Marine phosphate mining on iceGovt withdraws environmental clearance Affected parties must make submissions on the controversial Sandpiper Project within three months. The environmental clearance granted for offshore phosphate mining will be withdrawn, and all affected parties now have three months to give input. This was announced yesterday by the minister of environment and tourism, Pohamba Shifeta, only days before a special cabinet meeting called by President Hage Geingob was supposed to discuss the certificate issued to Namibian Marine Phosphate (NMP).
The environmental clearance was issued by the environmental commissioner in the Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Teofilus Nghitila, for the Sandpiper Project located 120km southwest of Walvis Bay.
Shifeta yesterday ordered Nghitila to inform the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources, the fishing industry and all other interested parties to finalise their inputs within three months.
He said the consultation process must be completed within six months and the order is binding on all parties unless set aside in the High Court.
Namibian Sun understands that Founding President Sam Nujoma also reiterated his position around phosphate mining during the Swapo policy conference, which ends today in Windhoek.
In fact, Nujoma had already made it categorically clear that he is against phosphate mining in 2013 during a New Era interview.
“These imperialists think we Africans are stupid and they want to destroy our fisheries resource – which is the future of our children – they must go back to Australia,” Nujoma was quoted as saying.
This week an urgent High Court application was filed by several fishing associations against the issuance of the environmental clearance, while an appeal was also lodged with the ministry against the granting of the certificate.
It was about this appeal that Shifeta was giving feedback when he announced the decision to withdraw the environmental clearance.
The appeal was lodged by Michael Gawaseb, a trustee of the Economic Social Justice Trust and a community activist.
Giving a lengthy explanation of the process followed with regard to the environmental clearance, Shifeta yesterday said the decision prompted considerable debate and reaction.
He said although the Environmental Management Act does not obligate the environmental commissioner to notify the public when issuing such clearance, he agrees that it should be done.
Shifeta added that although the period for appeal was extended by three weeks only one appeal was submitted on the basis that this project will have devastating long-lasting impacts on the marine environment and that the public was not afforded the opportunity to be heard and give inputs.
Shifeta said the matter of impact was comprehensively addressed in the environmental studies.
According to Shifeta he did not find any procedural defects with the granting of the environmental clearance and he agreed with the commissioner that procedures were followed.
He said there was failure on the part of the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources, whose performance might be affected by the mining of phosphate, to respond to the commissioner''s request to review the final report on the matter.
“It is clear that on 13 June 2016 the commissioner''s request to the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources to review the final report was ignored or not seen necessary to respond…”
Shifeta added that the fishing industry was supposed to channel their inputs to the final report for review, but their line ministry failed to respond to this for reasons only known to them.
He said that the failure of the fisheries ministry to act on the final report and receive inputs from the industry or sensitise the industry to be proactive cannot be blamed on the entire fishing industry.
“Since the matter of granting the marine phosphate came into public the reaction by the industry may be in bona fide. Hence, I am inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt in the matter.”
ELLANIE SMIT