A Government for Itself?
Gwede Mantshe`s entrance into the mining portfolio has almost predictably been no different to the arrogance and superior authoritarianism which has characterised the tenure of the last 4 Ministers in this portfolio. The consistency of the arrogance of government ministers has been a hallmark of the ANC government and has suggested that this type of arrogance and dismissal of groups that do not bow before the majesty of the ANC and its ministers, has become a sort of Governmentality of the ANC. Governmentality is a Foucauldian concept which refers to the organized practices (mentalities, rationalities, and techniques) through which subjects are governed.
The manner, in which the Minister has dismissed the Court order which compels him and the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) to consult mining communities in the “formulation” of the Charter, epitomises the very disdain and contempt with which ministers, such as Gwede Mantashe, has viewed the claims by mining affected communities to be involved in their own governance.
In the first instance the minister has completely ignored the court order. In the second the minister deliberately ignored correspondence initiated by mining communities through their attorneys and in the third instance when communities eventually cornered the minister at his press conference to demand answers, they were summarily dismissed as if they are annoying mosquitoes for which the minister showed only contempt and annoyance.
At the heart of Minister Mantashe`s vapid rejection of the claims of organisations Like MACUA and WAMUA to be part of the formulation of the charter, is the suggestion by the minister that such consultation will not be advanced through meetings with well informed and mandated interest groups and social movements such as MACUA and WAMUA and that instead the minister appears to propose that the DMR will run a road show in which meetings will be held in each province.
Besides the blatant disregard of the court order, there are at least three fundamental problems with this approach by the minister.
The first concern relates to the nature of government policy development processes. The fact that the minister has engaged with a select group of stakeholders, while excluding others, would suggest a process that starts out with a bias towards certain interest groups. The exclusion of both AMCU and NUMSA as organised unions in the mining sector already points to a deep bias towards the interest of the Chamber of Mines and NUM.
Yet, while organised community groups who were affirmed by the Courts as relevant and interested stakeholders who should be consulted on the formulation of the charter were excluded, the organisation of the wife of Minister Radebe(SAMDA) was invited instead. It appears as if one of the criteria to be included involves the extent of ones connection to ANC politicians.
Be that as it may, the very reason government seeks to draw together informed and representative stakeholders should be based on their organisational reach and their ability to speak for and represent, albeit not fully, the interests of their respective constituencies, as precursors to broader consultations within the public domain.
The practise of speaking to stakeholders in this way helps government to narrow down issues and to bring different interests to the table so that amicable resolutions can be found to difficult and complex problems.
In dismissing the claims by MACUA and WAMUA to be involved in the formulation of the charter, the minster deliberately disregards the many years of activism and community engagement that led to the formation of MACUA and WAMUA and eventually to the adoption of the Peoples Mining Charter in 2016.
MACUA, formed by over 150 community and environmental activists in 2012, embarked on a three year project to gather inputs and aspirations from over 150 mining affected communities across the country. In the lead up to the adoption of the Peoples Mining Charter in 2015, the organisation rallied together over 19 civil society organisations and 50 affiliated community based organisations to draw up the foundational values of a just mining regime in the Berea Declaration.
Throughout the last 5 years, MACUA and WAMUA have continued to engage communities across the country through various marches, community capacity building workshops and dialogues and have consistently made submissions to the DMR, the Minister and various legislative processes.
These organisations, together with MEJCON are by far the most organised community voices in the mining sector, and there can be little doubt that their grassroots work could greatly enhance and enrich the debates around the formation of the Charter.
Yet, the minister, in fidelity to the arrogant and dismissive governmentality that has characterised the sector, dismisses these organisations as if they have nothing of value to add to the process.
This brings us to the second concern with the minister`s approach. Instead of using organised groups to inform the formulation of the Charter, the minister wishes to set up meetings where it is able to bus in compliant ANC members to drown out the voices of those who have over the years shown a genuine interest and who have organised a genuine constituency.
Mining activists and MACUA have extensive experience of the type of faux consultation that the Minister has in mind and should the minister insist on pursuing this path, then the chances of meeting his 3 month deadline appears to be headed towards becoming just another policy process in which yet another minister fails to read the tea leaves and who fails to understand that contrary to the 1980`s and 1990`s, when Minister Mantahse was active in the sector, communities are organised, informed and determined to have a say in their own governance. His glib dismissal of their claims may yet come back to haunt him.
Instead of seeing the organisations of mining affected communities as a hindrance, the Minister would be well advised to view them as potential allies that will bring a deeper grassroots calculation to the development of sustainable solutions in the sector, which can strengthen the hand of government and labour while ensuring that all interest groups are not only represented but taken into account.
Leading us to the third concern with the minister’s approach. It would appear that the minister is dead set on imposing a solution on communities which will be exclusively drafted by his selected partners while excluding any critical voices and even excluding organised community groups.
Such an imposition of a policy, while having a mountain of jurisprudence up to the Constitutional Court and the most recent High Court ruling, which argues against such an approach, is also deeply problematic in that it perpetuates the colonial subjectivity of the vast majority of people who are forced to live in the shadows of environmentally and socially destructive mines.
As a government that claims to be of and for the people, we should all be deeply concerned when that same government devices spurious excuses and devious methods to avoid the constitutional responsibility to include interested and affected parties in finding solutions to their struggles.
