PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT, 2002: SUBMISSIONS BY 13 NON-­‐GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIONS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION OF PROSPECTING, RECONNAISSANCE, EXPLORATION AND MINING

A coalition of 13 NGOs argues that the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) provides an inferior environmental regulatory regime compared to the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA). They call for the integration of mining under NEMA to ensure comprehensive environmental impact assessments, better public participation, and higher penalties for non-compliance. The submission also requests specific safeguards for environmentally sensitive areas and improved public access to mining application documents.

• The environmental regulatory regime under the MPRDA is significantly weaker than the one imposed by the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), leading to inadequate public consultation and less comprehensive environmental impact reports.
• Current MPRDA timeframes for prospecting rights applications are insufficient, allowing only 30 days for consultation with landowners and affected parties, which conflicts with Constitutional Court requirements.
• Penalties for environmental offences under the MPRDA are far lower than those under NEMA, providing little disincentive for high-profit mining companies. For example, mining without a right under MPRDA carries a maximum fine of R100,000, whereas a similar offence under NEMA can attract R5 million.
• The NGOs request that the government declare prohibitions on commercial prospecting and mining in areas of critical biodiversity and hydrological sensitivity, such as the Magaliesberg Protected Environment and the Agulhas Bank.
• There is a systemic lack of transparency and access to information, with mining companies and the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) often refusing to provide key application documents to the public.
• Inadequate environmental impact assessments (EIAs) and financial provisions lead to long-term degradation and state costs for rehabilitation, as seen with acid mine drainage on the Witwatersrand.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (2011). PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT, 2002: SUBMISSIONS BY 13 NON-­‐GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIONS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION OF PROSPECTING, RECONNAISSANCE, EXPLORATION AND MINING. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/CER-Letter-to-Minister-of-MR-re-MPRDA-6-April-2011.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT, 2002: SUBMISSIONS BY 13 NON-­‐GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIONS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION OF PROSPECTING, RECONNAISSANCE, EXPLORATION AND MINING. 2011. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/CER-Letter-to-Minister-of-MR-re-MPRDA-6-April-2011.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT, 2002: SUBMISSIONS BY 13 NON-­‐GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIONS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION OF PROSPECTING, RECONNAISSANCE, EXPLORATION AND MINING |date=6 April 2011 |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/CER-Letter-to-Minister-of-MR-re-MPRDA-6-April-2011.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{centreforenvironmentalrights2011proposed, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT, 2002: SUBMISSIONS BY 13 NON-­‐GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIONS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION OF PROSPECTING, RECONNAISSANCE, EXPLORATION AND MINING}}, publisher = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2011}, month = apr, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/CER-Letter-to-Minister-of-MR-re-MPRDA-6-April-2011.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }