court documents.

He further adds that this sham reorganization demonstrates how the role of the KCB Group Company Secretary purportedly ceased to be and was then very briefly replaced with a new role of the KCB Group General Counsel. The role of KCB Group Company Secretary then ‘resurfaced’ immediately thereafter, in total violation of legal and regulatory requirements.

Continue Reading

News & Analysis

Court of Appeal Upholds Eviction of Radcliffes from Karen Land

Published

on

By

Adrian Radcliffe, the Expatriate Squatter, Evicted from Karen Property by Innocent Purchaser for Value

The Court of Appeal has stayed the decision of the Environment and Land Court purporting to reinstate Adrian Radcliffe into possession of the 5.7 Acre Karen Land by Kena Properties Ltd after eviction by the lawful owners in February 2022. Adrian Radcliffe who was evicted by Kena Properties Ltd, the innocent purchaser of the Land for value.

Before his eviction, Mr. Radcliffe had been living on the land as a squatter expatriate for 33 years without paying any rent. Since he moved into the property as a tenant, he only paid deposit for the land in August 1989 despite corresponding severally with the owner of the land. His attempt to acquire the land by adverse possession claim filed in 2005 was dismissed by Court in 2011 on the basis that he has engaged with the owner of the land July 1997 and agreed to buy the land which he failed to do. The High Court [Justice Kalpana Rawal as she then was] concluded that:

“His [Mr. Adrian Radcliffe] averments that he did not have any idea of the whereabouts of the Defendant and that he could possibly be not alive, were not only very sad but mala fide in view of the correspondence on record addressed by him to the Defendant’s wife. I would thus find that the averments made by him to the contrary are untrue looking to the facts of this case.”

On 10th March 2022, Mr. Adrian Radcliffe and Family purported to obtain court orders for reinstatement into the land. However, the Court of Appeal issued an interim stay of execution of the said orders. The Court of Appeal has now granted the application of Kena Properties Ltd and stayed the execution of the Environment and Land Court Order pending the hearing and determination of the Appeal.

The Court also stayed the proceedings at the Environment and Land Court on the matter during the pendency of the Appeal. In effect, the eviction orders issued by the Chief Magistrate Court for eviction of Mr. Adrian Radcliffe in favour of Kena Properties as the purchaser of the property for value were upheld and the company now enjoys unfettered ownership and possession of the suit property until the conclusion of the Appeal.

The Court of Appeal in granting the orders sought by Kena Properties Ltd concurred with Kena Properties Ltd that as the property owner it had an arguable appeal with a high probability of success which would be rendered nugatory if Adrian Radcliffe a trespasser was to resume his unlawful possession of the suit property, erect structures thereon, recklessly use or abuse the said suit property as he deems fit. In any case, that is bound to fundamentally alter the state of the suit property and render it unusable by Kena Properties Ltd as the property owner.

At the same time, the Appellate Court rubbished the argument of Adrian Radcliffe in opposition to the application for stay that he has been in occupation of the suit property for more than 30 years and that he and his family were unlawfully evicted from the suit property on 4th February, 2022. The Court also rejected Radcliffe’s claim that Kena Properties Ltd has no valid title to the suit property and held that as the purchaser, the company was entitled to enjoy ownership and possession of their property during the pendency of the appeal.

The Court dismissed claims of Mr. Adrian Radcliffe that Kena Properties Ltd as the property owner acquired title to the suit property illegally and unprocedurally finding to the contrary. Further, it rejected Adrian Radcliffe’s claim that Kena Properties as the purchaser cannot evict a legal occupier of a property putting paid to the claim that he was a legal occupier at the time of eviction.

As a matter of fact, Mr. Adrian Radcliffe cannot claim to be the legal occupier of the property having attempted to acquire it by adverse possession before the High Court thwarted his fraudulent scheme on 28th February 2011. Mr. Radcliffe did not appeal the 2011 High Court decision meaning it is still the law that he is not the owner of the land nor the legal occupier of the land having attempted to adversely acquire against the interests of the lawful owner who sold it to Kena Properties.

Mr. Adrian Radcliffe is a well-to-do Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WaSH) UNICEF consultant and former UN employee (who has been earning hefty House Allowance). Many have wondered why he has been defaulting in paying rent for 33 years on the prime plot of land in Karen while living large and taking his kids to most expensive schools in Kenya. No question, a local Kenyan could never have gotten away with such selfish impunity.