Such are the actions of a government who no longer has an interest in representing the interests of the poor and vulnerable and instead these are the actions of a government who are increasingly committed to governing in the interest of itself and its political party.
We expect more from this new government and every citizen should see this attack on the rights of mining affected communities as a precursor to the inevitable attack on their rights as well. First they excluded the mining affected communities.
The manner, in which the Minister has dismissed the Court order which compels him and the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) to consult mining communities in the “formulation” of the Charter, epitomises the very disdain and contempt with which ministers, such as Gwede Mantashe, has viewed the claims by mining affected communities to be involved in their own governance.
In the first instance the minister has completely ignored the court order. In the second the minister deliberately ignored correspondence initiated by mining communities through their attorneys and in the third instance when communities eventually cornered the minister at his press conference to demand answers, they were summarily dismissed as if they are annoying mosquitoes for which the minister showed only contempt and annoyance.
At the heart of Minister Mantashe`s vapid rejection of the claims of organisations Like MACUA and WAMUA to be part of the formulation of the charter, is the suggestion by the minister that such consultation will not be advanced through meetings with well informed and mandated interest groups and social movements such as MACUA and WAMUA and that instead the minister appears to propose that the DMR will run a road show in which meetings will be held in each province.
Besides the blatant disregard of the court order, there are at least three fundamental problems with this approach by the minister.
The first concern relates to the nature of government policy development processes. The fact that the minister has engaged with a select group of stakeholders, while excluding others, would suggest a process that starts out with a bias towards certain interest groups. The exclusion of both AMCU and NUMSA as organised unions in the mining sector already points to a deep bias towards the interest of the Chamber of Mines and NUM.
Yet, while organised community groups who were affirmed by the Courts as relevant and interested stakeholders who should be consulted on the formulation of the charter were excluded, the organisation of the wife of Minister Radebe(SAMDA) was invited instead. It appears as if one of the criteria to be included involves the extent of ones connection to ANC politicians.
Be that as it may, the very reason government seeks to draw together informed and representative stakeholders should be based on their organisational reach and their ability to speak for and represent, albeit not fully, the interests of their respective constituencies, as precursors to broader consultations within the public domain.
The practise of speaking to stakeholders in this way helps government to narrow down issues and to bring different interests to the table so that amicable resolutions can be found to difficult and complex problems.
In dismissing the claims by MACUA and WAMUA to be involved in the formulation of the charter, the minster deliberately disregards the many years of activism and community engagement that led to the formation of MACUA and WAMUA and eventually to the adoption of the Peoples Mining Charter in 2016.
MACUA, formed by over 150 community and environmental activists in 2012, embarked on a three year project to gather inputs and aspirations from over 150 mining affected communities across the country. In the lead up to the adoption of the Peoples Mining Charter in 2015, the organisation rallied together over 19 civil society organisations and 50 affiliated community based organisations to draw up the foundational values of a just mining regime in the Berea Declaration.
Throughout the last 5 years, MACUA and WAMUA have continued to engage communities across the country through various marches, community capacity building workshops and dialogues and have consistently made submissions to the DMR, the Minister and various legislative processes.
These organisations, together with MEJCON are by far the most organised community voices in the mining sector, and there can be little doubt that their grassroots work could greatly enhance and enrich the debates around the formation of the Charter.
Yet, the minister, in fidelity to the arrogant and dismissive governmentality that has characterised the sector, dismisses these organisations as if they have nothing of value to add to the process.
This brings us to the second concern with the minister`s approach. Instead of using organised groups to inform the formulation of the Charter, the minister wishes to set up meetings where it is able to bus in compliant ANC members to drown out the voices of those who have over the years shown a genuine interest and who have organised a genuine constituency.
Mining activists and MACUA have extensive experience of the type of faux consultation that the Minister has in mind and should the minister insist on pursuing this path, then the chances of meeting his 3 month deadline appears to be headed towards becoming just another policy process in which yet another minister fails to read the tea leaves and who fails to understand that contrary to the 1980`s and 1990`s, when Minister Mantahse was active in the sector, communities are organised, informed and determined to have a say in their own governance. His glib dismissal of their claims may yet come back to haunt him.
Instead of seeing the organisations of mining affected communities as a hindrance, the Minister would be well advised to view them as potential allies that will bring a deeper grassroots calculation to the development of sustainable solutions in the sector, which can strengthen the hand of government and labour while ensuring that all interest groups are not only represented but taken into account.
Leading us to the third concern with the minister’s approach. It would appear that the minister is dead set on imposing a solution on communities which will be exclusively drafted by his selected partners while excluding any critical voices and even excluding organised community groups.
Such an imposition of a policy, while having a mountain of jurisprudence up to the Constitutional Court and the most recent High Court ruling, which argues against such an approach, is also deeply problematic in that it perpetuates the colonial subjectivity of the vast majority of people who are forced to live in the shadows of environmentally and socially destructive mines.
As a government that claims to be of and for the people, we should all be deeply concerned when that same government devices spurious excuses and devious methods to avoid the constitutional responsibility to include interested and affected parties in finding solutions to their struggles.
Such are the actions of a government who no longer has an interest in representing the interests of the poor and vulnerable and instead these are the actions of a government who are increasingly committed to governing in the interest of itself and its political party.
We expect more from this new government and every citizen should see this attack on the rights of mining affected communities as a precursor to the inevitable attack on their rights as well. First they excluded the mining affected communities.
Comments
Post a Comment