Landowners condemn office of the Director of Mines in extending the Letter of Intent (LOI) for South Pacific Mining Company Limited
THE landowners of Upper Tenement D in Hongrano, Isabel Province has condemned the actions of the Office of the Director of Mines in extending the Letter of Intent (LOI) for South Pacific Mining Company Limited.
They call for immediate rectification of this decision and urge the relevant authorities to ensure that the provisions of the Mines and Minerals Act (1990) are upheld with integrity and fairness.
“This decision is unlawful, unjust, and detrimental to the interests of the landowners of Upper Tenement D,” they said.
This extension blatantly contravenes Section 21 subsection 6 of the Mines and Minerals Act (1990), which provides clear guidelines on how such extensions should be handled when negotiations with landowners fail.
The Mines and Minerals Act (1990) is explicit in its directives. Section 21 subsection 6 states:
“(6) Where no agreement is reached between the applicant and the landowners at the end of the period specified in the letter of intent, the Board may –
(a) where it is satisfied that bona fide attempts have been made by the applicant to negotiate with the landowners or landholding groups, extend the said period; or
(b) where it is satisfied that sufficient attempts to negotiate have not been made, inform the applicant that his application is unsuccessful.”
The situation in Upper Tenement D clearly falls under the latter scenario.
From March 2, 2024, to June 13, 2024, the Mines and Minerals Board approved an LOI negotiation period for South Pacific Mining Company.
Despite this ample three-month period, not a single landowner agreed to sign the Surface Access Agreement (SAA).
The repeated complaints from landowners during this period highlight the failure of the South Pacific Mining Company to engage in bona fide negotiations.
By extending the LOI period, the Office of the Director of Mines has disregarded the stipulations of the Mines and Minerals Act.
The Act mandates that if bona fide negotiation attempts have not been made, the application should be deemed unsuccessful.
The fact that not a single landowner agreed to the terms proposed by the South Pacific Mining Company within the specified timeframe is irrefutable evidence that sufficient attempts to negotiate were not made.
This decision to extend the LOI is not only a clear violation of the law but also a blatant disregard for the rights and voices of the landowners in Upper Tenement D.
It raises serious concerns about the impartiality and integrity of the Office of the Director of Mines.
The landowners are rightfully outraged and feel that their interests are being sidelined in favor of corporate interests.
The widespread opposition from numerous landowning groups in Isabel Province further underscores the gravity of this issue.
The Director of Mines’ decision seems to be driven by personal interests rather than adherence to the law and the well-being of the local communities.
“Such actions undermine the credibility of the regulatory framework designed to protect the interests of both the landowners and the environment.
“We, the landowners closely monitoring these developments, are well-versed in the requirements of the Mines and Minerals Act (1990),” they said.
The decision to extend the LOI for South Pacific Mining Company is a blatant misinterpretation and misapplication of the law.
It is an affront to justice and fairness, and it cannot be justified under any circumstances.
The mining company is owned by former logger Johnny Lee SY and Jianyang HE of China.
