Draft Amendments to the MPRDA Regulations, 2019 Table of Comments

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) provided comments on the 2019 Draft Amendments to the MPRDA Regulations, advocating for stronger protections for affected communities. Key recommendations include explicitly including civil society in the definition of interested parties, replacing 'consultation' with 'free, prior and informed consent' for customary communities, and improving the transparency and accessibility of public notices. The CER also raised significant objections to proposed changes in the appeals process and the imposition of fees for appeals, citing concerns over administrative justice and access to justice.

• The CER supports the expansion of the definition of "interested and affected persons" but recommends that the definition explicitly include civil society and non-governmental organisations to recognize their role in collaborating with the state on mining legal frameworks.
• Regarding the proposed definition of "meaningful consultation," the CER argues that the Department should require free, prior and informed consent from affected communities. They cite the case of Baleni and Others v Minister of Mineral Resources and Others, where the court determined that the consent of customary communities should be sought rather than just consultation.
• The CER proposes that the requirements for notifying the public about applications be made more inclusive. This includes publishing notices on the Department and designated agency websites, and placing notices in community halls, municipal offices, or traditional offices in English and the dominant official language of the area.
• The CER supports the introduction of a prescribed form for section 52 notices regarding profitability and curtailment of mining operations, which would require mining companies to lodge the notice within 7 days after consulting with affected employees or registered trade unions.
• The CER criticizes the proposed Regulation 73C regarding compensation and resettlement disputes, stating it is "wholly inconsistent" with section 54 of the Act. They argue the regulation grants the Regional Manager powers not contemplated in the Act and fails to require the constitution of a negotiation team.
• The CER opposes the proposed amendments to Chapter 3 on appeals, citing several issues: the exclusion of section 96(1)(b) appeals, conflicts with the Act regarding the competent authority, and a 30-day appeal window that may prevent parties from appealing if they are not notified of decisions in time.
• The CER objects to the current Regulation 74(3) which requires a fee for appeals, stating that this creates "serious access to justice issues" for parties who lack the financial means to file an appeal.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (2020). Draft Amendments to the MPRDA Regulations, 2019 Table of Comments. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Table-of-Comments.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. Draft Amendments to the MPRDA Regulations, 2019 Table of Comments. 2020. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Table-of-Comments.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=Draft Amendments to the MPRDA Regulations, 2019 Table of Comments |date=31 January 2020 |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Table-of-Comments.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrights2020draft, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{Draft Amendments to the MPRDA Regulations, 2019 Table of Comments}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2020}, month = jan, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Table-of-Comments.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }