New laws in Sierra Leone are changing the environment battlefield

shortsaveall writes:
Dated: August 9, 2022

This is a struggle communities around the world are facing to keep companies from taking over their land, polluting the environment and forcing them to relocate.

When a large investor sees an opportunity to profit from a mine or large-scale farming, long-established lifestyles and even land ownership often mean little.

But in one West African country, Sierra Leone, the rules for such a fight could change drastically.

Under new laws passed this week, companies operating in Sierra Leone will need to obtain the express consent of local communities before engaging in mining, industrial or agricultural activities. Residents who own land will be able to veto any project that affects it. And the companies will have to help pay for any legal fees that local communities incur in negotiations, meaning they will likely fund legal due diligence used against them.

Environmental and land rights experts have hailed the laws as a bold move for a nation of eight million that remains one of the world’s poorest despite vast natural resources, and even though intensive mining and palm oil and sugarcane plantations led to deforestation and landslides. and soil erosion.

The new laws, which the president is expected to sign next week, are among the first of their kind to apply across much of the country, and according to human rights and environmental watchdogs, they will be among the most protecting in the world.

“To our knowledge, nowhere, in any hemisphere, is there a legal regime that provides such strong rights to affected communities,” said Sonkita Conteh, program director for Sierra Leone at Namati, a non-profit organization that provides legal training for local communities. .

The legislation also drew a backlash, with companies warning that it would interfere with any new land development. At least one major investor said he will not try new projects in Sierra Leone because of one of the new laws.

Non-profits and international organizations have long fought to get governments and businesses to seek local approval before embarking on large-scale projects, with countries in Latin and Central America at the forefront of this struggle.

“Usually, companies are given concessions before they get the consent of the population, and then they “inform” them,” says Natalia Green, a climate change activist from Ecuador. “They offer people a sandwich, make people sign something, and that’s it.”

In Sierra Leone, so far, most communities have hardly participated in projects. Companies that mine gold, titanium or diamonds or grow palm oil often bypassed residents by making agreements with local chiefs or government officials to work on their lands, observers said.

Cormac Callinan, an environmental lawyer based in Cape Town, said the right to what lawyers call “free, prior and informed consent” is an issue around the world.

“Those who live somewhere have the greatest moral right to be consulted and said no,” said Mr. Cullinan, who represents South Africa’s indigenous population seeking to stop the construction of Amazon’s African headquarters in Cape Town.

“But this right is often not recognized in the law.”

This is changing in several countries. In 2018, Sierra Leone’s neighbor Liberia passed a law requiring prior consent from the rural population across much of the country, although unlike Sierra Leone, the government can still bypass local communities to allow mining. In February, Ecuador’s highest court upheld a similar right, but it only applies to the country’s 14 recognized indigenous groups.

Sierra Leone’s two new laws, the Customary Land Laws and the National Land Commission Laws, go the furthest, according to environmental experts, ending a decade-long struggle by local organizations against land grabbing and pollution. The third law, passed on Tuesday, strengthens the protection of the population from mining.

The laws will apply to each of Sierra Leone’s provinces, but not to the capital, Freetown and its suburbs, which have a different legal system. About 95 percent of the country’s territory is governed by customary law, with unwritten rules and oral traditions determining who can own, use or transfer land, often to the detriment of certain ethnic groups and women.

One of the laws would also end colonial-era rule that prohibited the descendants of freed slaves from owning land outside of Freetown.

Mr. Conteh, Namati’s legal expert, said that until now, families could easily lose their lands, either because they had little proof of ownership or because companies made deals with intermediaries.

New legislation in Sierra Leone transfers power from intermediaries such as community leaders to people who own or directly use land.

It also states that women should have equal rights to land without interference or discrimination, an issue that has long plagued Sierra Leone.

According to Aisha Fofana Ibrahim, professor of gender studies at the University of Sierra Leone, although women make up the majority of the country’s agricultural workforce, they often face barriers to land ownership. According to her, this has made them dependent on a husband or male relatives and risk losing access to land in the event of divorce or death.

The new legislation creates committees tasked with managing common lands and resolving land disputes, with at least 30 per cent of their members being women. “This law is a huge win for women,” said Dr. Fofana Ibrahim.

But Idrissa Taravalli, a political science professor at the same university, said he was more ambivalent about the benefits of the law. According to him, one of the laws can strengthen communities in relations with foreign companies. But another, which promises new processes to determine who owns land, could turn some Sierra Leoneans against each other.

“Land in Sierra Leone is tied to issues of tribes, ethnicity and origins,” said Dr. Tharavalli. “But after Ebola and Covid, this is the new diamond,” he added. “Applying a liberal approach to land ownership without careful consideration of tradition and culture can lead to clashes.”

Some firms have also criticized the legislation. Gerben Haringsma, Regional Director for Sierra Leone at Socfin, a Luxembourg company that has been growing palm oil in the country for ten years and faced accusations of land grabbingargued that the laws would make new large-scale investment in agriculture impossible.

Mr. Haringsma said in an email that he welcomed the law clarifying who owns land in Sierra Leone. But he argued that with the land rights law, too many members of the community would now have to participate in investor decision-making processes.

“With this law, the public does not need to be protected, as large investors can no longer start large projects,” Mr. Haringsma said.

Ms. Green, a consultant from Ecuador, said that indigenous peoples and local communities around the world should have better information about projects that affect their livelihoods, as well as the right to veto.

And if the opportunity presents itself, they will use that veto, she said: “Most communities, if they are properly informed about all the environmental impacts, will say no.”