Mining in Forest Reserves - Spotlight on L.I. 2462

The briefing examines L.I. 2462, a 2022 regulation that allows mining in Ghana's forest reserves. It argues that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lacks the constitutional mandate to manage natural resources, a role reserved for Natural Resource Commissions. The document further contends that L.I. 2462 lacks a proper legal foundation under the Environmental Protection Agency Act, 1994, and cannot supersede the protections of forest reserves established by Executive Instruments or Acts of Parliament. Additionally, it highlights weak sanctions, a lack of stakeholder consultation, and the absence of gender quotas as significant shortcomings.

• L.I. 2462 allows mining in all forest reserves in Ghana, provided specific procedures are followed, though it excludes certain prohibited zones such as cultural sites, protected provenance zones, and globally significant biodiversity areas.
• Mining activities in forest reserves require multiple permits, including a Forestry Entry Permit from the Forestry Commission, mineral rights from the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources, Environmental Permits from the EPA, Water Use Permits from the Water Resources Commission, and Mining Operating Permits from the Inspectorate Division of the Minerals Commission.
• The regulations establish a three-tiered governance structure to manage mining in reserves, consisting of a Liaison Group, a Steering Committee, and a Local Liaison Group.
• The EPA's use of L.I. 2462 to regulate mining is argued to be a constitutional overreach because the 1992 Constitution of Ghana assigns the management of natural resources to Natural Resource Commissions, a category that does not include the EPA.
• L.I. 2462 is claimed to lack a legitimate legal foundation because Section 62(1) of the Environmental Protection Agency Act, 1994 (Act 490) only empowers the Minister to regulate environmental standards and waste disposal, not the broader management of mining and mineral royalties.
• The document argues that L.I. 2462 cannot legally authorize mining in forest reserves because it cannot implicitly repeal an Executive Instrument (E.I.) used to establish a reserve, nor can it supersede parliamentary acts like the Forests Act, 1927 and the Forests Protection Act, 1974.
• The sanctions for violating L.I. 2462 are described as weak, with maximum penalties of one year imprisonment and a fine of 3,000ghc (250 penalty units), which is considered inadequate for preventing biodiversity loss.

APA

Martey, D., Godts, R., Akapame, C. K., Ichou, B., & Norteye, R. P. N. S. (2024). Mining in Forest Reserves - Spotlight on L.I. 2462. ClientEarth. https://www.clientearth.org/media/psihkohb/ghana-mining-briefing-4.pdf

Chicago

Martey, Dennis, Raphaëlle Godts, Clement Kojo Akapame, Benjamin Ichou, and Ruth Pauline Naa Shormeh Norteye. Mining in Forest Reserves - Spotlight on L.I. 2462. ClientEarth, 2024. https://www.clientearth.org/media/psihkohb/ghana-mining-briefing-4.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Martey |first1=Dennis |last2=Godts |first2=Raphaëlle |last3=Akapame |first3=Clement Kojo |last4=Ichou |first4=Benjamin |last5=Norteye |first5=Ruth Pauline Naa Shormeh |title=Mining in Forest Reserves - Spotlight on L.I. 2462 |publisher=ClientEarth |date=June 2024 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/psihkohb/ghana-mining-briefing-4.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{martey2024mining, author = {Martey, Dennis and Godts, Raphaëlle and Akapame, Clement Kojo and Ichou, Benjamin and Norteye, Ruth Pauline Naa Shormeh}, title = {{Mining in Forest Reserves - Spotlight on L.I. 2462}}, institution = {ClientEarth}, year = {2024}, month = jun, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/psihkohb/ghana-mining-briefing-4.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }