GGMC review finds ‘scandalous’ allotment of medium-scale mining permits

-Baishanlin Director has third largest holdings

With an allotment of       109 properties, Baishanlin Director Chu Hongbo is the third largest holder of medium-scale mining permits in Guyana, according to a recent report that reviewed operations at the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC) and described the allocations as “scandalous.”

The report also highlighted Baishanlin’s 72 mining claims, since the claim system was intended exclusively for Guyanese and it was never the intention of the Mining Act to allow non-Guyanese persons and corporations to operate in the small-scale or medium-scale mining systems. At the end of 2013, the list of claims in existence on the GGMC website showed 72 claims held by Baishanlin– a Chinese logging company–though they are shown as abandoned on a March 31, 2014 list.

However, in the current claims list, there are new claims registered to Baishanlin, according to the inception report of a Management and Systems Review of various divisions in the GGMC that was compiled earlier this year. The report, which was obtained by Stabroek News, was authored by Dr Grantley Walrond, L. Heesterman and J. Goolsarran.

“How Baishanlin, a Chinese corporation with non-Guyanese owning the beneficial interest in the company, qualified to so operate, is indeed a mystery. This goes to the heart of a non-appreciation of the intent and fact of the law and is indeed worrying,” the report states.

The report also identified Hongbo as being the holder of 109 medium-scale mining permits. This would place Hongbo as one of the largest holders of such permits. According to the list of medium-scale mining permits holders in the report, only Ramnarine (only name) and Michael Vieira, with 193 and 122 permits, respectively, hold more medium-scale mining permits than Hongbo. Local miner Afro Alphonso holds 107 medium-scale mining permits, according to the report.

“If the state of landlordism which was evident in the small-scale system was to be frowned on, then the state of ownership of Prospecting Permits (Medium Scale) and Mining Permits (Medium Scale) could only be described as scandalous,” the report declared. It pointed out that a medium-scale mining permit caters for up to 1,200 acres.

“Yet in this format, there are persons holding in excess of 500 Prospecting Permits Medium Scale and 100 Mining Permits Medium Scale,” the report asserted. Hongbo is one of the four persons which includes Ramnarine, Vieira and Alphonso, who hold over 100 medium-scale mining permits.

There are a number of persons who hold Pros-pecting Permits Medium Scale (PPMS) as opposed to Mining Permits in greater numbers than Hongbo. Mining Permits grant the holder permission to mine, while a PPMS is for prospecting, though in practice, mining is also done on the PPMS.

Alphonso is the largest holder of PPMS properties, with 565, followed by Shawn Hopkinson, Stephen Lamazon and Clarence Dabreo, at 232, 221, and 212 PPMS properties, respectively. Other Alphonsos and Hopkinsons also hold a significant number of PPMS properties.

The report noted that the medium-scale alienation scheme was also intended to be available only to Guyanese but noticeably allows for the ability of the titleholder to first conduct exploration under the Prospecting Permit, which is renewable annually, and for him to apply for a Mining Permit with a duration of five years, though renewable.

While the GGMC has the authority to not grant these permits if it deems the holder incapable of assuming the obligations of the performance in this scheme, i.e., because of lack of capacity, or to prevent renewals for the same reasons or non-performance, this system is operating much like the claim system, where there is an “automatic” expectation of allocation or retention regardless of capacity or effort, the report stated. “An obligation is therefore imposed on the GGMC to establish yardsticks of capacity and effort, which must be transparently applied. Careful design of forms of reporting are essential for the transparency of the system,” the report declared.

It had noted that there is a tendency to “landlordism,” which has taken over the mining industry. “The medium-scale scheme cries out for closer transparent regulation where accountability is expected,” the report said, while adding that like the small-scale system, the principle of beneficial occupancy and by extension, the curtailment of the tendency to landlordism needs to be given effect.

The report also noted that in recent years, joint ventures or buy-out arrangements with foreign entities over large numbers of PPMS as well as small-scale permits have been made. “In itself this is against the spirit of the law. One consequence of this is that exploration data on such areas never end up with the state, as under the current mining law there is no reporting requirement. We understand that a reporting requirement exists in the 2012 amendments but these have not yet been implemented,” the report also stated.

Meanwhile, in noting Baishanlin’s mining claims, the report pointed out that one of the more pressing complaints in the sector is that the average Guyanese can no longer secure access to this offer of the state via the Mining Act, because mineral bearing lands are not available. “Further, it was never and could not be the intention of the framers of the mining laws for one artisan/small miner to own over 1000 claims,” it states.

In terms of mining claims, the report also identified Ramnarine as the largest holder of mining claims, with 1,560 properties. He is followed by David Coates, Afro Alphonso, and Neville Osman with 875, 712, and 582 claims, respectively.

The “claim system,” as described, was intended exclusively for Guyanese, reflecting the state’s obligation to facilitate Guyanese making a livelihood from their patrimony. In order to allow everyone fair opportunity, a body of rules with respect to the nature of the claim and how it can be ‘located,’ retained and worked was developed. The artisan operating in this system is presumed to be outside of the banking system as far as financing is concerned as tenure is short, with potential income too variable and risks too high, the report noted.

It pointed out that by definition, the small-scale miner is assumed to have his operations limited to mining with tools which have the ability to move less than 200 cubic metres of earth, including overburden in any given day. “Similarly, the overarching consideration is that he cannot explore vast tracts of land with his limited resources and if he must operate in this scheme, he must limit his total holdings in any given year to acceptable levels. If he is unsuccessful, then he can relinquish it and move elsewhere or pay the small price of the rental for not allowing someone else the opportunity to work on that ground,” the report stated.

It asserted that in a practical sense, there must be a limit to claim-holding, and 20 claims, equivalent to about 500 acres, would be on the generous side for persons wishing to engage in the small-scale scheme of mining. “A cursory examination of the declaration by producers/declarers of gold and diamonds demonstrate absolutely no correlation between large claim holding and production/declaration,” the report declared.

It recalled that when the regulations for the 1989 version of the Mining Act were being considered, much time and attention were spent on the necessity to allow Guyanese operating in this system to be entitled, at any one time, to tracts of land which they could beneficially occupy. It said that personal communication from former GGMC Commissioner William Woolford indicated that the cap on the size of landholdings to the various titles, which was central to the three-tiered licensing scheme was resisted by the Guyana Gold and Diamond Miners Association and was never included in the draft regulations which have been outstanding since 1989.

“This issue must be revisited as an area of great urgency,” the report said. “The draft regulations, which were intended to give effect to the 1989 Mining Act, must be completed and become operational. Even in its current state, there are many advances on the present state, including the obscurity of a host of amendments to the current regulations, of which many are not aware,” it added.