DAVAO CITY (MindaNews/22 Feb) — I thought the country was looking for a way of doing responsible mining. And that the Aquino administration was serious in pursuing this.
There are those, of course, who do not believe that responsible mining is at all possible in an archipelago like the Philippines. Where you have a tropical paradise of 7,200 islands with its rich environmental treasures, it is not responsible, they contend, to allow foreigners to destroy the paradise and take away the treasures for returns to the country that are far too small.
In its issuance of EO 79, the Aquino Administration seemed at least to acknowledge the financial problem. Under the current law, it acknowledged the Philippines’ cut in the value of the minerals themselves – “from zero to nil” according to SC Justice Carpio – was too small. By declaring it would issue no new mining permits to companies without Congress first defining a more rational regime of sharing, it seemed to be open to more rationality in mining.
But rationalizing the fiscal regime is only one aspect of responsible mining. There are others – like rationalizing the impact of mining on the environment and rationalizing the impact of mining on the people.
Under current policy, for a company like SMI that had already received its mining permit long before EO 79 was issued, it needs an Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) in order to implement its mining plans. It is simple. If a company fulfills conditions that adequately protect the environment, then the permit is issued.
In the case of SMI, however, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) has issued a “conditional ECC.” What, pray tell, is that? It is an issuance which permits SMI to operate on the condition that it fulfills certain stringent conditions on pain of cancellation of the ECC. It sets conditions, but it sets no clear deadlines as to when conditions must be met. It undertakes to “strictly monitor” the compliance of SMI, where the conditions of strictness are fuzzy.
Normally, an ECC is issued under clear compliance by a mining firm with conditions of environmental acceptability. Environmentalists have been monitoring these closely. SMI has not complied with these conditions; nevertheless, it is being permitted to operate conditionally. It is like an elephant in a shop of precious crystals. If it is clear the elephant will not destroy the crystal in the shop, then it can be permitted to dance. That’s the normal ECC. But the DENR’s preposterous “conditional ECC” is: the elephant in the crystal shop is permitted to dance, on the condition that it will not break the crystal, and with the public assurance that it will “strictly monitor” that when the elephant begins breaking the crystal, it will cancel the permit. So, elephant, dance!
Where is the responsibility here? Where is the rationality?
From SMI’s environmental impact statement itself, it is known that the mining site is in an area of high seismic activity, just 12 kilometers away from Mt. Matutom, still classified as active.
SMI will clear 3,935 hectares of forest – including 1,350 hectares of protected rainforest. It threatens 812 flora species, 247 of which are Philippine endemics and 52 of which are mainland Mindanao endemics.