Continue Reading

News & Analysis

Review: Journal of Conflict Management and Sustainable Development, Vol. 9, No. 1

Published

on

By

The Journal of Conflict Management and Sustainable Development, Volume 9, Issue No. 1, which is edited by and published by Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD is out and stays true to the reputation of the journal in providing a platform for scholarly debate on thematic areas in the fields of Conflict Management and Sustainable Development. The current issue published in September 2022 covers diverse topics including Resolving Oil and Gas Disputes in Africa; National Environment Tribunal, Sustainable Development and Access to Justice in Kenya; Protection of Cultural Heritage During War; The Role of Water in the attainment of Sustainable Development in Kenya; Property Rights in Human Biological Materials in Kenya; Nurturing our Wetlands for Biodiversity Conservation; Investor-State Dispute Resolution in a Fast-Paced World; Status of Participation of Women in Mediation; Business of Climate Change and Critical Analysis of World Trade Organization’s Most-Favored Nation (MFN) Treatment.

Dr. Wilfred A. Mutubwa and Eunice Njeri Ng’ang’a in “Resolving Oil and Gas Disputes in an Integrating Africa: An Appraisal of the Role of Regional Arbitration Centres” explore the nature of disputes in the realm of oil and gas in Africa taking a look into the recent continental and sub-regional developments in a bid to establish regional integration. Additionally, it tests the limits of intra-African trade and dispute resolution and the imperatives for the African regional courts and arbitration centres. In “National Environment Tribunal, Sustainable Development and Access to Justice in Kenya,” Dr. Kariuki Muigua discusses the role played by the National Environment Tribunal (NET) in promoting access to justice and enhancing the principles of sustainable development in Kenya. The paper also highlights challenges facing the tribunal and proposes recommendations towards enhancing the effectiveness of the tribunal.

Dr. Kenneth Wyne Mutuma in “Protecting Cultural Heritage in Times of War: A Case for History,” argues that cultural heritage is at the heart of human existence and its preservation even in times of war is sacrosanct. It concludes that it is thus critical for states to take positive and tangible steps to ensure environmental conservation and protection during war within the ambit of the existing international legal framework. In “The Role of Water in the attainment of Sustainable Development in Kenya,” Jack Shivugu critically evaluates the role of water in the attainment of sustainable development in Kenya and argues water plays a critical role in the attainment of the sustainable development goals both in Kenya and at the global stage. The paper interrogates some of the water and Sustainable Development concerns in Kenya including water pollution, water scarcity and climate change and suggests practical ways to enhance the role of water in the Sustainable Development agenda.

Dr. Paul Ogendi in “Collective Property Rights in Human Biological Materials in Kenya,” reflects on property rights in relation to human biological materials obtained from research participants participating in genomic research. He argues that property rights are crucial in genomic research because they can help avoid exploitation or abuse of such precious material by researchers. In “Nurturing our Wetlands for Biodiversity Conservation,” Dr. Kariuki Muigua notes that Wetlands have a vital role in not just delivering ecological services to meet human needs, but also in biodiversity conservation. Wetlands are vital habitat sites for many species and a source of water, both of which contribute to biodiversity protection. The paper examines the role of wetlands in biodiversity conservation and how these wetland resources might be managed to improve biodiversity conservation.

Oseko Louis D. Obure in “Investor-State Dispute Resolution in a Fast-Paced World,” preponderance of disputes between States or States and Investors created need for a robust, effective, and efficient mechanisms not only for the resolution of these disputes but also their prevention. He notes that developing states lead in being parties to Investor-State Disputes (ISD) particularly as respondents. He proceeds to conceptualize and problematize investor-state disputes resolution in a fast-paced world. Lilian N.S. Kong’ani and Dr. Kariuki Muigua in “Status of Participation of Women in Mediation: A case Study of Development Project Conflict in Olkaria IV, Kenya” review the status of participation of women in mediation to resolve conflicts between KenGen and the community. The paper demonstrates a need for further democratization of the mediation processes to cater for more participation of women to enhance the mediation results and offer more sustainable resolutions.

Felix Otieno Odhiambo and Melinda Lorenda Mueni in “The Business of Climate Change: An Analysis of Carbon Trading in Kenya analyses the business of carbon trading in the context of Kenya’s legal framework. The article examines the legal framework that underpins climate change into the Kenyan legal system and provides an exposition of the concept of carbon trading and its various forms. Michael Okello, in “Critical Analysis of World Trade Organisation’s Most-Favored Nation (MFN) Treatment: Prospects, Challenges and Emerging Trends in the 21st Century,” highlights the rationale behind MFN treatment and also restates the vision of multilateral trade to achieve equitable and special interventions with respect to trade in goods, services and trade related intellectual property rights in the affected states.

Continue Reading

Trending